Maurizio TAURINO

Background: Accessory renal arteries (ARAs) frequently coexist with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) and can influence treatment. This study aimed to retrospectively analyze the ARA’s exclusion effect on patients undergoing standard endovascular aneurysm repair for AAA. Methods: The study focused on medium- and long-term outcomes, including type II endoleak, aneurysmal sac changes, mortality, reoperation rates, renal function, and infarction post-operatively. Results: 76 patients treated with EVAR for AAA were included. One hundred and two ARAs were identified: 69 originated from the neck, 30 from the sac, and 3 from the iliac arteries. The ARA treatment was embolization in 15 patients and coverage in 72. Technical success was 100%. One-month post-operative computed tomography angiography (CTA) revealed that 76 ARAs (74.51%) were excluded. Thirty-day complications included renal deterioration in 7 patients (9.21%) and a blood pressure increase in 15 (19.73%). During follow-up, 16 patients (21.05%) died, with three aneurysm-related deaths (3.94%). ARA-related type II endoleak (T2EL) was significantly associated with the ARA’s origin in the aneurysmatic sac. Despite reinterventions were not significantly linked to any factor, post-operative renal infarction was correlated with an ARA diameter greater than 3 mm and ARA embolization. Conclusion: ARAs can influence EVAR outcomes, with anatomical and procedural factors associated with T2EL and renal infarction. Further studies are needed to optimize the management of ARAs during EVAR.

Purpose: After endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), an increased [18F]FDG uptake may be observed at PET/CT, being common to both vascular graft/endograft infection (VGEI) and sterile post-surgical inflammation. Increased non-specific metabolic activity, due to foreign body reaction, can persist for several years after surgery, thus complicating the interpretation of PET/CT studies. In this paper, we aimed to assess [18F]FDG distribution at different time-points after the implant of abdominal Endurant® endografts in patients without suspicion of infection. Methods: We retrospectively evaluated [18F]FDG/CT in 16 oncological patients who underwent abdominal aortic aneurysm exclusion with Endurant® grafts. Patients had no clinical suspicion of infection and were followed up for at least 24 months after scan. [18F]FDG PET/CT scans were interpreted using both visual and semi-quantitative analyses. Results: The time between the EVAR procedure and [18F]FDG PET/CT ranged between 1 and 36 months. All grafts showed mild and diffuse [18F]FDG uptake without a focal pattern. Mean values of SUVmax were 2.63 ± 0.48 (95% CI 2.38–2.88); for SUVmean 1.90 ± 0.33 (95% CI 1.72–2.08); for T/B ratios 1.43 ± 0.41 (95% CI 1.21–1.65). SUVmax and SUVmean were not correlated to the time elapsed from the procedure, but we observed a declining trend in T/B ratio over time. Conclusions: Endovascular implant of Endurant® grafts does not cause a significant inflammatory reaction. The evidence of faint and diffuse [18F]FDG uptake along the graft can reliably exclude an infection, even in early post-procedural phases. Therefore, in patients with a low probability of VGEI, [18F]FDG PET/CT can also be performed immediately after EVAR.