Role of Duplex Scan in Endoleak Detection After Endoluminal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Abstract

duplex scan, if validated, appears to be a reliable means for excluding the presence of endoleak after EAAR.

Duplex ultrasound in aneurysm surveillance following endovascular aneurysm repair: a comparison with computed tomography aortography

“…[4][5][6][7][8][9] In the present study, we report sensitivity of 86% and a negative predictive value of 94% for DU. Ramon et al reported their experience in the only other larger series with an equivalent follow-up time.…”

“…For such reasons, a comparison of DU with CTA in endoleak detection may not lend itself well to meta-analysis where pooled sensitivities are calculated. A recent such study included authors who report 25% sensitivity 8 with those who report 97% for the same test, 4 and excluded larger series, 7 not surprisingly concluding that DU should not displace CT for aortic endograft surveillance. 10 We have used biphasic CT scanning with non-contrast and arterial phase contrast scans as our standard protocol, reserving triphasic scan for cases where endoleak is suspected but not confirmed or cases of sac enlargement in the absence of endoleaks on a biphasic scan.…”

Endovascular stent graft repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: Current status and future directions

“…In addition to CT imaging, ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are other two imaging modalities that play an increasing role in follow-up of EVAR of AAA. Ultrasound is less expensive and does not involve ionizing radiation or potentially nephrotoxic contrast [14,15] . Several studies reported the usefulness of contrast-enhanced ultrasound, because it seems to allow better identification and characterization of endoleaks [16][17][18] .…”

Imaging of complications after endoluminal treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms

“…There are few papers comparing the state-of-the art EHCT to CDUS [24,25,26]. Sensitivity and negative predictive value of CDUS for endoleak detection are, respectively, 97 and 98 % [25].…”

“…Sensitivity and negative predictive value of CDUS for endoleak detection are, respectively, 97 and 98 % [25]. Zannetti et al [26] have reported a high negative predictive value of 99.4 % and considered CDUS as a reliable technique to exclude the presence of endoleak. These results are in accordance with our experience.…”