A comparative analysis of the outcomes of aortic cuffs and converters for endovascular graft migration

Bradley G. Thomas, Luis A. Sanchez, Patrick J. Geraghty, Brian G. Rubin, Samuel R. Money, Gregorio A. Sicard

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

29 Scopus citations


Objective: Proximal attachment failure, often leading to graft migration, is a severe complication of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Aortic cuffs have been used to treat proximal attachment failure with mixed results. The Zenith Renu AAA Ancillary Graft (Cook Inc, Bloomington, Ind) is available in two configurations: converter and main body extension. Both provide proximal extension with active fixation for the treatment of pre-existing endovascular grafts with failed or failing proximal fixation or seal in patients who are not surgical candidates. We prospectively compared the outcomes of patient treatment with these two device configurations. Methods: From September 2005 to May 2008, a prospective, nonrandomized, postmarket registry was conducted to collect data from 151 patients treated at 95 institutions for proximal aortic endovascular graft failure using the Renu graft. Treatment indications included inadequate proximal fixation or seal, for example, migration, and type I and III endoleak. A total of 136 patients (90%) had migration, 111 (74%) had endoleak, and 94 (62%) had endoleaks and graft migration. AneuRx grafts were present in 126 patients (83%), of which 89 (59%) were treated with a converter and 62 (41%) with a main body extension. Outcomes using converters vs main body extensions for endoleak rates, changes in aneurysm size, and ruptures were compared. Results: Preprocedural demographics between the two groups did not differ significantly. Procedural success rates were 98% for the converter group and 100% for the main body extension group. At a mean follow-up of 12.8 ± 7.5 months, no type III endoleaks (0%)were identified in the converter group, and five (8%) were identified in the main body extension group. There were no aneurysm ruptures in patients treated with converters (0%) and three ruptures (5%) in patients treated with main body extensions. Each patient with aneurysm rupture had been treated with a Renu main body extension, developed a type III endoleak, and underwent surgical conversion. Two of the three patients died postoperatively. Conclusions: Proximal attachment failure and graft migration are potentially lethal complications of EVAR. Proximal graft extension using an aortic cuff is the easiest technique for salvaging an endovascular graft. Unfortunately, it has a predictable failure mode (development of a type III endoleak due to component separation) and is associated with a significantly higher failure rate than with the use of a converter. EVAR salvage with a converter and a femorofemoral bypass is a more complex but superior option for endovascular graft salvage.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1373-1380
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Vascular Surgery
Issue number6
StatePublished - Jun 2010


Dive into the research topics of 'A comparative analysis of the outcomes of aortic cuffs and converters for endovascular graft migration'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this