Part 4/Chapter 21/13-min read

EVAR, Iliac Branch Devices, Endoleaks, and Post-EVAR Surveillance

Endovascular aneurysm repair as an anatomic operation before it is a device operation: proximal neck, iliac landing zones, pelvic perfusion, and durable seal. The chapter frames standard EVAR candidacy, iliac branch devices, endoleak classification and management, and post-EVAR surveillance.

Edited by Tal M. Hörer MD, PhD · David T. McGreevy MD, PhD·Reviewed ·5 sections · 33 references

Listen to this chapter6 min · AI audio edition · two hostsAI narration

Planning conference: A practical planning-room conversation: anatomy, device or operative choices, surveillance, complications, and decision boundaries.

Choose the hosts

EVAR candidacy and device-selection anatomy

Endovascular aneurysm repair is an anatomic operation before it is a device operation. The central question is whether the aneurysm can be excluded with durable proximal and distal seal while preserving clinically important pelvic and lower-limb perfusion. For standard infrarenal EVAR, candidacy is framed by the proximal neck—its length, angulation, and wall quality—and by the iliac landing zones, especially their diameter and suitability for seal. Device instructions for use remain the practical boundary for elective standard EVAR; across major infrarenal device labels, the typical proximal-neck length floor is on the order of 10–15 mm, while iliac diameter limits are device-specific. Off-IFU repair has been studied, but it should not be treated as a substitute for the device label when planning an elective repair. The proximal neck is the segment where early judgment has the greatest late consequence. A short, angulated, diseased, or otherwise poor-quality neck converts an apparently straightforward EVAR into a repair at risk of proximal seal failure. In practice, the surgeon should decide before the case whether the anatomy supports standard EVAR, whether adjunctive proximal sealing is likely to be needed, or whether the patient is better served by a complex endovascular strategy rather than forcing a standard device into hostile anatomy. The complication the trainee must anticipate is type Ia endoleak, because proximal seal failure is associated with sac expansion and reintervention. The iliac anatomy determines not only the distal seal but also the pelvic-perfusion strategy. A common iliac aneurysm may make a standard distal landing zone unsuitable and force a choice among iliac branch preservation, hypogastric exclusion, or other iliac adjuncts. Iliac branch devices preserve flow into at least one internal iliac artery during endovascular AAA repair with common iliac aneurysm extension and have been associated in pooled and registry analyses with less buttock claudication than routine hypogastric exclusion, while maintaining acceptable technical success. Device selection should therefore be recorded as a chain of decisions rather than a single brand choice: proximal seal suitability, main-body feasibility, contralateral gate and limb strategy, distal iliac seal, and pelvic-flow preservation. Common iliac aneurysm anatomy and operator experience dominate the iliac choice, and bilateral iliac disease often requires a deliberate side-by-side comparison of iliac branch device use, embolisation, and bell-bottom techniques. The correct decision is not simply the most endovascular option; it is the option most likely to maintain seal, avoid avoidable pelvic ischemic symptoms, and remain surveillable over time.

Iliac branch and adjunctive strategies

Iliac branch planning begins with the principle that pelvic perfusion has value. When a common iliac aneurysm extends the aneurysm repair into the iliac bifurcation, an iliac branch device can preserve flow to at least one internal iliac artery while allowing endovascular exclusion of the aneurysmal common iliac segment. This is especially relevant when the alternative is routine hypogastric exclusion, because pooled and registry data support reduced buttock claudication with iliac branch devices at acceptable technical success. The practical decision is anatomy-led. If the common iliac aneurysm provides an anatomy suitable for an iliac branch device and the operator has appropriate experience, branch preservation is a strong option. If the anatomy is unsuitable, the surgeon must compare hypogastric embolisation with other distal-seal strategies such as bell-bottom techniques, while recognising that bilateral iliac disease makes the decision more consequential. In bilateral disease, preserving at least one internal iliac artery is often the pivotal planning objective, and the operative plan should specify which side is preserved, which side is excluded or sealed by another method, and how each choice will be followed. Adjunctive strategies are not limited to the iliac segment. Proximal adjuncts become relevant when seal is inadequate or when early imaging identifies a type Ia endoleak. Type Ia endoleak represents proximal seal failure, is associated with sac expansion and reintervention, and is commonly treated with proximal cuffs or other sealing devices. The key caveat is that the adjunct treats the observed failure, but the underlying problem is often adverse proximal-neck anatomy; when that anatomy is dominant, the case may belong in a fenestrated or branched-repair pathway rather than repeated standard-EVAR rescue. A trainee should think of adjuncts as part of a durability strategy, not as a cosmetic completion maneuver. The adjunct should correct a defined mechanical problem: inadequate proximal seal, inadequate distal seal, threatened pelvic perfusion, or iliac aneurysm extension. A completion angiogram or surveillance study that shows an apparently minor leak cannot be interpreted safely without asking which seal zone has failed and whether sac pressurisation is likely to persist. At the bedside, document the indication, timing, and escalation trigger before choosing surveillance, imaging, intervention, or deferral.

Endoleak classification and early management

Endoleak classification is clinically useful because it links the imaging finding to the source of persistent sac perfusion and therefore to the urgency and type of treatment. Type Ia is proximal seal failure, type Ib is distal seal failure, type II is retrograde branch flow, type III is graft junction or fabric failure, type IV is graft porosity and is predominantly historical, and type V is endotension without an identified leak. This classification should be used in the report, in the operative note, and in follow-up planning because each category carries a different surveillance pathway and intervention threshold. The early management question is whether the endoleak reflects seal failure, device failure, branch back-bleeding, or unexplained sac pressurisation. Proximal and distal seal failures are conceptually different from type II endoleak because they imply a failure of exclusion at the attachment site. Type Ia endoleak is specifically associated with sac expansion and reintervention and is typically treated with adjunctive proximal cuffs or sealing devices. For type Ib endoleak, the classification itself directs attention to the distal landing zone and the adequacy of iliac seal. Type II endoleak requires a different discipline. It is the most common post-EVAR finding, but pooled systematic reviews show that detection is far more frequent than clinically meaningful sac expansion. The management error is to treat the image rather than the aneurysm sac: reintervention should be driven by sac dynamics, not by the presence of a type II endoleak alone. This distinction is important during consent and follow-up because many patients will have an imaging label that does not immediately justify an invasive procedure. Imaging modality affects confidence in early classification. CT angiography remains the reference standard for endoleak classification, particularly when the clinical decision depends on distinguishing seal failure from branch-related flow. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and color duplex have shown good accuracy compared with CT angiography in pooled meta-analyses and are used by some programs as interval-imaging alternatives to reduce contrast exposure, but reported accuracy varies with reader experience and study setting. The early post-EVAR report should therefore answer four questions: whether an endoleak is present, what type it is, whether the aneurysm sac is changing, and whether the finding alters the repair plan. When imaging cannot confidently classify the leak or when sac behavior is concerning, escalation to a more definitive imaging strategy is appropriate because surveillance is intended to detect endoleak and sac change before late rupture.

Post-EVAR surveillance and reintervention triggers

Post-EVAR surveillance is built around two linked observations: the presence or absence of endoleak and the behavior of the aneurysm sac. Contemporary best-practice guidance frames surveillance as a risk-stratified pathway using CT angiography, duplex ultrasound, and contrast-enhanced ultrasound, with cadence informed by initial sac behavior and endoleak status. Exact intervals are society- and program-specific, so the durable principle is more important than a memorised schedule: detect endoleak and sac change early enough to prevent late failure. Sac dynamics are the language of follow-up. A stable or shrinking sac after technically successful EVAR supports lower-risk surveillance pathways, while sac expansion demands explanation. When sac enlargement is accompanied by type Ia, type Ib, or type III endoleak, the concern is persistent systemic pressurisation through seal or graft failure. When sac enlargement occurs with type II endoleak, the decision is more nuanced because type II endoleak is common and clinically meaningful sac expansion is much less common than detection. When sac enlargement occurs without an identified leak, type V endotension is a diagnosis of exclusion. Reintervention triggers should be tied to the failure mode. Type Ia endoleak is proximal seal failure and is associated with sac expansion and reintervention; it is typically managed with adjunctive proximal cuffs or sealing devices, while adverse proximal-neck anatomy should prompt consideration of whether complex endovascular repair is more appropriate. Type Ib endoleak directs attention to the distal seal zone. Type III endoleak implies graft junction or fabric failure and should not be managed as a benign branch leak. For type II endoleak, surveillance should avoid reflexive intervention. The finding is common, and pooled evidence supports a strategy in which reintervention is driven by sac dynamics rather than detection alone. Pre-emptive embolisation of side branches has been studied with conflicting effect estimates, and intervention thresholds for established type II endoleak remain center- and society-driven. In practice, the surgeon should explain that the leak is being watched because the sac is the clinically decisive structure. Modality selection should be patient- and question-specific. CT angiography provides the reference standard for classification when the precise endoleak type will change management. Duplex and contrast-enhanced ultrasound can reduce contrast exposure and are supported by pooled analyses showing good accuracy compared with CT angiography, but performance varies by reader experience and series. A surveillance program should therefore define which patients can safely undergo ultrasound-based interval imaging and which findings require CT angiography for confirmation and procedural planning. The follow-up plan should be visible in the operative and discharge documentation. It should state the intended imaging modality, the reason for that modality, the key finding that would trigger escalation, and whether iliac branch patency or hypogastric exclusion requires special attention. In patients with common iliac aneurysm extension treated with an iliac branch device, surveillance should not stop at the aortic sac; the preserved internal iliac pathway and iliac seal zones remain part of the durability assessment.

DiagnosticPost-EVAR surveillance: sac behavior, leak class, and escalation lane
  • Six classes by flow source: Ia and Ib seal failure (proximal, distal); II retrograde branch flow; III graft junction or fabric failure; IV graft porosity (legacy); V endotension without identified leak. Each class drives its own intervention threshold and surveillance pathway.
    Trigger
    Post-EVAR endoleak classification
    Branch / Endpoint
    Type IV endoleaks are largely a legacy of older fabric generations; Type V is a diagnosis of exclusion when the sac expands without a visualised leak.
    Citation
  • Type Ia endoleak (proximal seal failure) is associated with sac expansion and re-intervention and is typically treated by adjunctive proximal-cuff or sealing devices; pooled reviews show acceptable technical success across treatment strategies and an ongoing late re-intervention signal.
    Trigger
    Adults with proximal-seal failure after standard endovascular AAA repair
    Branch / Endpoint
    Proximal-neck adverse anatomy is the dominant risk factor and the case for fenestrated or branched repair when present.
    Citation
  • Type II endoleak is the most common post-EVAR finding; pooled systematic reviews show a high prevalence of detection but a far lower rate of clinically meaningful sac expansion, and re-intervention is driven by sac dynamics rather than by detection alone.
    Trigger
    Adults under post-EVAR imaging surveillance
    Branch / Endpoint
    Pre-emptive embolisation of side branches has been studied in systematic review with conflicting effect estimates; intervention thresholds for established type II endoleaks remain center- and society-driven.
    Citation
  • Contrast-enhanced ultrasound and color duplex have shown good accuracy compared with CT angiography for endoleak detection in pooled meta-analyses, and several programs use them as an interval-imaging alternative to reduce contrast exposure.
    Trigger
    Adults under post-EVAR imaging surveillance
    Branch / Endpoint
    Reported accuracy varies by reader experience and series; CT angiography remains the reference standard for endoleak classification.
    Citation

Durability, complications, and boundaries with complex aortic chapters

The durable success of EVAR depends on continued exclusion of the sac, stable seal zones, device integrity, and appropriate pelvic-perfusion management. The clinically important late complications are those that reconnect pressure to the sac or undermine the repair: proximal seal failure, distal seal failure, graft junction or fabric failure, persistent branch-related sac pressurisation, and endotension when the sac expands without a visible leak. These events are not interchangeable, and the classification of the endoleak should remain the organising structure for surveillance and treatment. The evidence is strongest for a few practical rules. Standard EVAR should be planned within device-specific anatomic boundaries, especially with respect to the proximal neck and iliac landing zones. Iliac branch devices are valuable when common iliac aneurysm extension threatens pelvic perfusion and the anatomy is suitable. Type Ia endoleak should be treated as a seal-failure problem associated with sac expansion and reintervention. Type II endoleak should be interpreted through sac dynamics rather than through detection alone. The uncertainty is equally important. Off-IFU standard EVAR data do not erase the device label, ultrasound-based surveillance depends on local expertise, and type II endoleak intervention thresholds remain center- and society-driven. Complex proximal-neck anatomy should not be hidden under repeated standard-EVAR adjuncts when the underlying problem is poor suitability for infrarenal seal; such cases cross the boundary into complex endovascular planning. A good EVAR chapter should leave the surgeon with one habit: every postoperative image must be translated into a management consequence. Is the sac stable, shrinking, or expanding? Is the leak a seal failure, branch leak, device failure, or unexplained endotension? Does the iliac strategy preserve the intended pelvic flow? Does the patient need confirmation with CT angiography, interval ultrasound surveillance, endovascular reintervention, or referral for complex repair planning? These questions keep EVAR from becoming a one-day procedure and maintain it as the longitudinal aneurysm treatment that it is.

References

  1. 1.
    Using bilateral iliac branch devices for endovascular iliac aneurysm repair. ANZ journal of surgery. 2011.
    PubMed-indexed article2011

    Using bilateral iliac branch devices for endovascular iliac aneurysm repair. ANZ journal of surgery. 2011. doi:10.1111/j.1445-2197.2011.05710.x.

    PubMedDOI
  2. 2.
    Endoleaks after EVAR and TEVAR: indications for treatment and techniques. The Journal of cardiovascular surgery. 2014.
    PubMed-indexed article2014

    Endoleaks after EVAR and TEVAR: indications for treatment and techniques. The Journal of cardiovascular surgery. 2014. PMID:24796903.

    PubMed
  3. 3.
    Type II endoleaks. Journal of vascular surgery. 2014.
    PubMed-indexed article2014

    Type II endoleaks. Journal of vascular surgery. 2014. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2014.07.100.

    PubMedDOI
  4. 4.
    Internal Iliac Aneurysm Repair Outcomes Using a Modification of the Iliac Branch Graft. European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery. 2015.
    PubMed-indexed article2015
    PubMed
  5. 5.
    Type II endoleaks: challenges and solutions. Vascular health and risk management. 2016.
    PubMed-indexed article2016

    Type II endoleaks: challenges and solutions. Vascular health and risk management. 2016. doi:10.2147/vhrm.s81275.

    PubMedDOI
  6. 6.
    Type II endoleaks: when and how. The Journal of cardiovascular surgery. 2017.
    PubMed-indexed article2017

    Type II endoleaks: when and how. The Journal of cardiovascular surgery. 2017. doi:10.23736/s0021-9509.17.10072-8.

    PubMedDOI
  7. 7.
    Outcomes of Extended Endovascular Aortic Repair for Aorto-Iliac Aneurysm with Internal Iliac Artery Occlusion. Annals of vascular diseases. 2017.
    PubMed-indexed article2017

    Outcomes of Extended Endovascular Aortic Repair for Aorto-Iliac Aneurysm with Internal Iliac Artery Occlusion. Annals of vascular diseases. 2017. doi:10.3400/avd.oa.17-00089.

    PubMedDOI
  8. 8.
    Type IIIb endoleak after elective endovascular aneurysm repair: a systematic review. The Journal of cardiovascular surgery. 2020.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2020

    Type IIIb endoleak after elective endovascular aneurysm repair: a systematic review. The Journal of cardiovascular surgery. 2020. doi:10.23736/s0021-9509.18.10446-0.

    PubMedDOI
  9. 9.
    Editor's Choice - Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Outcome of Treatment for Type II Endoleak Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair. European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery. 2018.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2018

    Editor's Choice - Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Outcome of Treatment for Type II Endoleak Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair. European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery. 2018. doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2018.06.009.

    PubMedDOI
  10. 10.
    Meta-analysis of the accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the detection of endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair. Journal of vascular surgery. 2019.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2019

    Meta-analysis of the accuracy of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for the detection of endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair. Journal of vascular surgery. 2019. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2018.07.044.

    PubMedDOI
  11. 11.
    Outcomes of endovascular treatment of endoleak type Ia after EVAR: a systematic review of the literature. The Journal of cardiovascular surgery. 2019.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2019

    Outcomes of endovascular treatment of endoleak type Ia after EVAR: a systematic review of the literature. The Journal of cardiovascular surgery. 2019. doi:10.23736/s0021-9509.19.10854-3.

    PubMedDOI
  12. 12.
    Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Outcome of Different Treatments for Type 1a Endoleak After EVAR. Annals of vascular surgery. 2019.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2019

    Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Outcome of Different Treatments for Type 1a Endoleak After EVAR. Annals of vascular surgery. 2019. doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2019.03.032.

    PubMedDOI
  13. 13.
    Internal iliac artery preservation outcomes of endovascular aortic repair for common iliac aneurysm: iliac branch device versus crossover chimney technique. Heart and vessels. 2021.
    PubMed-indexed article2021

    Internal iliac artery preservation outcomes of endovascular aortic repair for common iliac aneurysm: iliac branch device versus crossover chimney technique. Heart and vessels. 2021. doi:10.1007/s00380-020-01678-x.

    PubMedDOI
  14. 14.
    Review of Type III Endoleaks. Seminars in interventional radiology. 2020.
    PubMed-indexed article2020

    Review of Type III Endoleaks. Seminars in interventional radiology. 2020. doi:10.1055/s-0040-1715874.

    PubMedDOI
  15. 15.
    A Systematic Review and Pooled Meta-Analysis on the Incidence and Temporal Occurrence of Type II Endoleak Following an Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair. Annals of vascular surgery. 2021.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2021

    A Systematic Review and Pooled Meta-Analysis on the Incidence and Temporal Occurrence of Type II Endoleak Following an Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair. Annals of vascular surgery. 2021. doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2021.01.083.

    PubMedDOI
  16. 16.
    A systematic review of the current status of interventions for type II endoleak after EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysms. International journal of surgery (London, England). 2021.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2021

    A systematic review of the current status of interventions for type II endoleak after EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysms. International journal of surgery (London, England). 2021. doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.106138.

    PubMedDOI
  17. 17.
    Solitary iliac branch endoprosthesis placement for iliac artery aneurysms. Journal of vascular surgery. 2022.
    PubMed-indexed article2022

    Solitary iliac branch endoprosthesis placement for iliac artery aneurysms. Journal of vascular surgery. 2022. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2021.10.005.

    PubMedDOI
  18. 18.
    External iliac artery extension causes greater aneurysm sac regression than the bell-bottom technique or iliac branch endoprosthesis for repair of concomitant infrarenal aortic and iliac artery aneurysm. Journal of vascular surgery. 2022.
    PubMed-indexed article2022

    External iliac artery extension causes greater aneurysm sac regression than the bell-bottom technique or iliac branch endoprosthesis for repair of concomitant infrarenal aortic and iliac artery aneurysm. Journal of vascular surgery. 2022. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2021.12.062.

    PubMedDOI
  19. 19.
    Embolization for Type Ia Endoleak after EVAR for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Biomedicines. 2022.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2022

    Embolization for Type Ia Endoleak after EVAR for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Biomedicines. 2022. doi:10.3390/biomedicines10061442.

    PubMedDOI
  20. 20.
    Iliac branch device to treat type Ib endoleak with a brachial access or an "up-and-over" transfemoral technique. Journal of vascular surgery. 2022.
    PubMed-indexed article2022

    Iliac branch device to treat type Ib endoleak with a brachial access or an "up-and-over" transfemoral technique. Journal of vascular surgery. 2022. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2022.06.025.

    PubMedDOI
  21. 21.
    Colour Duplex and/or Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Compared with Computed Tomography Angiography for Endoleak Detection after Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of clinical medicine. 2022.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2022

    Colour Duplex and/or Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound Compared with Computed Tomography Angiography for Endoleak Detection after Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of clinical medicine. 2022. doi:10.3390/jcm11133628.

    PubMedDOI
  22. 22.
    Five-year outcomes from a prospective, multicenter study of endovascular repair of iliac artery aneurysms using an iliac branch device. Journal of vascular surgery. 2023.
    PubMed-indexed article2023

    Five-year outcomes from a prospective, multicenter study of endovascular repair of iliac artery aneurysms using an iliac branch device. Journal of vascular surgery. 2023. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2022.07.006.

    PubMedDOI
  23. 23.
    Pre-operative Aortic Neck Characteristics and Post-operative Sealing Zone as Predictors of Type 1a Endoleak and Migration After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery. 2022.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2022

    Pre-operative Aortic Neck Characteristics and Post-operative Sealing Zone as Predictors of Type 1a Endoleak and Migration After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery. 2022. doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2022.08.017.

    PubMedDOI
  24. 24.
    Editor's Choice - Meta-Analysis of Compliance with Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Surveillance: The EVAR Surveillance Paradox. European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery. 2023.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2023

    Editor's Choice - Meta-Analysis of Compliance with Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Surveillance: The EVAR Surveillance Paradox. European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery. 2023. doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2022.10.033.

    PubMedDOI
  25. 25.
    An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of pre-emptive aortic side branch embolization to prevent type II endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair. Journal of vascular surgery. 2023.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2023

    An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of pre-emptive aortic side branch embolization to prevent type II endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair. Journal of vascular surgery. 2023. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2022.11.042.

    PubMedDOI
  26. 26.
    Five-year outcomes for bell bottom, iliac branch endoprosthesis, and coil and cover approaches from the GREAT registry. Journal of vascular surgery. 2024.
    PubMed-indexed article2024

    Five-year outcomes for bell bottom, iliac branch endoprosthesis, and coil and cover approaches from the GREAT registry. Journal of vascular surgery. 2024. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2024.01.212.

    PubMedDOI
  27. 27.
    Understanding Type II Endoleak: A Harmless Imaging Finding or a Silent Threat?. Journal of clinical medicine. 2024.
    PubMed-indexed articleReview2024

    Understanding Type II Endoleak: A Harmless Imaging Finding or a Silent Threat?. Journal of clinical medicine. 2024. doi:10.3390/jcm13144250.

    PubMedDOI
  28. 28.
    Diagnostic accuracy of microvascular flow imaging ultrasound for endoleak detection after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Polish journal of radiology. 2024.
    PubMed-indexed articleMeta-analysis / systematic review2024

    Diagnostic accuracy of microvascular flow imaging ultrasound for endoleak detection after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Polish journal of radiology. 2024. doi:10.5114/pjr/190502.

    PubMedDOI
  29. 29.
    Follow up Imaging Protocols after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: Results of the International FOREVAR Survey. EJVES vascular forum. 2025.
    PubMed-indexed article2025

    Follow up Imaging Protocols after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: Results of the International FOREVAR Survey. EJVES vascular forum. 2025. doi:10.1016/j.ejvsvf.2025.07.005.

    PubMedDOI
  30. 30.
    Best Practice Guidelines: Imaging Surveillance After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair. AJR. American journal of roentgenology. 2020.
    PubMed-indexed articleClinical practice guideline2020

    Best Practice Guidelines: Imaging Surveillance After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair. AJR. American journal of roentgenology. 2020. doi:10.2214/ajr.19.22197.

    PubMedDOI
  31. 31.
    Insight from an Italian Delphi Consensus on EVAR feasibility outside the instruction for use: the SAFE EVAR Study. The Journal of cardiovascular surgery. 2024.
    PubMed-indexed articleClinical practice guideline2024

    Insight from an Italian Delphi Consensus on EVAR feasibility outside the instruction for use: the SAFE EVAR Study. The Journal of cardiovascular surgery. 2024. doi:10.23736/s0021-9509.23.12906-5.

    PubMedDOI
  32. 32.
    Editor's Choice -- European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-Iliac Artery Aneurysms. 2024.
    PubMed-indexed articleClinical practice guideline2024

    Editor's Choice -- European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-Iliac Artery Aneurysms. 2024. doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2023.11.002.

    PubMedDOI
  33. 33.
    The Society for Vascular Surgery practice guidelines on the care of patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm. 2018.
    PubMed-indexed articleClinical practice guideline2018

    The Society for Vascular Surgery practice guidelines on the care of patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm. 2018. doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2017.10.044.

    PubMedDOI

Educational use only

AI assists this editorial workflow. Published updates are human-reviewed before publication.

Not intended to diagnose, monitor, predict, prognose, treat, or alleviate disease.

Verify clinically relevant information against primary sources and current guidelines.

AI DisclosurePrivacyTermsCautions