A systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical effectiveness and safety of unilateral versus bilateral iliac branch devices for aortoiliac and iliac artery aneurysms

• Published in: Journal of vascular surgery Vol. 76; no. 4; pp. 1089 - 1098.e8
• Main Authors: Cao, Zhanjiang, Zhu, Rongrong, Ghaffarian, Amir, Wu, Weiwei, Weng, Chengxin, Chen, Xiyang, Shalhub, Sherene, Starnes, Benjamin W., Zhang, Wayne W.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01-10-2022
• Subjects: Aortoiliac aneurysm; Endovascular aortic repair; External iliac artery; Hypogastric iliac artery; Iliac artery aneurysm; Iliac branch devices; Hypogastric iliac artery; Iliac branch devices; External iliac artery; Iliac artery aneurysm; Endovascular aortic repair; Aortoiliac aneurysm
• ISSN: 0741-5214; 1097-6809
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2022.03.005

Iliac branch devices (IBDs) have been used in the treatment of aortoiliac and isolated iliac artery aneurysms. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the clinical effectiveness and safety of IBDs.
A systematic review of the literature was conducted by identifying studies in the Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases regarding the outcomes of IBDs in aortoiliac or isolated iliac artery aneurysms between May 2006 and December 2020. Individual studies were evaluated for the following major outcomes: technical success, 30-day mortality, primary patency, endoleak, reintervention, and rates of pelvic ischemia. Furthermore, subgroup meta-analyses were performed to compare the pelvic ischemic events in patients with bilateral IBDs, unilateral IBDs, and bilateral internal iliac artery (IIA) embolization/coverage.
Forty-five studies with a total of 2736 patients undergoing unilateral or bilateral IBDs met inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The pooled technical success rate of IBDs was 98.0% (confidence interval [CI]: 97.3%-98.7%). After IBD treatment, the 30-day mortality rate was 0.4% (CI: 0.07%-0.70%); 30-day patency was 98.4% (CI: 97.7%-99.0%); buttock claudication developed in 1.84% (CI: 1.26%-2.41%); and endoleak occurred in 11.9% (CI: 9.2%-14.7%) and reintervention in 7.6% (CI: 5.65%-9.58%). Furthermore, in patients with bilateral iliac artery involvement, the pooled estimate rates of buttock claudication were 0.7% in the bilateral IBD group, 7.9% in unilateral IBD with contralateral IIA embolization patients, and 33.8% in bilateral IIA embolization/coverage patients, which were statistically significant among the three groups. Sexual dysfunction was 5.0% in the bilateral IIA occlusion group, which was significantly higher than that in IBD groups.
The utilization of IBDs in the treatment of aortoiliac or isolated iliac artery aneurysms is associated with high technical success rates as well as low incidences of pelvic ischemia. The risk of postoperative buttock claudication can be further decreased with both IIA preservation if patients are anatomically suitable for bilateral IBDs.