The sac evolution imaging follow-up after endovascular aortic repair: An international expert opinion-based Delphi consensus study.
Détails
Télécharger: 38462062.pdf (178.08 [Ko])
Etat: Public
Version: Final published version
Licence: CC BY 4.0
Etat: Public
Version: Final published version
Licence: CC BY 4.0
ID Serval
serval:BIB_27EF0A6EB8BE
Type
Article: article d'un périodique ou d'un magazine.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Titre
The sac evolution imaging follow-up after endovascular aortic repair: An international expert opinion-based Delphi consensus study.
Périodique
Journal of vascular surgery
Collaborateur⸱rice⸱s
SLIM F-U EVAR, Collaborative Study Group
Contributeur⸱rice⸱s
Beck A.W., Hertault A., Savlania A., Froio A., Giaquinta A., Zimmermann A., Psyllas A., Wanhainen A., Marchetti A.A., Queiroz A.B., Kahlberg A., Reyes-Valdivia A., Schanzer A., Tambyraja A., Freyrie A., Lorido A., Millon A., Ippoliti A., Abai B., Mees B., Reutersberg B., Maurel B., Michel B., Wahlgren C.M., Cavazzini C., Setacci C., Lee C.J., Ferrer C., Bicknell C., Raphaël C., Clair D., Dawson D.L., Arnaoutakis D.J., Böckler D., Kotelis D., Mujagic E., Chisci E., Cieri E., Gallitto E., Marone E.M., Ducasse E., Verzini F., Pecoraro F., Serracino-Inglott F., Benedetto F., Speziale F., Stilo F., Álvarez-Marcos F., Pagliariccio G., Piffaretti G., Lanza G., Philipp G., Geenberg G., Jung G., Melissano G., Veraldi G.F., Parlani G., Faggioli G., de Donato G., Simonte G., Colacchio G., De Caridi G., Pratesi G., Spinella G., Torsello G., Leong Tan G.W., Magee G.A., Verhagen H., Andrew H., Koleilat I., Ohman J.W., de Vries JPPM, Budtz-Lilly J., Black J., Eldrup-Jorgensen J., Hockley J., Bath J., Sobocinski J., van Herwaarden J.A., Reinhard K., Orion K.C., Amankwah K., Bertoglio L., di Marzo L., Garriboli L., Rizzo L., Hakimi M., Sheahan M., Khashram M., Schermerhorn M., Lescan M., Conrad M., Davies M.G., Czerny M., Orrico M., Eagleton M.J., Smeds M.R., Taurino M., Wohlauer M., Sharafuddin M.J., Anna-Leonie M., Reijnen M., Antonello M., Piazza M., Settembre N., Mouawad N.J., Tsilimparis N., Dias N., Martinelli O., Frigatti P., Sirignano P., Chong P., Bevis P., DiMuzio P., Henke P., Düppers P., Holt P., Helmiö P., Vriens P., Pulli R., Bellosta R., Micheli R., Veeraswamy R., Cuff R., Chiappa R., Gattuso R., Pini R., Dalman R.L., Milner R., Scali S.T., Bahia S., Laukontaus S., Trimarchi S., Fernandez-Alonso S., Deglise S., Bellmunt-Montoya S., Hofer S., Yusuf S.W., Ronchey S., Bartoli S., Bonvini S., Camparini S., Fazzini S., Pirrelli S., Hörer T., Bisdas T., Vasudevan T., Lattmann T., Wyss T.R., Maldonado T., Pfammatter T., Kölbel T., Jakimowicz T., Donati T., Tracci M., Bracale U.M., Tolva V.S., Riambau V., Palazzo V., Makaloski V., Von Allmen R.S., Dorigo W., Mansour W., Van den Eynde W.
ISSN
1097-6809 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
0741-5214
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
09/2024
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
80
Numéro
3
Pages
937-945
Langue
anglais
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article
Publication Status: ppublish
Publication Status: ppublish
Résumé
Management of follow-up protocols after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) varies significantly between centers and is not standardized according to sac regression. By designing an international expert-based Delphi consensus, the study aimed to create recommendations on follow-up after EVAR according to sac evolution.
Eight facilitators created appropriate statements regarding the study topic that were voted, using a 4-point Likert scale, by a selected panel of international experts using a three-round modified Delphi consensus process. Based on the experts' responses, only those statements reaching a grade A (full agreement ≥75%) or B (overall agreement ≥80% and full disagreement <5%) were included in the final document.
One-hundred and seventy-four participants were included in the final analysis, and each voted the initial 29 statements related to the definition of sac regression (Q1-Q9), EVAR follow-up (Q10-Q14), and the assessment and role of sac regression during follow-up (Q15-Q29). At the end of the process, 2 statements (6.9%) were rejected, 9 statements (31%) received a grade B consensus strength, and 18 (62.1%) reached a grade A consensus strength. Of 27 final statements, 15 (55.6%) were classified as grade I, whereas 12 (44.4%) were classified as grade II. Experts agreed that sac regression should be considered an important indicator of EVAR success and always be assessed during follow-up after EVAR.
Based on the elevated strength and high consistency of this international expert-based Delphi consensus, most of the statements might guide the current clinical management of follow-up after EVAR according to the sac regression. Future studies are needed to clarify debated issues.
Eight facilitators created appropriate statements regarding the study topic that were voted, using a 4-point Likert scale, by a selected panel of international experts using a three-round modified Delphi consensus process. Based on the experts' responses, only those statements reaching a grade A (full agreement ≥75%) or B (overall agreement ≥80% and full disagreement <5%) were included in the final document.
One-hundred and seventy-four participants were included in the final analysis, and each voted the initial 29 statements related to the definition of sac regression (Q1-Q9), EVAR follow-up (Q10-Q14), and the assessment and role of sac regression during follow-up (Q15-Q29). At the end of the process, 2 statements (6.9%) were rejected, 9 statements (31%) received a grade B consensus strength, and 18 (62.1%) reached a grade A consensus strength. Of 27 final statements, 15 (55.6%) were classified as grade I, whereas 12 (44.4%) were classified as grade II. Experts agreed that sac regression should be considered an important indicator of EVAR success and always be assessed during follow-up after EVAR.
Based on the elevated strength and high consistency of this international expert-based Delphi consensus, most of the statements might guide the current clinical management of follow-up after EVAR according to the sac regression. Future studies are needed to clarify debated issues.
Mots-clé
Humans, Endovascular Procedures/adverse effects, Endovascular Procedures/standards, Delphi Technique, Consensus, Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects, Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/standards, Treatment Outcome, Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/surgery, Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal/diagnostic imaging, Predictive Value of Tests, Time Factors, Aortography/standards, Computed Tomography Angiography/standards, Endovascular Aneurysm Repair, CTA, DUS, Delphi consensus, EVAR, Follow-up, Sac regression
Pubmed
Open Access
Oui
Création de la notice
14/03/2024 17:33
Dernière modification de la notice
27/08/2024 6:22