TY - JOUR
T1 - The sac evolution imaging follow-up after endovascular aortic repair
T2 - An international expert opinion-based Delphi consensus study
AU - Tinelli, Giovanni
AU - D'Oria, Mario
AU - Sica, Simona
AU - Mani, Kevin
AU - Rancic, Zoran
AU - Resch, Timothy Andrew
AU - Beccia, Flavia
AU - Azizzadeh, Ali
AU - Da Volta Ferreira, Marcelo Martins
AU - Gargiulo, Mauro
AU - Lepidi, Sandro
AU - Tshomba, Yamume
AU - Oderich, Gustavo S.
AU - Haulon, Stéphan
AU - Beck, Adam W.
AU - Hertault, Adrien
AU - Savlania, Ajay
AU - Froio, Alberto
AU - Giaquinta, Alessia
AU - Zimmermann, Alexander
AU - Psyllas, Anastasios
AU - Wanhainen, Anders
AU - Marchetti, Andrea Ascoli
AU - Queiroz, Andre Brito
AU - Kahlberg, Andrea
AU - Reyes-Valdivia, Andrés
AU - Schanzer, Andres
AU - Tambyraja, Andrew
AU - Freyrie, Antonio
AU - Lorido, Antonio
AU - Millon, Antoine
AU - Ippoliti, Arnaldo
AU - Abai, Babak
AU - Mees, Barend
AU - Reutersberg, Benedikt
AU - Maurel, Blandine
AU - Michel, Bosiers
AU - Wahlgren, Carl Magnus
AU - Cavazzini, Carlo
AU - Setacci, Carlo
AU - Lee, Cheong Jun
AU - Ferrer, Ciro
AU - Bicknell, Colin
AU - Raphaël, Coscas
AU - Clair, Daniel
AU - Dawson, David L.
AU - Arnaoutakis, Dean J.
AU - Böckler, Dittmar
AU - de Vries, J. P.P.M.
AU - Reijnen, Michel
AU - SLIM F-U EVAR, Collaborative Study Group
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Authors
PY - 2024/9
Y1 - 2024/9
N2 - Objective: 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. Methods: 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. Results: 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. Conclusions: 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.
AB - Objective: 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. Methods: 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. Results: 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. Conclusions: 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.
KW - CTA
KW - Delphi consensus
KW - DUS
KW - EVAR
KW - Follow-up
KW - Sac regression
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85193921137&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jvs.2024.03.007
DO - 10.1016/j.jvs.2024.03.007
M3 - Article
C2 - 38462062
AN - SCOPUS:85193921137
SN - 0741-5214
VL - 80
SP - 937
EP - 945
JO - Journal of vascular surgery
JF - Journal of vascular surgery
IS - 3
ER -