Comparison of Bare Metal vs Covered Proximal Stent Fixation During Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair of Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

FEVAR for CAAAs and Extent IV TAAAs was performed with high technical success, low mortality, and MAEs, independent of the use of BMFS. There is no difference in patient survival and freedom from secondary interventions in patients treated with or without BMFS.Clinical ImpactOne hundred forty-seven patients were treated with bare-metal fixation-stent (79) or covered fixation stents (68). Technical success was similar (p=.47). Overall 30-day mortality was 1%, with no difference in major adverse events (MAEs; p=.59). At 1- and 3-year, there was no difference in patient survival (p=.51), freedom from secondary intervention (p=.71). In conclusion, FEVAR for CAAAs and Extent IV TAAAs was performed with high technical success, low mortality and MAEs, independent of the use of bare-metal fixation stent.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Endovascular Therapy
Published
2025-11-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/15266028251388749
Primary Topic
Aortic aneurysm repair treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of Bare Metal vs Covered Proximal Stent Fixation During Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair of Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Lucas Ruiter Kanamori, Bernardo C. Mendes, Steven Maximus, Gustavo S. Oderich et al.
Journal of Endovascular Therapy
Aortic aneurysm repair treatments
article

Comparison of Bare Metal vs Covered Proximal Stent Fixation During Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair of Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Lucas Ruiter Kanamori, Bernardo C. Mendes, Steven Maximus, Gustavo S. Oderich, Bruno Schmid, Naveed Saqib, Emanuel R. Tenorio, Thanila A. Macedo, Guilherme Baumgardt Barbosa Lima, Ying Huang
article en

Abstract

FEVAR for CAAAs and Extent IV TAAAs was performed with high technical success, low mortality, and MAEs, independent of the use of BMFS. There is no difference in patient survival and freedom from secondary interventions in patients treated with or without BMFS.Clinical ImpactOne hundred forty-seven patients were treated with bare-metal fixation-stent (79) or covered fixation stents (68). Technical success was similar (p=.47). Overall 30-day mortality was 1%, with no difference in major adverse events (MAEs; p=.59). At 1- and 3-year, there was no difference in patient survival (p=.51), freedom from secondary intervention (p=.71). In conclusion, FEVAR for CAAAs and Extent IV TAAAs was performed with high technical success, low mortality and MAEs, independent of the use of bare-metal fixation stent.

Journal of Endovascular Therapy
Baylor College of Medicine (US), Mayo Clinic in Arizona (US), The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 52%
Aortic aneurysm repair treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Comparison of Bare Metal vs Covered Proximal Stent Fixation During Fenestrated Endovascular Aortic Repair of Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms — Lucas Ruiter Kanamori, Bernardo C. Mendes, et al. · Journal of Endovascular Therapy (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS