Endovascular Repair for Aorto-enteric Fistula: A Bridge Too Far or a Bridge to Surgery?

PurposeTo review our experience of endovascular treatment of aorto-enteric fistula (AEF).MethodsBetween March 1999 and March 2005, 15 patients in five university and teaching hospitals in Belgium and The Netherlands were treated for AEF by endovascular repair. Twelve (80%) were male. The mean age was 67 years. Thirteen (87%) had had previous aortic or iliac surgery, 1.7–307 months before. All patients showed clinical or biochemical signs of bleeding. Eight (53%) were in shock, five (33%) had systemic signs of infection.Eight (53%) patients were treated in an emergency setting. Ten (67%) were treated with an aortouniiliac device, three (20%) with an aortobiiliac device, one with a tube graft and one with occluders only. All patients received antibiotics postoperatively for a prolonged period of time.ResultsAll AEF were successfully sealed, the 30-days mortality was nil. Mean hospital stay was 20 (2–81) days. One patient died 2.7 months later of postoperative complications, one died of lung cancer. Until now, there are no signs of reinfection in four (27%) patients (mean follow-up 15.7 (1–44) months). However, reinfection or recurrent AEF occurred in nine (60%) patients after 9.5 (0.61–31) months. Seven patients were reoperated successfully, two patients died after reintervention.ConclusionEndovascular sealing of AEF is a promising technique, which provides time to treat shock, local and systemic infection, and co-morbidity. This creates a better situation to perform open repair in the future with possibly better outcome. Danger of reinfection remains high. Endovascular sealing of AEF should, therefore, be seen as a bridge to open surgery when possible.