ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT01005212AAA CEUSUpdated Apr 12, 2024Results posted

Evaluation of Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound to Detect Endoleaks After Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

An observational study in Endoleaks, sponsored by E. Peden, MD. Completed at 2 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-04-12.

Sponsored by E. Peden, MD · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Case-only
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
20
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study will be a cross-sectional survey of interobserver variability associated with contrast enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) to detect endoleaks using computed tomographic angiography (CTA) as the practice standard. The investigators will enroll 40 consecutive patients undergoing endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). At the first follow-up visit after the procedure, participants will undergo two abdominal ultrasound examinations with and without contrast, and one CTA. Analyses will be conducted to examine interobserver variability in the detection and characterization of endoleaks using contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS). Other endpoints include examination of sensitivity and specificity of CEUS compared to CTA, and characterization of the number and types of endoleaks detected.

02

Conditions studied

  • Endoleaks

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • EVAR
  • Ultrasounds
  • AAA
  • endoleaks after endovascular repair of AAA
03

In context

Endoleak

29 studies on the registry are indexed under Endoleak; 6 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 20 is below the median of 48 across 12 observational studies indexed under Endoleak.

Browse Endoleak studies →

Lead sponsor

E. Peden, MD is the lead sponsor of 2 studies on the registry; 1 is open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Non-probability sample

Study population

Subjects that have undgone endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR).

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  1. Age 18 years of age or greater;
  2. Diagnosed with abdominal aortic aneurysm and has undergone or is scheduled to undergo endovascular repair procedure.
  3. Has not completed the first scheduled post-treatment follow-up exam
  4. Voluntary participation and signature of IRB-approved .

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Inability to consent (includes non-English speaking patients)
  2. Has already completed the first scheduled post-treatment follow-up exam.
  3. Clinical instability;
  4. Pregnancy / breast feeding;
  5. Known allergy to perflutren;
  6. Known or suspected right-to-left, bi-directional, or transient right-to-left cardiac shunts (based on manufacturer recommendations for use);
  7. Recent heart attack (\<6 months), unstable angina or uncontrolled cardiopulmonary disease
  8. Clinically unstable or recent worsening congestive heart failure (based on FDA warning)
  9. Serious ventricular arrhythmias or at high risk for arrhythmias
  10. Respiratory failure (based on FDA warning)
  11. Severe emphysema, pulmonary emboli or other conditions that compromise pulmonary arterial vasculature (based on FDA warning)
  12. Any reason judged by the investigators to hamper inclusion.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(1)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

05

Study design

Observational model
Case-only
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
20 participants (actual)

Interventions

  • An intravenous line will be placed and 1.3 mL of the ultrasound contrast agent DEFINITY® will be added to 50 mL sterile saline. Flow will be initiated at 4.0 mL/minute and adjusted for optimal imaging. A maximum of 1.3 mL or one vial of ultrasound contrast will be used per patient per session according to the manufacturer's guidelines.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Endoleak Detection

    Persistent of a pulsatile intrasac color flow outside the stent-graft

    Time frame: Same day outcome

07

Results

Posted Apr 12, 2024

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestoneSingle Arm
Started20
Completed20
Not completed0

Outcome measures

PrimaryEndoleak Detection

Persistent of a pulsatile intrasac color flow outside the stent-graft

Time frame:
Same day outcome
Reported as:
Count of participants · Participants
Endoleak Detection
ParticipantsSingle Arm
Endoleak Detection9

Adverse events

Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
CEUS-Single Arm0/20 (0%)0/20 (0%)0/20 (0%)

Baseline characteristics

Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)Single Arm
Mean70 (50 to 90)
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)Single Arm
Female0
Male20
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(participants)Single Arm
United States20
08

Study locations

2 sites
  • Houston Methodist Hospital; Department of Cardiovascualr Surgery
    Houston, Texas 77030, United States
  • Houston Methodist Hospital; Department of Cardiovascular Surgery
    Houston, Texas 77030, United States
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Baum RA, Carpenter JP, Cope C, Golden MA, Velazquez OC, Neschis DG, Mitchell ME, Barker CF, Fairman RM. Aneurysm sac pressure measurements after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg. 2001 Jan;33(1):32-41. doi: 10.1067/mva.2001.111807. PubMed 11137921 ↗
  • Baum RA, Carpenter JP, Stavropoulous SW, Fairman RM. Diagnosis and management of type 2 endoleaks after endovascular aneurysm repair. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2001 Dec;4(4):222-6. doi: 10.1016/s1089-2516(01)90012-5. PubMed 11894049 ↗
  • Bargellini I, Napoli V, Petruzzi P, Cioni R, Vignali C, Sardella SG, Ferrari M, Bartolozzi C. Type II lumbar endoleaks: hemodynamic differentiation by contrast-enhanced ultrasound scanning and influence on aneurysm enlargement after endovascular aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2005 Jan;41(1):10-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2004.10.037. PubMed 15696037 ↗
  • Bendick PJ, Bove PG, Long GW, Zelenock GB, Brown OW, Shanley CJ. Efficacy of ultrasound scan contrast agents in the noninvasive follow-up of aortic stent grafts. J Vasc Surg. 2003 Feb;37(2):381-5. doi: 10.1067/mva.2003.17. PubMed 12563210 ↗
  • Bromley PJ, Kaufman JA. Abdominal aortic aneurysms before and after endograft implantation: evaluation by computed tomography. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2001 Mar;4(1):15-26. doi: 10.1053/tvir.2001.23090. PubMed 11981786 ↗
  • Carrafiello G, Recaldini C, Lagana D, Piffaretti G, Fugazzola C. Endoleak detection and classification after endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm: value of CEUS over CTA. Abdom Imaging. 2008 May-Jun;33(3):357-62. doi: 10.1007/s00261-007-9268-3. PubMed 17619925 ↗
  • Chuter TA, Faruqi RM, Sawhney R, Reilly LM, Kerlan RB, Canto CJ, Lukaszewicz GC, Laberge JM, Wilson MW, Gordon RL, Wall SD, Rapp J, Messina LM. Endoleak after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg. 2001 Jul;34(1):98-105. doi: 10.1067/mva.2001.111487. PubMed 11436081 ↗
  • Dill-Macky MJ, Wilson SR, Sternbach Y, Kachura J, Lindsay T. Detecting endoleaks in aortic endografts using contrast-enhanced sonography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007 Mar;188(3):W262-8. doi: 10.2214/AJR.05.0532. PubMed 17312033 ↗
  • Deaton DH, Makaroun MS, Fairman RM. Endoleak: predictive value for aneurysm growth at 3 years. Ann Vasc Surg. 2002 Jan;16(1):37-42. doi: 10.1007/s10016-001-0129-1. Epub 2002 Jan 16. PubMed 11904802 ↗
  • Eskandari MK, Yao JS, Pearce WH, Rutherford RB, Veith FJ, Harris P, Bernhard VM, Becker GJ, Morasch MD, Chrisman HB, Ryu RK, Matsumura JS. Surveillance after endoluminal repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Cardiovasc Surg. 2001 Oct;9(5):469-71. doi: 10.1016/s0967-2109(01)00044-8. No abstract available. PubMed 11489651 ↗
  • Giannoni MF, Palombo G, Sbarigia E, Speziale F, Zaccaria A, Fiorani P. Contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging for aortic stent-graft surveillance. J Endovasc Ther. 2003 Apr;10(2):208-17. doi: 10.1177/152660280301000208. PubMed 12877601 ↗
  • Giannoni MF, Fanelli F, Citone M, Cristina Acconcia M, Speziale F, Gossetti B. Contrast ultrasound imaging: the best method to detect type II endoleak during endovascular aneurysm repair follow-up. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2007 Jun;6(3):359-62. doi: 10.1510/icvts.2006.137265. Epub 2007 Jan 8. PubMed 17669866 ↗
  • Henao EA, Hodge MD, Felkai DD, McCollum CH, Noon GP, Lin PH, Lumsden AB, Bush RL. Contrast-enhanced Duplex surveillance after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: improved efficacy using a continuous infusion technique. J Vasc Surg. 2006 Feb;43(2):259-64; discussion 264. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2005.09.045. PubMed 16476596 ↗
  • Heilberger P, Schunn C, Ritter W, Weber S, Raithel D. Postoperative color flow duplex scanning in aortic endografting. J Endovasc Surg. 1997 Aug;4(3):262-71. doi: 10.1177/152660289700400305. PubMed 9291051 ↗
  • Hiatt MD, Rubin GD. Surveillance for endoleaks: how to detect all of them. Semin Vasc Surg. 2004 Dec;17(4):268-78. doi: 10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2004.09.003. PubMed 15614750 ↗
  • Jaakkola P, Hippelainen M, Farin P, Rytkonen H, Kainulainen S, Partanen K. Interobserver variability in measuring the dimensions of the abdominal aorta: comparison of ultrasound and computed tomography. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 1996 Aug;12(2):230-7. doi: 10.1016/s1078-5884(96)80112-2. PubMed 8760988 ↗
  • Jones WB, Taylor SM, Kalbaugh CA, Joels CS, Blackhurst DW, Langan EM 3rd, Gray BH, Youkey JR. Lost to follow-up: a potential under-appreciated limitation of endovascular aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2007 Sep;46(3):434-40; discussion 440-1. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2007.05.002. PubMed 17826228 ↗
  • McWilliams RG, Martin J, White D, Gould DA, Rowlands PC, Haycox A, Brennan J, Gilling-Smith GL, Harris PL. Detection of endoleak with enhanced ultrasound imaging: comparison with biphasic computed tomography. J Endovasc Ther. 2002 Apr;9(2):170-9. doi: 10.1177/152660280200900206. PubMed 12010096 ↗
  • Muthu C, Gordon M, Buckenham T, Lewis D. The case for lifelong follow-up after endovascular aneurysm repair. N Z Med J. 2005 Nov 11;118(1225):U1729. No abstract available. PubMed 16286942 ↗
  • Napoli V, Bargellini I, Sardella SG, Petruzzi P, Cioni R, Vignali C, Ferrari M, Bartolozzi C. Abdominal aortic aneurysm: contrast-enhanced US for missed endoleaks after endoluminal repair. Radiology. 2004 Oct;233(1):217-25. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2331031767. PubMed 15454621 ↗
  • Resch T, Ivancev K, Brunkwall J, Nyman U, Malina M, Lindblad B. Distal migration of stent-grafts after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 1999 Mar;10(3):257-64; discussion 265-6. doi: 10.1016/s1051-0443(99)70027-8. PubMed 10102188 ↗
  • Rydberg J, Lalka S, Johnson M, Cikrit D, Dalsing M, Sawchuk A, Shafique S. Characterization of endoleaks by dynamic computed tomographic angiography. Am J Surg. 2004 Nov;188(5):538-43. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2004.07.011. PubMed 15546566 ↗
  • Sawhney R, Kerlan RK, Wall SD, Chuter TA, Ruiz DE, Canto CJ, LaBerge JM, Reilly LM, Yee J, Wilson MW, Jean-Claude J, Faruqi RM, Gordon RL. Analysis of initial CT findings after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Radiology. 2001 Jul;220(1):157-60. doi: 10.1148/radiology.220.1.r01jl22157. PubMed 11425989 ↗
  • Singh K, Jacobsen BK, Solberg S, Bonaa KH, Kumar S, Bajic R, Arnesen E. Intra- and interobserver variability in the measurements of abdominal aortic and common iliac artery diameter with computed tomography. The Tromso study. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2003 May;25(5):399-407. doi: 10.1053/ejvs.2002.1856. PubMed 12713777 ↗
  • Singh K, Jacobsen BK, Solberg S, Kumar S, Arnesen E. The difference between ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) measurements of aortic diameter increases with aortic diameter: analysis of axial images of abdominal aortic and common iliac artery diameter in normal and aneurysmal aortas. The Tromso Study, 1994-1995. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2004 Aug;28(2):158-67. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2004.03.018. PubMed 15234697 ↗
  • Tillich M, Hausegger KA, Tiesenhausen K, Tauss J, Groell R, Szolar DH. Helical CT angiography of stent-grafts in abdominal aortic aneurysms: morphologic changes and complications. Radiographics. 1999 Nov-Dec;19(6):1573-83. doi: 10.1148/radiographics.19.6.g99no091573. PubMed 10555675 ↗
  • Wanhainen A, Bergqvist D, Bjorck M. Measuring the abdominal aorta with ultrasonography and computed tomography - difference and variability. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2002 Nov;24(5):428-34. doi: 10.1053/ejvs.2002.1748. PubMed 12435343 ↗
  • White GH, Yu W, May J, Chaufour X, Stephen MS. Endoleak as a complication of endoluminal grafting of abdominal aortic aneurysms: classification, incidence, diagnosis, and management. J Endovasc Surg. 1997 May;4(2):152-68. doi: 10.1177/152660289700400207. PubMed 9185003 ↗
  • White GH, May J, Petrasek P, Waugh R, Stephen M, Harris J. Endotension: an explanation for continued AAA growth after successful endoluminal repair. J Endovasc Surg. 1999 Nov;6(4):308-15. doi: 10.1583/1074-6218(1999)0062.0.CO;2. PubMed 10893130 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Apr 12, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT01005212
Lead sponsor
E. Peden, MD
Responsible party
E. Peden, MD (Sponsor-Investigator/Principal Investigator, The Methodist Hospital Research Institute) — Sponsor-investigator
First posted
Oct 30, 2009
Start date
Jan 2008
Primary completion
Sep 2010
Completion
Sep 2010
Results posted
Apr 12, 2024
Last update
Apr 12, 2024

Study contacts

Eric Peden, MD
principal investigator · Houston Methodist Hosptial

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2023. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion