Table 2.

Studies reporting on the outcomes of preemptive sac embolization.

Study, Year	Population	Results & Conclusions
Fabre et al., 2021 [57]	47 pts with aneurysm sac coil embolization during EVAR vs. 47 pts with standard EVAR	The embolization group had a significantly lower rate of T2EL at 12 months compared to pts with standard EVAR (14.3% vs. 40.5%). Nevertheless, this protection advantage was lost at 24 months.
Piazza et al., 2016 [58]	52 pts with intraoperative sac embolization vs. 55 pts with standard EVAR	The embolization group achieved higher freedom from T2EL at 3, 6, and 12 months, superior freedom from T2EL-related reintervention and greater shrinkage of the aneurysmal sac.
Zanchetta et al., 2007 [59]	84 pts with intraoperative intrasac fibrin glue injection	Sac embolization resulted in a low rate of delayed T2EL (2.4%) and a statistically significant decrease in the maximum transverse aneurysm diameter.
Mascoli et al., 2016 [60]	26 pts with intraprocedural sac embolization vs. 44 pts without	Selective intraoperative sac embolization in patients with known morphological risk factors decreases T2EL rate.
Muthu et al., 2007 [61]	69 pts with contemporary IMA embolization and thrombin injection into the sac vs. 69 controls	Despite the rate of T2EL being lower in the embolization group, no statistically significant results were achieved, mainly due to endoleaks from the lumbar arteries.
Pilon et al., 2010 [62]	18 pts with fibrin glue injection into the sac vs. 20 pts with standard EVAR	Sac embolization led to fewer CT scans, resulting in reduced health-care costs.

Abbreviations: pts, patients; EVAR, endovascular aneurysm repair; T2EL, type II endoleak; IMA, inferior mesenteric artery; CT, computed tomography.