Type 2 endoleak (T2EL) is the most common complication after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), occurring in 10%–25% of patients. Although many T2ELs follow a benign course, persistent T2EL is associated with sac expansion, secondary endoleaks, rupture, and aneurysm-related mortality. Endovascular treatment is indicated in cases of progressive sac growth and is broadly divided into the transarterial approach and the direct sac puncture approach—the latter encompassing transabdominal, translumbar, and transcaval routes. Each approach has distinct technical advantages and limitations, and selection should be tailored to the source vessel of the endoleak, sac location, surrounding anatomy, and patient-related factors. Coils, N-butyl cyanoacrylate, and ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (Onyx) constitute the principal embolic agents, with liquid embolics showing improved durability over coils alone in recent comparative studies. Prophylactic embolization of the inferior mesenteric artery, lumbar arteries, or the aneurysm sac during EVAR has recently emerged as a promising preventive strategy. This review summarizes the current approaches, embolic materials, prophylactic strategies, and clinical outcomes of T2EL management from the perspective of the interventional radiologist.

<b>Purpose</b><br/>This study aimed to evaluate the clinical efficacy and patency of stents placed for symptomatic iliac vein or IVC obstruction caused by malignant tumors. Material and Methods: A total of 34 consecutive patients with malignant iliac vein or IVC obstruction underwent stent placement. We reviewed their electronic medical records, pre- and post-procedural CT scans, and angiograms retrospectively, and evaluated technical success, clinical success, and patient-based and vessel-based reocclusion rates confirmed by follow-up cross-sectional images. The reocclusion rate difference between IVC and iliac stents was also assessed. <br/><b>Results</b><br/>All patients complained of leg and/or trunk edema. The stents were placed in the following locations: IVC (n = 9); iliac veins (n = 19); and both IVC and iliac veins (n = 6). Technical success rate was 100% and the clinical success rate was 87.5% during hospitalization. Cross-sectional area of the affected thigh was significantly decreased after stent placement (mean 11.7%, p = 0.003). The median follow-up period was 65 days (Q1–Q3, 28.5–227.3; IQR, 198.8). The patient-based reocclusion rate was 42.8%. The vessel-based reocclusion rates for IVC (12.5%) tended to be lower than those of iliac veins (45%), though the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.194). <br/><b>Conclusion</b><br/>Stent insertion for iliac vein or IVC obstruction secondary to malignancy is technically feasible and can help to improve patients’ symptoms. IVC stents tend to achieve a higher rate of patency than iliac vein stents.