Sex differences in perioperative outcomes after complex abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

ObjectiveFemale sex is associated with worse outcomes after infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. However, the impact of female sex on complex AAA repair is poorly characterized. Therefore, we compared outcomes between female and male patients after open and endovascular treatment of complex AAA.MethodsWe identified all patients who underwent complex aneurysm repair between 2011 and 2017 in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted vascular module. Complex repairs were defined as those for juxtarenal, pararenal, or suprarenal aneurysms. We compared rates of perioperative adverse events between female and male patients stratified by open AAA repair and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). We calculated propensity scores and used inverse probability-weighted logistic regression to identify independent associations between female sex and our outcomes.ResultsWe identified 2270 complex aneurysm repairs, of which 1260 were EVARs (21.4% female) and 1010 were open repairs (30.7% female). After EVAR, female patients had higher rates of perioperative mortality (6.3% vs 2.4%; P = .001) and major complications (15.9% vs 7.6%; P < .001) compared with male patients. In contrast, after open repair, perioperative mortality was not significantly different (7.4% vs 5.6%; P = .3), and the rate of major complications was similar (29.4% vs 27.4%; P = .53) between female and male patients. Furthermore, even though perioperative mortality was significantly lower after EVAR compared with open repair for male patients (2.4% vs 5.6%; P = .001), this difference was not significant for women (6.3% vs 7.4%; P = .60). On multivariable analysis, female sex remained independently associated with higher perioperative mortality (odds ratio [OR], 2.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-4.9; P = .007) and major complications (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.3-3.2; P = .002) in patients treated with EVAR but showed no significant association with mortality (OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.5-1.6; P = .69) or major complications (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.8-1.5; P = .74) after open repair. However, the association of female sex with higher perioperative mortality in patients undergoing complex EVAR was attenuated when diameter was replaced with aortic size index in the multivariable analysis (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 0.9-3.9; P = .091).ConclusionsFemale sex is associated with higher perioperative mortality and more major complications than for male patients after complex EVAR but not after complex open repair. Continuous efforts are warranted to improve the sex discrepancies in patients undergoing endovascular repair of complex AAA.     

Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair is associated with lower perioperative morbidity and mortality compared with open repair for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms

ObjectiveThe Zenith Fenestrated Endovascular Graft (ZFEN; Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind) has expanded the anatomic eligibility of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Current data on ZFEN mainly consist of single-institution experiences and show conflicting results. Therefore, we compared perioperative outcomes after repair using ZFEN with open complex AAA repair and infrarenal EVAR in a nationwide multicenter registry.MethodsWe identified all patients undergoing elective AAA repair using ZFEN, open complex AAA repair, and standard infrarenal EVAR between 2012 and 2016 within the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted vascular module. Open complex AAA repairs were defined as those with a juxtarenal or suprarenal proximal AAA extent in combination with an aortic cross-clamping position that was above at least one renal artery. The primary outcome was perioperative mortality, defined as death within 30 days or within the index hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included postoperative renal dysfunction (creatinine concentration increase of >2 mg/dL from preoperative value or new dialysis), occurrence of any complication, procedure times, blood transfusion rates, and length of stay. To account for baseline differences, we calculated propensity scores and employed inverse probability-weighted logistic regression.ResultsWe identified 6825 AAA repairs—220 ZFENs, 181 open complex AAA repairs, and 6424 infrarenal EVARs. Univariate analysis of ZFEN compared with open complex AAA repair demonstrated lower rates of perioperative mortality (1.8% vs 8.8%; P = .001), postoperative renal dysfunction (1.4% vs 7.7%; P = .002), and overall complications (11% vs 33%; P < .001). In addition, fewer patients undergoing ZFEN received blood transfusions (22% vs 73%; P < .001), and median length of stay was shorter (2 vs 7 days; P < .001). After adjustment, open complex AAA repair was associated with higher odds of perioperative mortality (odds ratio [OR], 4.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-18), postoperative renal dysfunction (OR, 13; 95% CI, 3.6-49), and overall complication rates (OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 2.3-7.5) compared with ZFEN. Compared with infrarenal EVAR, ZFEN presented comparable rates of perioperative mortality (1.8% vs 0.8%; P = .084), renal dysfunction (1.4% vs 0.7%; P = .19), and any complication (11% vs 7.7%; P = .09). Furthermore, after adjustment, there was no significant difference between the odds of perioperative mortality, postoperative renal dysfunction, or any complication between infrarenal EVAR and ZFEN.ConclusionsZFEN is associated with lower perioperative morbidity and mortality compared with open complex AAA repair, and outcomes are comparable to those of infrarenal EVAR. Long-term durability of ZFEN compared with open complex AAA repair warrants future research.     

Chronic kidney disease impacts outcomes after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

ObjectiveChronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease are traditionally associated with worse outcomes after endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). This study stratifies outcomes of AAA repair by approach, CKD severity, and dialysis dependence.MethodsAll patients undergoing elective infrarenal open aneurysm repair (OAR) and endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) with preoperative renal function data captured by the Vascular Quality Initiative between January 2003 and September 2020 were analyzed. Patients were stratified by CKD class as follows: CKD stages 1 and 2, CKD stage 3a, CKD stage 3b, CKD stages 4 and 5, and dialysis. Primary outcomes were perioperative and 1-year mortality. Predictors of survival were identified by Cox multivariate regression models.ResultsIn total, 53,867 elective AAA repairs were identified: 5396 (10%) OARs and 48,471 (90%) EVARs. Most patients were White (90%) and male (81%), with a mean age of 73 ± 9 years. Patients who underwent EVAR were older and had more comorbidities. The use of elective EVAR for AAA increased from 52% in 2003 to 91% in 2020 (P < .001). The OAR cohort had more perioperative complications and short-term mortality. The CKD 1 and 2 group had the highest 1-year survival compared with the other groups after both OAR and EVAR. On Cox regression analysis, after EVAR, compared with CKD 1 and 2, worsening CKD stage (CKD 3a: hazard ratio [HR], 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-1.68; P = .13; CKD 3b: HR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.23-2.45; P < .050; CKD 4-5: HR, 3.23; 95% CI, 2.13-4.88; P < .001), and dialysis (HR, 4.48; 95% CI, 1.90-10.6; P < .001) were independently associated with worse 1-year survival rates. After OAR, compared with CKD 1 and 2, worsening CKD stage (CKD 3a: HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.96-1.20; P = .20; CKD 3b: HR, 1.60; 95% CI, 1.41-1.81; P < .001; CKD 4-5: HR, 2.85; 95% CI, 2.39-3.41; P < .001), and dialysis (HR, 3.79; 95% CI, 3.01-4.76; P < .001) were independently associated with worse 1-year survival rates.ConclusionsRegardless of the treatment approach, CKD severity is an important predictor of perioperative and 1-year mortality rates after infrarenal AAA repair and may reflect the natural history of CKD. Open repair is associated with high perioperative mortality risk in patients with CKD stages 4 and 5, as well as end-stage renal disease. Individualization of patient decision-making is especially important in patients with a glomerular filtration rate of less than 45 and perhaps consideration should be given to raising the threshold for elective AAA repair in these patients. Further studies focusing on appropriate size threshold for repair in these patients may be warranted.     

Factors associated with in-hospital complications and long-term implications of these complications in elderly patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair

ObjectivePerioperative complications in elderly patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) occur frequently. Although perioperative mortality has been well-described in the elderly patient population, factors associated with in-hospital complications and their impact on long-term survival remain poorly characterized.MethodsWe identified all patients undergoing elective EVAR for infrarenal AAA within the Vascular Quality Initiative registry (2003-2018) and compared in-hospital complication rates between elderly (age ≥75) and nonelderly patients (<75). We used logistic regression to identify independent factors associated with in-hospital complications, whereas Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine associations between complications and long-term survival. To assess the effect of complications on early and late survival, we stratified survival periods into the first 30 days after discharge, and between 1 and 6 months, 7 and 12 months, and 1 and 8 years after the index procedure. To investigate the implications of in-hospital morbidity on long-term outcomes, we estimated the adjusted population-attributable fractions of individual complications on both perioperative and long-term survival.ResultsWe identified 17,156 elderly patients and 19,922 nonelderly patients. Elderly patients experienced higher complication rates compared with nonelderly patients (17% vs 10%; P < .001). The factors with the strongest associations with morbidity in elderly patients were anemia (odds ratio [OR], 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2-2.6), female gender (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.7-2.1), and large AAA diameter (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.6-1.9). Patients with any in-hospital complication had lower unadjusted survival estimates than patients without complications at 1 year (83% vs 95%; P < .001), 5 years (66% vs 80%; P < .001), and 8 years (60% vs 72%; P < .001). After risk adjustment, in-hospital complications were independently associated with higher mortality, although the association attenuated over time (first month after discharge: hazard ratio [HR], 5.9; 95% CI, 3.9-9.1; 1-6 months after the procedure: HR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.7-2.7; P < .001; 7-12 months after the procedure: HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9; 1-8 years after the procedure: HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.01-1.3). Of all deaths occurring within 8 years after procedure, 9.5% were independently associated with in-hospital complications. Complications with the greatest impact on long-term mortality were renal dysfunction (2.4%), blood transfusion (3.4%), and reintubations (2.4%).ConclusionsElderly patients are at higher risk for in-hospital complications after EVAR. These in-hospital complications have a significant impact on both short- and long-term survival. To further improve the delivery of EVAR care nationally, quality improvement efforts should be focused on preventing postoperative morbidity in elderly patients, as well as refining out of hospital surveillance strategies for subjects who experience in-hospital complications to improve overall survival.     

Perioperative blood transfusion in anemic patients undergoing elective endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair

ObjectiveAlthough blood transfusion can be lifesaving in active hemorrhage or severe anemia, it is also associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Several trials have established this risk and therefore defined a restrictive standard for transfusion, but this threshold and the risk of transfusions have not been specifically examined in vascular surgery patients. We therefore sought to assess transfusion practices and outcomes of anemic patients undergoing elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).MethodsThe Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried for patients undergoing EVAR between the years 2008 and 2017. Anemic patients were included in the study and were further stratified into mild anemia, defined by a hemoglobin level of 10 to 13 g/dL in men or 10 to 12 g/dL in women, and moderate to severe anemia, defined by a hemoglobin level <10 g/dL. The primary study outcomes were in-hospital mortality and complications.ResultsAmong 27,777 EVAR patients, one-third (n = 9232) were anemic and included in the study. One-fifth (n = 1866) of anemic patients received a perioperative transfusion. Transfused patients were more likely to have a history of cardiovascular disease. In-hospital mortality was significantly higher for anemic patients who received transfusions, both in mild anemia (mortality, 3.6% vs 0.4% in no transfusion; P < .001) and in moderate to severe anemia (4.5% vs 1.3%; P < .01). Morbidity was also significantly higher, with anemic patients who received a transfusion having higher rates of myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, dysrhythmias, renal complications, leg ischemia, respiratory complications, and reoperation compared with anemic patients who did not receive any transfusion. The 30-day mortality was also higher in transfused patients (P < .001). After adjustment for patients' demographics, comorbidities, and operative factors, transfusion in anemic patients was associated with a nearly 4.4-fold increased odds of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 4.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.72-7.05; P < .001) and 4.3-fold higher odds of any in-hospital complication (OR, 4.31; 95% CI, 3.47-5.34; P < .001). This was more pronounced among patients with mild anemia, with 5.7 times (OR, 5.7; 95% CI, 1.78-18.0) and 4.3 times (OR, 4.3; 95% CI, 3.46-5.29) the odds of in-hospital mortality and complications, respectively.ConclusionsAmong anemic patients undergoing elective EVAR, transfusion is associated with an increased risk of death and in-hospital complications, even after controlling for patients' comorbidities and operative factors. These data suggest that the restrictive use of blood transfusions might be safer in vascular surgery EVAR patients. Medical management of anemia may be warranted in these patients to reduce morbidity and mortality; however, further studies are needed to evaluate effectiveness.     

Factors associated with symptomatic postoperative myocardial infarction after endovascular aneurysm repair

ObjectiveEndovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has now become the most common operation to treat abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). One of the perceived benefits of EVAR over open AAA repair is reduced incidence of perioperative cardiac complications and mortality. The purpose of this study was to determine risk factors associated with postoperative myocardial infarction (POMI) in patients who have undergone EVAR.MethodsData were obtained from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database for the years 2012 to 2015 in the Participant Use Data File. All patients in the database who underwent EVAR during this time were identified. These patients were then divided into two groups: those with POMI and those without. Bivariate analysis was done for preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative risk factors, followed by multivariable analysis to determine associations of independent variables with POMI. A risk prediction model for POMI was created to accurately predict incidence of POMI after EVAR.ResultsA total of 7702 patients (81.3% male, 18.7% female) were identified who underwent EVAR from 2011 to 2015. Of these patients, 110 (1.4%) had POMI and 7592 (98.6%) did not. Several risk factors were related to an increased risk of POMI, including dependent functional health status, need for lower extremity revascularization, longer operation time, and ruptured AAA (P < .05, all).On multivariable analysis, the following factors were found to have significant associations with POMI: return to operating room (odds ratio [OR], 1.84; confidence interval [CI], 1.10-3.09; P = .020), ruptured AAA (OR, 1.87; CI, 1.18-2.95; P = .008), pneumonia (OR, 1.94; CI, 1.01-3.73; P = .048), age >80 years (compared with <70 years; OR, 2.30; CI, 1.36-3.86; P = .002), unplanned intubation (OR, 4.07; CI, 2.31-7.18; P < .001), and length of hospital stay >6 days (OR, 8.43; CI, 4.75-14.94; P < .001). The risk prediction model showed that in the presence of all these risk factors, the incidence of POMI was 58.3%. The incidence of cardiac arrest and death was significantly higher for patients with POMI compared with patients without POMI (cardiac arrest, 11.9% vs 1.3%; death, 10.2% vs 1.1%).ConclusionsIn patients who undergo EVAR, the risk of POMI is increased for those who are older, who present with a ruptured AAA, who have pneumonia, who have unplanned intubation, and who have prolonged hospital stay. Patients who suffer from POMI have higher risk of having cardiac arrest and death.     

Comparable perioperative mortality outcomes in younger patients undergoing elective open and endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

BackgroundEvidence for benefit of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) over open surgical repair for de novo infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in younger patients remains conflicting because of heterogeneous study populations and small sample sizes. The objective of this study was to compare perioperative and short-term outcomes for EVAR and open surgery in younger patients using a large national disease and procedure-specific data set.MethodsWe identified patients 65 years of age or younger undergoing first-time elective EVAR or open AAA repair from the Vascular Quality Initiative (2003-2014). We excluded patients with pararenal or thoracoabdominal aneurysms, those medically unfit for open repair, and those undergoing EVAR for isolated iliac aneurysms. Clinical and procedural characteristics were balanced using inverse propensity of treatment weighting. A supplemental analysis extended the study to those younger than 70 years.ResultsWe identified 2641 patients, 73% (n = 1928) EVAR and 27% (n = 713) open repair. The median age was 62 years (interquartile range, 59-64 years), and 13% were female. The median follow-up time was 401 days (interquartile range, 357-459 days). Unadjusted perioperative survival was 99.6% overall (open repair, 99.1%; EVAR, 99.8%; P < .001), with 97.4% 1-year survival overall (open repair, 97.3%; EVAR, 97.4%; P = .9). Unadjusted reintervention rates were five (open repair) and seven (EVAR) reinterventions per 100 person-years (P = .8). After propensity weighting, the absolute incidence of perioperative mortality was <1% in both groups (open repair, 0.9%, EVAR, 0.2%; P < .001), and complication rates were low. Propensity-weighted survival (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-1.38; P = .6) and reintervention rates (open repair, 6; EVAR, 8; reinterventions per 100 person-years; P = .8) did not differ between the two interventions. The analysis of those younger than 70 years showed similar results.ConclusionsIn this study of younger patients undergoing repair of infrarenal AAA, 30-day morbidity and mortality for both open surgery and EVAR are low, and the absolute mortality difference is small. The prior published perioperative mortality and 1-year survival benefit of EVAR over open AAA repair is not observed in younger patients. Further studies of long-term durability are needed to guide decision-making for open repair vs EVAR in this population.     

Predictors of acute kidney injury after infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in octogenarians

Objective

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common postoperative complication after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. However, limited studies have investigated this complication in elderly patients. This study aims to evaluate AKI in octogenarians after open endovascular AAA repair (OAR) and endovascular AAA repair (EVAR).

Infrarenal endovascular aneurysm repair with large device (34- to 36-mm) diameters is associated with higher risk of proximal fixation failure

ObjectiveEndovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the standard of care for infrarenal aneurysms. Endografts are commercially available in proximal diameters up to 36 mm, allowing proximal seal in necks up to 32 mm. We sought to further investigate clinical outcomes after standard EVAR in patients requiring large main body devices.MethodsWe performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database for all patients undergoing elective EVAR for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms at a single institution from 2000 to 2016. Only endografts with the option of a 34- to 36-mm proximal diameter were included. Requisite patient demographics, anatomic and device-related variables, and relevant clinical outcomes and imaging were reviewed. The primary outcome in this study was proximal fixation failure, which was a composite of type IA endoleak and stent graft migration >10 mm after EVAR. Outcomes were stratified by device diameter for the large-diameter device cohort (34-36 mm) and the normal-diameter device cohort (<34 mm).ResultsThere were 500 patients treated with EVAR who met the inclusion criteria. A total of 108 (21.6%) patients received large-diameter devices. There was no difference between the large-diameter cohort and the normal-diameter cohort in terms of 30-day (0.9% vs 0.95%; P = .960) or 1-year mortality (9.0% vs 6.2%; P = .920). Proximal fixation failure occurred in 24 of 392 (6.1%) patients in the normal-diameter cohort and 26 of 108 (24%) patients in the large-diameter cohort (P < .001). There were 13 (3.3%) type IA endoleaks in the normal-diameter cohort and 16 (14.8%) in the large-diameter cohort (P < .001). Stent graft migration (>10 mm) occurred in 15 (3.8%) in the normal-diameter cohort and 16 (14.8%) in the large-diameter cohort (P < .001). After multivariate analysis, only the use of Talent (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minn) endografts (odds ratio [OR], 4.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-17.21) and neck diameter ≥29 mm (OR, 2.50; 95% CI, 1.12-5.08) remained significant independent risk factors for development of proximal fixation failure (OR, 3.99; 95% CI, 1.75-9.11).ConclusionsStandard EVAR in patients with large infrarenal necks ≥29 mm requiring a 34- to 36-mm-diameter endograft is independently associated with an increased rate of proximal fixation failure. This group of patients should be considered for more proximal seal strategies with fenestrated or branched devices vs open repair. Also, this group likely needs more stringent radiographic follow-up.     

Mortality analysis of endovascular aneurysm sealing versus endovascular aneurysm repair

BackgroundEndovascular aneurysm sealing (EVAS), using the Nellix endovascular aneurysm sealing system, has been associated with high reintervention and migration rates. However, prior reports have suggested that EVAS might be related to a lower all-cause mortality compared with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). In the present study, we examined the 5-year all-cause mortality trends after EVAS and EVAR.MethodsWe compared the 333 EVAS patients in the EVAS-1 Nellix U.S. investigational device exemption trial with 16,497 infrarenal EVAR controls from the Vascular Quality Initiative, treated between 2014 and 2016, after applying the exclusion criteria from the investigational device exemption trial (ie, hemodialysis, creatinine >2.0 mg/dL, rupture). As a secondary analysis, we stratified the patients by aneurysm diameter (<5.5 cm and ≥5.5 cm). We calculated propensity scores after adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and anatomic characteristics and applied inverse probability weighting to compare the risk-adjusted long-term mortality using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses.ResultsAfter weighting, the EVAS group had experienced similar 5-year mortality compared with the controls from the Vascular Quality Initiative (EVAS vs EVAR, 18% vs 14%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-1.7; P = .70). The subgroup analysis demonstrated that for patients with an aneurysm diameter of <5.5 cm, EVAS was associated with higher 5-year mortality compared with EVAR (19% vs 11%; HR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.7-4.7; P = .013). In patients with an aneurysm diameter of ≥5.5 cm, EVAS was associated with lower mortality within the first 2 years (2-year mortality: HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13-0.62; P = .002). However, compared with EVAR, EVAS was associated with higher mortality between 2 and 5 years (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.0; P = .005), with no mortality difference at 5 years (18% vs 17%; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.4-1.4; P = .46).ConclusionsWithin the overall population, EVAS was associated with similar 5-year mortality compared with EVAR. EVAS was associated with higher mortality for those with small aneurysms (<5.5 cm). For those with larger aneurysms (≥5.5 cm), EVAS was initially associated with lower mortality within the first 2 years, although this advantage was lost thereafter, with higher mortality after 2 years. Future studies are required to evaluate the specific causes of death and to elucidate the potential beneficial mechanism behind sac obliteration that leads to this potential initial survival benefit. This could help guide the development of future grafts with better proximal fixation and sealing that also incorporate sac obliteration.     

Perioperative outcome of endovascular repair for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms

Background

As endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) continues to advance, eligibility of patients with anatomically complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) for EVAR is increasing. However, whether complex EVAR is associated with favorable outcome over conventional open repair and how outcomes compare with infrarenal EVAR remains unclear. This study examined perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing complex EVAR, focusing on differences with complex open repair and standard infrarenal EVAR.

Impact of suprarenal neck angulation on endovascular aneurysm repair outcomes

BackgroundHostile infrarenal proximal neck (β) anatomy of abdominal aortic aneurysm has been associated with increased risk of aneurysm-related complications after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). However, there is a paucity of literature addressing the suprarenal angle (α). The aim of this study was to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes after EVAR in patients with severe suprarenal neck angulation (α >60 degrees).MethodsA retrospective review of the medical records of 561 patients who underwent EVAR between January 2005 and December 2017 was performed. The main exclusion criteria were preoperative aneurysm rupture and fenestrated or branched endograft placement. High-resolution computed tomography images of 452 patients were available. Patients were grouped into angulated (α >60 degrees) and nonangulated (α ≤60 degrees) groups. The primary end point was freedom from type IA endoleak. Secondary end points included 30-day mortality, long-term survival, primary clinical success, and freedom from aneurysm rupture and graft migration. Primary clinical success was defined according to Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines as clinical success without the need for an additional or secondary surgical or endovascular procedure.ResultsOf 452 patients, 45 (10%) were included in the angulated group (α >60 degrees). Median follow-up time was 34 months (interquartile range, 14-56 months). Compared with patients in the nonangulated group, those in the angulated group had larger neck diameter at the level of the renal arteries (mean [standard deviation], 25.6 [3.8] mm vs 24.6 [3.4] mm; P = .06) and increased β angle (mean [standard deviation], 50.5 [22.9] degrees vs 41.6 [23.9] degrees; P = .01). The 3-year freedom from type IA endoleak estimate was 80.2% for the angulated group compared with 97.8% for the nonangulated group (P < .001). The angulated group showed significantly higher 30-day mortality (11.1% vs 0.25%; P < .001).The 3-year results showed that patients in the nonangulated group had higher rates of primary clinical success (90.2% vs 67.1%; P < .001), freedom from rupture (99% vs 97.1%; P = .02), freedom from migration (100% vs 92.4%; P < .001), and long-term survival (91.6% vs 75.8%; P = .006) compared with those in the angulated group. After adjustment for age, sex, neck diameter, and β angle, severe suprarenal neck angulation was associated with higher odds of type IA endoleak (adjusted hazard ratio, 8.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9-27), loss of primary clinical success (adjusted hazard ratio, 4.8; 95% CI, 2.6-8.9), and 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 52.5; 95% CI, 5.3-514) compared with α ≤60 degrees (all P < .001).ConclusionsThis is the first report to show a significant increase in operative mortality in patients undergoing EVAR with severely angulated suprarenal neck. Patients who survive the operation are at increased risk of secondary interventions. These findings suggest that EVAR should be used with caution in patients with severe α angulation and underpin the role of close follow-up in this particular population.     

Prognosis review and time-to-event data meta-analysis of endovascular aneurysm repair outside versus within instructions for use of aortic endograft devices

BackgroundOur objective was to investigate whether patients undergoing standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) outside the instructions for use (IFU) have worse outcomes than patients treated within IFU.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Electronic bibliographic sources were searched up to January 2019 using a combination of controlled vocabulary (thesaurus) and free-text terms to identify studies comparing outcomes of EVAR in patients treated outside versus within IFU. Pooled estimates of dichotomous outcomes were calculated using odds ratio (OR) or risk difference (RD) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We conducted a time-to-event data meta-analysis using the inverse-variance method and reported the results as summary hazard ratio (HR) and associated 95% CI. Random-effects methods of meta-analysis were applied. We formed meta-regression models to explore heterogeneity as a result of changes in practice over time.ResultsWe identified 17 observational cohort studies published between 2011 and 2017, reporting a total of 4498 patients. The pooled prevalence of EVAR performed outside the IFU was 40% (95% CI, 33-48). Nonadherence to IFU was not associated with increased risk of perioperative mortality (RD, 0.01; 95% CI, −0.00 to 0.01; P = .23), aneurysm rupture (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.30-5.93; P = .70), aneurysm-related mortality (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.20-3.84; P = .86), technical failure (RD, 0.01; 95% CI, −0.03 to 0.05; P = .56), requirement for adjunctive procedures (OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 0.81-2.71; P = .20), type I endoleak (HR, 2.28; 95% CI, 0.58-8.91; P = .24), aneurysm sac expansion (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.55-1.33; P = .49), or aneurysm-related reintervention (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.81-1.34; P = .74). The overall mortality was significantly higher in patients treated outside the IFU (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.42; P = .03). Meta-regression showed that the prevalence of EVAR performed outside the IFU has increased over time (P = .019).ConclusionsStandard EVAR outside the IFU was not found to have worse aneurysm-related outcomes than treatment within the IFU. Standard EVAR outside the IFU could be considered in selected patients who are deemed high risk for complex open or endovascular surgery.     

Concurrent renal artery stent during endovascular infrarenal aortic aneurysm repair confers higher risk for 30-day acute renal failure

Objective

Concurrent renal artery angioplasty and stenting (RAAS) during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has been practiced in an attempt to maintain renal perfusion. The aim of this study was to identify the current practice of RAAS during EVAR and its effect on perioperative renal outcome.

Clinical presentation,operative management,and long-term outcomes of rupture after previous abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

ObjectiveThe aim of the present study was to evaluate the presentation trends, intervention, and survival of patients who had been treated for late abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture (LAR) after open repair (OR) or endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR).MethodsWe reviewed the clinical data from a single-center, retrospective database for patients treated for LAR from 2000 to 2020. The end points were the 30-day mortality, major postoperative complication, and survival. The outcomes between LAR managed with EVAR (group I) vs OR were compared (group II).ResultsOf 390 patients with infrarenal aortic rupture, 40 (10%) had experienced aortic rupture after prior aortic repair and comprised the LAR cohort (34 men; age 78 ± 8 years). LAR had occurred before EVAR in 30 and before OR in 10 patients. LAR was more common in the second half of the study with 32 patients after 2010. LAR after prior OR was secondary to ruptured para-anastomotic pseudoaneurysms. After initial EVAR, LAR had occurred despite reintervention in 17 patients (42%). The time to LAR was shorter after prior EVAR than after OR (6 ± 4 vs 12 ± 4 years, respectively; P = .003). Treatment for LAR was EVAR for 25 patients (63%; group I) and OR for 15 (37%, group II). LAR after initial OR was managed with endovascular salvage for 8 of 10 patients. Endovascular management was more frequent in the latter half of the study period. In group I, fenestrated repair had been used for seven patients (28%). Salvage for the remaining cases was feasible with EVAR, aortic cuffs, or limb extensions. The incidence of free rupture, time to treatment, 30-day mortality (8% vs 13%; P = .3), complications (32% vs 60%; P = .1), and disposition were similar between the two groups. Those in group I had had less blood loss (660 vs 3000 mL; P < .001) and less need for dialysis (0% vs 33%; P < .001) than those in group II. The median follow-up was 21 months (interquartile range, 6-45 months). The overall 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival was 76%, 52%, and 41%, respectively, and was similar between groups (28 vs 22 months; P = .48). Late mortality was not related to the aorta.ConclusionsLAR after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair has been encountered more frequently in clinical practice, likely driven by the frequency of EVAR. However, most LARs, including those after previous OR, can now be salvaged with endovascular techniques with lower morbidity and mortality.     

Comparison of midterm results of endovascular aneurysm repair for ruptured and elective abdominal aortic aneurysms

ObjectiveEndovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) became an increasingly preferred modality for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair both in elective AAA repair (el-EVAR) and EVAR of a ruptured AAA (r-EVAR) setting. Ruptured AAAs usually have more hostile anatomies and less time for planning. Consequently, more complications may arise after r-EVAR. The purpose of this study was to compare mi-term outcomes between r-EVAR and el-EVAR.MethodsA retrospective cohort analysis of patients undergoing EVAR from 2000 to 2015 at a tertiary institution was performed. Patients with previous aortic surgery, nonatherosclerotic AAA and isolated iliac aneurysms were excluded. In-hospital casualties or patients who were intraoperatively converted to open repair were also excluded. For the midterm outcome analysis, only patients with at least two postoperative examinations (a 30-day computed tomography scan and a second postoperative examination performed 6 months or later) were considered. The primary end point was freedom from aneurysm-related complications (a composite of type I or III endoleak, aneurysm sac growth, migration of more than 5 mm, device integrity failure, AAA-related death, late postimplant rupture, or AAA-related secondary intervention). Freedom from secondary interventions, neck-related events (defined as a composite of type IA endoleak, migration of more than 5 mm, or preemptive neck-related secondary intervention) and late survival were secondary end points. The impact of device instructions for use (IFU) compliance on neck events was also assessed.ResultsThe study included 565 patients (65 r-EVAR and 500 el-EVAR). Eighty-two patients were treated outside proximal neck IFU, 13 in the r-EVAR group (21.3%) and 69 (14.5%) in the el-EVAR (P = .16). During the index hospitalization, there were more complications (12.3% vs 3.2%; P = .001) and reinterventions (12.3% vs 2.8%; P < .001) in the r-EVAR group. After discharge, median clinical follow-up time was 4.3 years (interquartile range, 2.1-7.0 years) without differences between both groups. Five-year freedom from AAA-related complications was 53.9% in the r-EVAR group and 65.4% in the el-EVAR (P = .21). In multivariable analysis the r-EVAR group was not at increased risk for late complications (hazard ratio [HR], 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-1.61; P = .81). Five-year freedom from neck-related events was 74% in r-EVAR and 82% in the el-EVAR group (P = .345). Patients treated outside neck IFU were at greater risk for neck-related events both in r-EVAR (HR, 6.5; 95% CI, 1.8-22.9; P = .004) and el-EVAR group (HR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.5-4.5; P < .001). Freedom from secondary interventions at 5 years was 63.0% for r-EVAR and 76.9% for el-EVAR (P = .16). Survival at 5 years was 68.8% in the r-EVAR group and 73.3% in the el-EVAR group (P = .30).ConclusionsDurable and sustainable midterm outcomes were found for both r-EVAR and el-EVAR patients who survived the postoperative period. Patients treated outside the IFU are at greater risk for late complications. Surveillance protocols may be tailored according to individual anatomy and IFU compliance rather than timing of repair.     

Perioperative and long-term outcomes after open conversion of endovascular aneurysm repair versus primary open aortic repair

BackgroundThe use of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has superseded that of open aneurysm repair (OAR) as the procedure of choice for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. However, significant rates of late reintervention and aneurysm rupture have been reported after EVAR, resulting in the need for conversion to OAR (C-OAR). To assess the relative effects of C-OAR on patients, we compared the outcomes of these patients to those of patients who had undergone P-OAR.MethodsThe data from all patients who had undergone C-OAR and P-OAR in the Vascular Quality Initiative Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network database from 2003 to 2018 were queried. Multivariable logistic regression and Kaplan-Meier survival and Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were used to assess the perioperative long-term outcomes.ResultsA total of 4763 patients were included (91.4%, P-OAR; 8.6%, C-OAR). C-OAR was associated with a significant increase in the odds of perioperative mortality (odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.7; P = .027) and renal complications (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2; P = .004) vs P-OAR. At 5 years, conversion was associated with a higher risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.5; 95% CI, 1.3-1.9; P < .001), aneurysmal rupture (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.1; P = .007), and reintervention (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.05-1.97; P = .022) compared with P-OAR. These results also persisted at 10 years, with conversion associated with a higher risk of mortality (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.8; P < .001), rupture (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-2.8; P = .018), and reintervention (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1; P = .010).ConclusionsThe results from the present study have demonstrated that C-OAR is associated with a significantly higher risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality compared with P-OAR. We found a significant increase in mortality, aneurysm rupture, and reintervention at 5 and 10 years of follow-up.     

Sex differences in mortality and morbidity following repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms

Objective

Medicare studies have shown increased perioperative mortality in women compared with men following endovascular and open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. However, a recent regional study of high-volume centers, adjusting for anatomy but limited in sample size, did not show sex to be predictive of worse outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate sex differences after intact AAA repair in a national clinical registry.

Surgical Repair of Juxtarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms and safety of Suprarenal Aortic Clamping

Background

Juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) comprises 15–20% of all AAAs and often requires open surgical repair (OSR) due to anatomical limitations associated with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), particularly in the case of hostile proximal necks. This study aimed to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes of suprarenal clamping during OSR of juxtarenal AAAs and compare the outcomes of this technique with those of infrarenal clamping for AAAs.

Methods

Between January 1 2014, and December 31 2016, 289 consecutive patients aged ≥40 years underwent primary repair for infrarenal AAAs, including 141 OSRs and 148 EVARs. Of the 141 patients, 20 were excluded and totally, 121 patients were included.

Results

All patients had fusiform-type AAAs and were divided into infrarenal (N = 98) or suprarenal (N=23) clamp groups. The mean follow-up period was 51.4 months (95% CI: 48.6–54.2). Mean survival time was 51.4 months (95% CI: 48.6–54.2). Thirty-day mortality was 0.8%, and there was no significant difference between two groups (P > .999). Renal complication in infrarenal clamp group was 4.1% and suprarenal clamp group was 4.3% (P > .999). Old age (HR: 1.084; 95% CI: 1.025–1.147; P=.005) and high ASA score (HR: 2.361; 95% CI: 1.225–4.553; P = .010) were substantially associated with in-hospital complications.

Conclusions

Although endovascular procedures for repairing juxtarenal AAAs, such as fenestrated EVAR, have been developed, surgical repair is the standard treatment for juxtarenal AAAs. Morbidity and mortality due to open surgery were not higher in the juxtarenal AAA group than in the infrarenal AAA group. Therefore, need for suprarenal clamp should not preclude OSR and also there is continued need for training in surgical exposure of juxtarenal AAA and OSR.

     

Factors associated with elimination of type II endoleak during the first year after endovascular aneurysm repair

ObjectiveThe natural history of endoleak type II (ET II) after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is still debatable. The aim of this study was to examine the presence of preoperative and postoperative factors associated with persistence of ET II during the initial 12-month follow-up period.MethodsA two-center retrospective study including patients subjected to EVAR from 2006 to 2017 was undertaken. Patients with ET II at 1-month computed tomography angiography (CTA) were categorized into two groups, resolution (group 1) vs persistence (group 2) of ET II at 12-month CTA. Preoperative demographics, comorbidities, aneurysm anatomic details, and pelvic artery index were assessed. Intraoperative details were also recorded.ResultsOf 825 patients, 140 (17%) patients (mean age, 71.7 ± 8.5 years; 94% male) presented with ET II at 1-month CTA. Group 1 included 58 patients (41%) and group 2, 82 patients (59%). The anatomic characteristics of the inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar arteries and the pelvic artery indices were not associated with ET II persistence. All patients in group 1 had presence of intraluminal thrombus (ILT) on preoperative CTA (group 1, 100%; group 2, 67%; P = .001), and the circular pattern of ILT was more common in group 1 (group 1, 44%; group 2, 24%; P = .01). At 12-month CTA, the mean sac regression was higher in group 1 (group 1, −3 ± 4 mm; group 2, 0.55 ± 3 mm; P = .000). After multivariate analysis, persistence of ET II was directly associated only with intraoperative internal iliac occlusion (odds ratio [OR], 0.232; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.06-0.86; P = .03) and inversely with statin therapy (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.01- 6.8; P = .047) and sac regression (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.11-1.39; P = .001).ConclusionsInduced occlusion of the internal iliac artery during EVAR was the only factor associated with persistence of ET II during the first year after EVAR. The presence and pattern of ILT may play a role in ET II persistence, whereas the number of patent infrarenal aortic branches and their diameter as well as the pelvic artery indices were not associated with ET II. The use of statins may have a positive effect on ET II resolution during the first postoperative year. Sac diameter is more likely to regress in patients with ET II resolution.