An intention-to-treat by endovascular repair policy may reduce overall mortality in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm

OBJECTIVE: The use of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has been restricted to a small number of specialized units on a selected group of patients. The aim of this study is to assess if the overall mortality in these patients with ruptured AAA may be reduced in a unit where all patients with ruptured AAA are considered first for EVAR. METHODS: During a 24-month period beginning in July 2002, 51 patients admitted with ruptured AAA were considered for EVAR as the treatment of choice and comprised the study group. EVAR was performed in 17 patients. Open repair was performed in 34 patients: 13 patients had hemodynamic instability and 16 patients had an unsuitable aortic neck anatomy. The study group was compared with a historical control group of 41 patients with ruptured AAA who were treated by open repair from July 2000 to June 2002. RESULTS: Mortality rate was 39% in the study group compared with 59% in the control group (P = .065). The duration of stay in the intensive care unit was significantly lower in the study group than in the control group (P = .01), although the total in-hospital stay was similar (17 days vs 14 days, P = .83). Within the study group, EVAR patients had a mortality rate of 24% compared with 47% in the open group (P = .14). CONCLUSION: Although the number of patients was small, offering EVAR to as many patients as possible with ruptured AAA has resulted in a 20% reduction in mortality, albeit statistically insignificant. However, it is in the unstable patients that EVAR will need to improve survival before it may be hailed to supersede the conventional approach.     

Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in octogenarians: myth or reality?

AIM: We studied the thirty-day mortality and morbidity rate to assess the value of conventional open repair vs endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in an elderly population presenting with a ruptured, symptomatic or asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) undergoing emergency, urgent or elective repair. METHODS: During the period from January 2004 to May 2007, 329 consecutive patients were treated for AAA in our Department. Among these, 81 (24.6%) were aged >80 years (mean age 83.6, range 80-95 years). These older patients were divided into groups according to their clinical presentation: ruptured AAA group (rAAA) - 22 cases (4 emergency EVAR, 18 emergency open repair); symptomatic non-ruptured AAA group (sAAA) - 15 cases (11 urgent EVAR, 4 urgent open repair); asymptomatic AAA group (asAAA) - 44 cases (32 elective EVAR, 12 elective open repair). The main outcome measures were 30-day mortality and 30-day morbidity rate. RESULTS: The mortality rate following open surgery vs EVAR was 66.6% vs 50% (P=NS) in the rAAA group, 25% vs 0% (P=NS) in the sAAA group, and 9% vs 3.2% (P=NS) in the asAAA group. When comparing postoperative morbidities in the octogenarians, 3 of the patients that received EVAR (6.4%) and 15 of those that received open repair (48.4%) had a severe complication (P<0.01). CONCLUSION: The introduction of EVAR has considerably changed the balance of risks and benefits for AAA treatment. Our study confirms the high mortality rate for octogenarians with rAAA and haemodynamic instability, and supports the value of an active EVAR approach for octogenarians with AAA to prevent rupture. Moreover, the introduction of endovascular techniques as part of an overall treatment algorithm for ruptured AAAs appears to be potentially associated with improved outcomes in terms of mortality and morbidity as compared to open surgical repairs alone.     

To what extent has endovascular aneurysm repair influenced abdominal aortic aneurysm management in the state of Illinois?

PURPOSE: This study was performed using population-based data to determine the changing trends in the techniques for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in the state of Illinois during the past 9 years and to examine the extent to which endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has influenced overall AAA management. METHODS: All records of patients who underwent AAA repair (1995 to 2003 inclusive) were retrieved from the Illinois Hospital Association COMPdata database. The outcome as determined by in-hospital mortality was analyzed according to intervention type (open vs EVAR) and indication (elective repair vs ruptured AAA). Data were stratified by age, gender, and hospital type (university vs community setting) and then analyzed using both univariate (chi 2 , t tests) and multivariate (stepwise logistic regression) techniques. RESULTS: Between 1995 and 2003, 14,517 patients underwent AAA repair (85% for elective and 15% for ruptured AAA). The average age was 71.4 +/- 7.9 years, and 76% were men. For elective cases, open repair was performed in 86% and EVAR in 14%; and for ruptured cases, open repair in 97% and EVAR in 3%. Elective EVAR was associated with lower in-hospital mortality compared with open repair regardless of age. No differences were observed with age after either type of repair for a ruptured aneurysm. Men had a lower in-hospital mortality compared with women for open repair of both elective and ruptured aneurysms. For EVAR, the mortality of an elective repair was lower in men, but there was no difference after a ruptured AAA. In men, the difference in mortality between elective open repair and EVAR was significant; the type of institution did not influence outcome. Patients >80 years of age had a higher mortality after open repair for both elective and ruptured AAA and after EVAR of a ruptured AAA. The average length of stay was 9.9 days for open elective repair, 13.1 days after open repair of a ruptured AAA, and 3.6 days for EVAR. The independent predictors of higher in-hospital mortality were female gender, age >80 years, diagnosis (ruptured vs open), and procedure (open vs EVAR). The year of the procedure and type of hospital (university vs community) were not predictive of outcome. CONCLUSIONS: EVAR has had a significant impact on AAA management in Illinois over a relatively short time period. In this population-based review, EVAR was associated with a significantly decreased in-hospital mortality and length of stay. Octogenarians had higher mortality after both types of repair, with the exception of elective EVAR.     

Emergency Endovascular Repair for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Feasibility and Comparison of Early Results with Conventional Open Repair

PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) on patients presenting with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in a teaching hospital, and to compare there post-operative outcomes with contemporaneous patients treated with open repair (OR). METHODS: A series of consecutive of patients presenting ruptured AAA with retro/intraperitoneal haematoma were included in the study. EVAR was attempted whenever possible. In all other cases (severe haemodynamic instability, adverse anatomy, device unavailability), ruptured AAA were treated by OR. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients were enrolled between January 2001 and July 2004. Seventeen (46%) patients were treated using adapted designed aortoiliac endografts (eight bifurcated, eight aorto-uniiliac, one iliac extension). Twenty (54%) patients unfit for EVAR because of severe haemodynamic instability (n=8), adverse anatomical configuration (n=7), or unavailability of an appropriate endograft (n=5) were treated by OR. Twenty-seven (73%) had a retrospective suitable anatomy for EVAR. Three early conversions from EVAR to OR were performed. Blood loss, operating time, and intensive care stay were significantly decreased in EVAR patients (respectively: 156 min+/-60, 1520 ml+/-1175, 3 days for EVAR; vs. 222 min+/-82, 3075 ml+/-1750, 13 days for OS; P<.01). The 30-day mortality rate was 23.5% for EVAR vs. 50% for OR (P=0.09). CONCLUSION: EVAR of ruptured AAA is feasible for selected patients based on haemodynamic and morphologic criteria, and should be associated with improved immediate outcomes as compared with OR. These results should be tempered by the fact that these patients have heavy comorbidities which explains the absence of difference in mid-term mortality rates between the two groups, but should also encourage surgical institutions that are managing such life-threatening emergencies to introduce EVAR as part of their therapeutic arsenal for ruptured AAA.     

Ruptured inflammatory abdominal aortic aneurysm: insights in clinical management and outcome

BACKGROUND: Ruptured inflammatory abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is relatively rare, and little has been written on the outcome of operative treatment. METHODS: Patients undergoing attempted repair of ruptured inflammatory AAA between 1995 and 2001 were included in a retrospective case-cohort study. Demographic, clinical, and operative factors were analyzed, together with in-hospital morbidity, in-hospital mortality, and duration of postoperative hospital stay. RESULTS: Of 297 patients who underwent attempted operative repair of ruptured AAA, 24 (8%) had an inflammatory aneurysm. Twenty-two patients were men, and two were women; median age was 69 years (range, 51-85 years). Operative findings revealed a contained hematoma in 16 patients (70%), free rupture in 3 patients (13%), aortocaval fistula in 4 patients (17%), and aortoenteric fistula in 1 patient (4%). Of 273 noninflammatory ruptured AAAs, only 2 AAA (1%) were associated with primary aortic fistula. Ten patients (42%) with inflammatory AAA died in hospital, compared with 117 of 273 patients (43%) without inflammation. Median postoperative stay was 10 days (range, 0-35 days). Of the 14 patients with inflammatory lesions who survived, 11 had postoperative complications; 4 patients had acute renal failure, three of whom required temporary renal replacement therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Ruptured inflammatory AAA is associated with a higher incidence of aortic fistula than is ruptured noninflammatory AAA. Repair of ruptured inflammatory AAA is not associated with increased operative mortality compared with repair of ruptured noninflammatory AAA.     

Outcomes of abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs: Endovascular vs open surgical repairs

BackgroundOperative mortality after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been reported as lower than open surgical repair (OSR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in randomized controlled trials. However, many cohort studies have demonstrated similar mortality rates for both procedures. We compared operative mortality between EVAR and OSR, at our institution.MethodsAll AAA operations from 2012 to 2017 were reviewed, and baseline characteristics were collected. Outcomes included 30-day mortality, operative data, complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), costs, re-intervention, and survival rates were compared. A multivariable analysis with unbalanced characteristics was performed.ResultsWe had a total of 162 patients, 100 having OSR and 62 for EVAR. The EVAR group was older, with higher ASA classification. Thirty-day mortality rate did not significantly differ (0/100 for OSR and 2/62 (3%) for EVAR; p = 0.145), while the EVAR group had less blood loss, shorter operative times, and LOS, but higher re-intervention rates (adjusted hazard ratio 6.4 (95%CI: 1.4, 26.8)). Survival rates did not significantly differ between the groups. EVAR cost approximately 1-million yen more.ConclusionsOSR had low 30-day mortality rate in selected low-risk patients whereas EVAR had less blood loss, shorter operative times, LOS and could be done in high-risk patients with low 30-day mortality but with higher re-intervention rate.     

Elective endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in octogenarians

OBJECTIVES: Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is an increasingly popular treatment option for patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), although open repair is considered the standard by virtue of its durability. Octogenarians, as a subgroup, may stand to benefit the most by EVAR. The purpose of this study is to review operative results and durability of open AAA repair and EVAR in octogenarians. METHODS: From May 1996 to August 2006, 150 patients aged >or=80 years underwent elective repair of their infrarenal AAA. Eighty-one underwent EVAR and 69 had open repair. Demographic data, aneurysm specifics, comorbidities, operative morbidity and mortality, intensive care unit and hospital length of stay, and late outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: In the EVAR group, 27 of 81 (33%) patients died during a mean follow-up of 25 months. In the open repair group, 34 of 69 (49%) patients died during a mean follow-up of 43 months. The median survival time for EVAR was 350 weeks (range, 145-404 weeks) compared with 317 weeks (range, 233-342 weeks) for the open repair group. A Kaplan-Meier log-rank analysis showed no difference in early or long-term survival between EVAR and open repair (P = .13). EVAR was associated with decreased blood loss, decreased length of intensive care unit and hospital stays, and a greater number of patients discharged to home. CONCLUSIONS: EVAR and open repair are comparable in safety and efficacy in octogenarians. Operative repair outcomes remain acceptable. Mid- and long-term survival are similar, indicating no survival advantage of one procedure compared with the other.     

Therapie des Bauchaortenaneurysmas

Intact (iAAA) and ruptured (rAAA) abdominal aortic aneurysms are complex diseases, which according to recent data are increasingly being treated by endovascular aortic repair (EVAR, iAAA 73 % versus rAAA 35 %). Constant improvement of commonly used endovascular techniques increases the feasibility of even challenging AAA pathologies. Various meta-analyses, systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials have examined the short-term and long-term outcome of EVAR versus open abdominal aortic repair (OAR). In contrast to OAR, EVAR seems to be beneficial in terms of 30-day mortality; nevertheless, OAR still has an accepted importance in the therapy of AAA. This article provides an overview on current treatment options of AAA regarding the correct individual indications in consideration of recent data on short-term and long-term outcome of EVAR.     

Endovascular repair for ruptured AAA: a literature review

The reduced physiological impact of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with conventional open repair has been demonstrated. If this technique could be used routinely in patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) it may reduce the high peri-operative mortality. This review of the literature identified the current experience with EVAR of ruptured AAA. Only a small number of case series with selected patients are reported. These patients were selected for their haemodynamic stability, and their suitable aneurysm morphology. The overall anatomic suitability rates for EVAR reported, suggest an applicability of 58% to 80% from an intent-to-treat experience. The average post-operative mortality rate was 24%, ranging from 9 to 45% and may reflect increasing experience and patient selection. Important lessons have been learned from these first experiences that help to define a clear position of EVAR as an additional therapeutic option for ruptured AAA.     

Elective treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm with endovascular or open repair: the first decade

OBJECTIVES: The development of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) as an alternative to open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) has led to an increasing number of patients being treated by this less-invasive technique. It was anticipated that EVAR would reduce the operative mortality and morbidity compared with open repair. This study examined the initial 10-year experience in one center when both techniques were available to determine if there were advantages to one technique or the other, putting the results into the perspective of routine clinical care of patients with infrarenal AAA. METHODS: From June 1996 to May 2005, 677 patients underwent elective repair of their infrarenal AAA, of which 417 were treated with open repair and 260 by EVAR. Demographic and aneurysm-specific data, comorbidities, operative morbidity, mortality, and late outcome were analyzed. RESULTS: Open repair patients were 2 years younger (71 vs 74 years, P < .001), had larger aneurysms (6.01 +/- 1.38 cm vs 5.45 +/- 0.99 cm, P < .001), greater familial predisposition, a higher incidence of current smokers, and a higher incidence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease than the EVAR group. There were no differences in renal function, hypertension, coronary artery disease, or heart failure between the two groups. Overall operative mortality was 3.1%; operative mortality per group was 3.5% for open and 2.7% for EVAR (P = .627). Procedure-related outcomes showed significant differences in operative blood loss and length of hospital stay in favor of EVAR, and 95% of the EVAR patients were discharged home vs 83% in the open repair group (P < .001). A Kaplan-Meier log-rank analysis showed no difference in early or long-term survival between open repair and EVAR (P = .20), but did show a difference in mid-term (3-year) survival favoring open repair (P < .002). Survival analysis by age (<70 and > or =70 years) showed no difference between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Open repair and EVAR are both performed safely in patients treated for elective infrarenal AAA. EVAR has the perioperative advantages of reduced blood loss, reduced length of intensive care unit and hospital stay, and increased number of patients discharged to home. The mid-term survival advantage of open repair has been observed in other reports and deserves further study.     

Endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm--a challenge to open repair? Results of a single centre experience in 20 patients.

INTRODUCTION: The mortality from ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) remains in the region of 50% despite advances in critical care. Endovascular repair of AAA has been shown to be associated with reduced physiological stress in the elective setting. It is hypothesised that the reduced physiological stress associated with EVAR may improve the outcome in patients with ruptured AAA. METHODS: A feasibility study of endovascular repair of ruptured AAA was undertaken at the University Hospital, Nottingham, U.K. between 1994 and 2000. Patients admitted with ruptured AAA were assessed by a team familiar with endovascular techniques for elective repair of AAA. After giving informed consent patients underwent spiral computed tomographic angiography (CTA) in the majority of cases. Patients were then transferred to the operating theatre for EVAR. RESULTS: Twenty patients underwent repair of ruptured AAA. Of these 20 patients, seven were referred from another hospital. Eight patients were considered unfit for open repair. The median duration of procedure was 180 min (range 120-480) and median blood loss was 1200 ml (range 750-2000 ml). The overall peri-operative mortality was 45%. A number of intra-operative and peri-operative procedures (both open and endovascular) were required to ensure aneurysm exclusion and to deal with the complications of endovascular surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Ruptured AAA remains a particularly hazardous condition to treat. There are a number of advantages of EVAR in this condition. A number of the problems early in the experience of EVAR have been addressed, but further experience is required to demonstrate its efficacy when compared with open repair.     

Improving aneurysm-related outcomes: nationwide benefits of endovascular repair

OBJECTIVES: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has changed the practice of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery. We examined a national Medicare database to establish the effect of EVAR introduction into the United States. METHODS: A 5% random sample of inpatient Medicare claims from 2000 to 2003 was queried using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision (ICD-9) diagnosis and procedure codes. An EVAR procedure code was available after October 2000. Occurrences were multiplied by 20 to estimate yearly national volumes and then divided into the yearly Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) population of elderly Medicare recipients for rates per capita, reported as cases per 100,000 elderly Medicare recipients. Statistical analysis was performed by using chi2, Student's t test, nonparametric tests, and multiple regression analysis, with significance defined as P < or = .05. RESULTS: Elective AAA repairs averaged 87.7 per 100,000 Medicare patients between 2000 and 2003, with EVAR has steadily increasing to 41% of elective repairs in 2003. From 2000 to 2003, overall elective AAA mortality declined from 5.0% to 3.7% (P < .001), while open repair mortality remained unchanged. EVAR patients are significantly older than patients treated with open repair. From 2000 to 2003 patients >84 years receiving EVAR increased to 62.7% (P < .001). Overall hospital length of stay (LOS) decreased from 8.6 days in 2000 to 7.3 days in 2003, P < .001, but increased for open AAA patients. EVAR patients were more likely to be discharged home rather than to skilled facilities. Average elective repair hospital charges were not different between groups, but Medicare reimbursement was lower for EVAR, with a higher proportion cases classified as DRG 111 (major cardiovascular procedure without complications). EVAR was used in 10.6% of ruptured AAA repairs in 2003, with a significant reduction in mortality compared with open repairs for rupture (31.8% vs 50.8%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: EVAR is replacing open surgery without an increase in overall case volume. EVAR is responsible for overall decrease in operative mortality even in ruptured aneurysms while decreasing utilization variables. Reimbursement to hospitals is shrinking, however.     

Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: endovascular repair does not confer any long-term survival advantage over open repair

Recent studies have suggested that endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) may reduce the perioperative mortality of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Whether EVAR confers any long-term survival advantage over published results for open repair of ruptured AAA has not been established. We conducted a single-center retrospective study over a 10-year period (1994-2004) examining the long-term outcome of patients who have undergone endovascular repair of ruptured AAA. Fifty-four patients underwent endovascular repair of a ruptured AAA. The median age was 75 years (interquartile range 69.5-79.5 years); 42 (78%) patients were male. The perioperative mortality rate was 37%. During a median follow-up of 32 months (range 14-48 months), there were 5 aneurysm-related and 13 non-aneurysm-related deaths. Overall, the 3- and 5-year survival rates were 36% and 26%, respectively. EVAR does not appear to confer any overall survival advantage in the mid- to long term compared with the published results for open repair. The reasons for this remain unclear. Further, larger studies are required to confirm these results.     

Endovascular Repair for Ruptured AAA: A Literature Review

The reduced physiological impact of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with conventional open repair has been demonstrated. If this technique could be used routinely in patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) it may reduce the high peri-operative mortality.

This review of the literature identified the current experience with EVAR of ruptured AAA. Only a small number of case series with selected patients are reported. These patients were selected for their haemodynamic stability, and their suitable aneurysm morphology. The overall anatomic suitability rates for EVAR reported, suggest an applicability of 58% to 80% from an intent-to-treat experience.

The average post-operative mortality rate was 24%, ranging from 9 to 45% and may reflect increasing experience and patient selection.

Important lessons have been learned from these first experiences that help to define a clear position of EVAR as an additional therapeutic option for ruptured AAA.     

Endovascular Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm – a Challenge to Open Repair? Results of a Single Centre Experience in 20 Patients

Introduction: the mortality from ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) remains in the region of 50% despite advances in critical care. Endovascular repair of AAA has been shown to be associated with reduced physiological stress in the elective setting. It is hypothesised that the reduced physiological stress associated with EVAR may improve the outcome in patients with ruptured AAA. Methods: a feasibility study of endovascular repair of ruptured AAA was undertaken at the University Hospital, Nottingham, U.K. between 1994 and 2000. Patients admitted with ruptured AAA were assessed by a team familiar with endovascular techniques for elective repair of AAA. After giving informed consent patients underwent spiral computed tomographic angiography (CTA) in the majority of cases. Patients were then transferred to the operating theatre for EVAR. Results: twenty patients underwent repair of ruptured AAA. Of these 20 patients, seven were referred from another hospital. Eight patients were considered unfit for open repair. The median duration of procedure was 180 min (range 120–480) and median blood loss was 1200 ml (range 750–2000 ml). The overall peri-operative mortality was 45%. A number of intra-operative and peri-operative procedures (both open and endovascular) were required to ensure aneurysm exclusion and to deal with the complications of endovascular surgery. Conclusions: ruptured AAA remains a particularly hazardous condition to treat. There are a number of advantages of EVAR in this condition. A number of the problems early in the experience of EVAR have been addressed, but further experience is required to demonstrate its efficacy when compared with open repair.     

Endovascular versus open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm: a comparison of early and intermediate results in patients suitable for both techniques.

PURPOSE: To assess early and intermediate results of endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR), and to compare them with open surgery (OS) in concurrent patients suitable for both types of treatment. METHODS: During 3 years, 180 patients with AAA underwent repair. We excluded patients with ruptured aneurysms (33), juxtarenal aneurysms (11), iliac aneurysms (8), with peripheral embolization (2) and those treated with a cryopreserved homograft (2). From the remaining patients (n=124), we selected those suitable for both techniques (n=83), of which 53 were treated by EVAR and 30 by OS. Analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Log Rank tests. RESULTS: Hospital mortality was not significantly higher in the OS group (6.6% OS vs. 3.7% EVAR), p=0.55. The EVAR group had significantly shorter operative time, length of hospital stay and less blood loss. The median follow up time was 2.18 years for OR and 1.58 years for EVAR. There were no conversions from EVAR to OS and no differences in late survival (p=0.255, Cox regression analysis) with a cumulative survival rate at 3 years of 89% for EVAR and 73% for OS. By 3 years 24% (95% CI, 11-47%) of EVAR patients had presented endoleaks with an endovascular re-intervention rate of 27% (95% CI, 13-50%). One patient in the OS group needed a late open intervention. CONCLUSIONS: EVAR compares favourably with OS in terms of reduction of operative time, hospital length of stay and blood loss. This study did not show a difference in early or late mortality. EVAR durability remains the most critical issue to be addressed.     

Anemia and postoperative outcomes after open and endovascular repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms

Objective

Anemia is associated with increased cardiac adverse events during the early postoperative period because of high physiologic stress and increased cardiac demand. The aim of this study was to assess the surgical outcomes and prognostic implications of anemia in patients undergoing repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs).

Patient selection and perioperative outcomes are similar between targeted and nontargeted hospitals (in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program) for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Objective

The targeted vascular module in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) consists of self-selected hospitals that choose to collect extra clinical details for better risk adjustment and improved procedure-specific outcomes. The purpose of this study was to compare patient selection and outcomes between targeted and nontargeted hospitals in the NSQIP regarding the operative management of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).

The endovascular management of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a controversial technique, which remains the subject of a number of prospective randomised trials. Although questions remain regarding its long-term durability objective evidence exists which demonstrates its reduced physiological impact compared with conventional open repair. If this technique could be used in patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) it may reduce the high peri-operative mortality. A review of the literature identified a limited experience with EVAR of ruptured AAA. Only a small number of case series with selected patients exist. The majority of patients were haemodynamically stable. However, the selective use of aortic occlusion balloons allowed successful endovascular management in a small number of unstable cases. All investigators had access to an "off the shelf" endovascular stent-graft (EVG). Per-operative mortality ranged from 9 to 45% and may reflect increasing experience and patient selection. A number of patients who underwent successful EVAR were turned down for open repair. A number of important lessons have been learned from these studies but questions remain regarding patient suitability and staffing issues. If these difficulties can be surmounted then the technique may offer an alternative to open repair.     

Outcomes after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the era of centralized care

ObjectiveLittle is known about the relationship between case volume and patient outcomes of those treated for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) after either endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) or open aneurysm repair (OAR). This study evaluated the impact of hospital case volume on outcomes after rAAA.MethodsPatients with rAAA were identified in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative database from 2003 to 2017, excluding patients from years in which a limited number of hospitals were included (2003-2009, 2017). Patients were stratified according to type of aneurysm repair and further stratified according to aortic surgical volume of the treating facility. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed.ResultsBetween 2010 and 2016, of 2895 patients who presented emergently with rAAA, 1246 underwent ruptured OAR (rOAR) and 1649 underwent ruptured EVAR (rEVAR). Before adjustment for demographics, comorbidities, and clinical characteristics, there were no differences in 1-year patient survival based on hospital OAR or EVAR volumes among patients undergoing rOAR or rEVAR. After adjustment for confounding variables, patients treated with rOAR at the highest volume OAR hospitals had a 33% lower hazard of mortality at 1 year relative to patients treated with rOAR at the lowest volume OAR hospitals. Preoperative interfacility transfer was associated with a 27% lower hazard of mortality after rOAR. There was no significant difference in hazard of mortality among patients undergoing rEVAR when they were stratified according to hospital EVAR volumes after adjustment for all other covariates.ConclusionsOutcomes after rAAA repair are associated with hospital volume among patients undergoing rOAR but not among patients undergoing rEVAR. Thus, centralization of care may have an important impact on outcomes when OAR is indicated, suggesting a benefit for preoperative interfacility transfer of care when it is feasible.