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.     

Outcome after endografting in small and large abdominal aortic aneurysms: a metanalysis.

AIM: To compare the results of endovascular repair (EVAR) in large and small (diameter < 5.5cm) abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). METHODS: A systematic review was performed to identify studies comparing the outcomes after EVAR of large and small aneurysms. Outcomes considered were: risk of death (perioperative, all cause, aneurysm-related), ruptures, and complications (conversion, reintervention). Weighted pooled estimates of outcomes in patients with small versus large aneurysms were calculated. The inverse variance method was used (random-effect model). Subgroup analyses by a follow-up longer or shorter than 24 months were performed. RESULTS: Five studies, with published and unpublished data, totallying 7,735 patients, were included. Overall, the weighted pooled estimates were: OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.51-0.90 for operative mortality, OR 0.77; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.86 for all cause mortality, OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.40 to 0.87 for aneurysm-related mortality and OR 0.61; 95% CI 0.47 to 0.79 for rupture in favour of small AAA group. Pooled estimates were not influenced by follow-up length. Conversion and reintervention rates were not significantly lower for small AAA. CONCLUSIONS: EVAR in small versus large AAA might be associated with lower operative mortality, aneurysm-related mortality and aneurysm rupture. Better evidence is needed to support these suggestions.     

A randomised trial of endovascular and open surgery for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm - results of a pilot study and lessons learned for future studies.

INTRODUCTION: EVAR has the potential to improve outcome after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Published series have been based upon selected populations. METHODS: An interim analysis of a single centre prospective randomised controlled trial comparing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with open aneurysm repair (OAR) in patients with ruptured AAA was performed. Patients who had a ruptured AAA and who were considered fit for open repair were randomised to EVAR or OAR after consent had been obtained. Those in the EVAR group had pre-operative spiral computed tomographic angiography (CTA). The primary endpoint was operative (30-day) mortality and secondary endpoints were moderate or severe operative complications, hospital stay and time between diagnosis and operation. A power study calculation required 100 patients to be recruited. RESULTS: Between September 2002 and December 2004, 103 patients were admitted with suspected ruptured AAA. Only 32 patients were recruited to the study. Of these, four patients died before receiving surgical treatment. On an intention to treat basis the 30-day mortality rate was 53% in the EVAR group and 53% in the OAR group. Moderate or severe operative complications occurred in 77% in the EVAR group and in 80% in the OAR group. Median total hospital stay in the EVAR group was 10 days (inter-quartile range 6-28) and 12 days (4-52) in the OAR group. Median time between diagnosis and operation was 75 minutes (64-126) in the EVAR group and 100 minutes (48-138) in the OAR group. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the relative high operative mortality in the EVAR group, these preliminary results show that it is possible to recruit patients to a randomised trial of OAR and EVAR in patients with ruptured AAA. CT scanning does not delay treatment.     

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.     

Kardiovaskuläres Risiko bei EVAR und offener Operation des nicht rupturierten abdominalen Aortenaneurysmas

Background

Cardiovascular complications have a significant impact on the outcome of patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) treated by open repair (OR) or by endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). EVAR might be associated with fewer cardiovascular complications. This review was undertaken to analyze whether the selection of EVAR and OR has an effect on cardiovascular complications within randomized trials with intact AAA patients.

Methods

Analysis of cardiovascular complications reported in the prospective, randomised trials (RCTs) comparing EVAR and OR in the elective treatment of intact AAAs.

Results

Four RCTs give evidence that EVAR is associated with a significantly lower perioperative mortality rate. Cardiovascular mortality and complication rates do not differ significantly between the two treatment options; this is also true for the long-term follow-up. Cardiac complications are inconsistently reported and vary widely. These results are true for patients with a low or average surgical risk and an AAA which can be treated by OR and EVAR. Large registries indicate that especially for high-risk patients and patients >?80 years the cardiovascular event rate is significantly reduced by the use of EVAR rather than OR.

Conclusion

EVAR is associated with a significantly lower perioperative mortality rate. Patients with a normal or average surgical risk have similar cardiovascular outcomes. Elderly patients and high-risk patients may benefit from EVAR.     

Clinical effect of abdominal aortic aneurysm endografting: 7-year concurrent comparison with open repair

OBJECTIVE: We compared the effectiveness and clinical outcome of open repair versus endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) in achieving prevention of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA)-related death and graft-related complications. METHODS: Over 7 years from 1997 to 2003, 1119 consecutive patients underwent elective treatment of infrarenal AAAs, 585 with open repair and 534 with EVAR. Patients were regularly followed up at 1, 6, 12 months, and every 6 months thereafter, in EVAR group, and at 3 and 12 months, and yearly thereafter after open repair. Preoperative, intraoperative, and follow-up data were stored in a prospective database. RESULTS: Median follow-up was similar in the 2 groups: 33 months (interquartile range [IQR], 13-50 months) in the EVAR group vs 35 months (IQR, 15-54 months) in the open repair group. EVAR group patients were older than patients in the open repair group: 73 years vs 72 years (P = .04). There were statistical significant differences between the EVAR group and the open repair group with respect to AAA median diameter (52 mm vs 56 mm), coronary disease rate (46% vs 37%; P = .001), pulmonary disease rate (56% vs 38%; P < .0001), and American Society of Anesthesiologists IV score rate (16% vs 6%; P < .0001). Thirty-day mortality in the EVAR group was 0.9% (5 of 534 patients), compared with 4.1% (24 of 585 patients; P = .001) in the open repair group, and major morbidity was 9.1% (49 of 534 patients) vs 18.6% (109 of 585 patients; P < .0001), respectively. The incidence of secondary procedures in the EVAR group was 15.7%, compared with 3% in the open repair group (P < .0001). There were no deaths related to secondary procedures in either group. Six AAAs (1.1%) ruptured after EVAR, 3 of which were fatal; in the open repair group 1 patient (0.2%) underwent successful repeat operatation to treat iliac pseudoaneurysm rupture 5 years after the original procedure. Kaplan-Meier estimates for freedom from aneurysm-related death at 84 months were 97.5% in the EVAR group and 95.9% in the open repair group (log rank test, P = .008). Kaplan-Meier survival estimates at 84 months were 67.1% in the open repair group and 66.9% in the EVAR group (P = NS). At the same interval the risk for secondary procedures was 49.4% for the EVAR group and 7.1% for the open repair group. Of the 11 variables analyzed with logistic analysis, open surgery (hazard ratio [HR], 11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.5-54.2; P = .002), American Society of Anesthesiologists IV score (HR, 7.1; 95% CI, 2.7-18.8; P = .0001), and age (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.04-1.13; P = .04) were positive independent predictors of perioperative mortality. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that at a maximum follow-up of 7 years, patients who undergo EVAR show lower perioperative and late aneurysm-related mortality compared with a younger and substantially healthier group of patients with aneurysms treated with open repair. The higher need for secondary procedures in the endovascular group did not affect superiority of the overall performance of EVAR in the early and late intervals.     

Midterm results of endovascular infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in high-risk patients

Short-term and midterm clinical outcomes after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) have been well documented. Evaluation of longer term outcomes is now possible. Here we describe our initial 100 high-risk patients treated with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), all with a minimum of 5 years of follow-up. A retrospective review of prospectively recorded data in a departmental database was undertaken for the first 100 consecutive EVAR patients with a minimum of 5 years (range, 60-105 months) of follow-up performed between December 1997 and June 2001. Information was obtained from surgical follow-up visits and family doctors' offices. Endovascular repair of AAA in high-risk patients can be achieved with acceptably low postoperative mortality and morbidity. Longer term results in this high-risk cohort suggest that EVAR is effective in preventing aneurysm-related deaths at 5 years and beyond. All late mortalities were due to patients' comorbid diseases.     

Outcome of abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the era of endovascular treatment

BACKGROUND: The effect on outcome of the introduction of endovascular techniques for the exclusion of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is largely unknown. The aim of the study was to contrast the early and mid-term outcome after open and endovascular AAA repair. METHODS: Consecutive patients who underwent transfemoral endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR; n = 93) between April 1998 and January 2003, or conventional open aneurysm repair in the time intervals before (n = 113) and after (n = 82) the introduction of EVAR were studied. All data were collected prospectively. All patients underwent elective and primary repair. Patient survival was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method and the possible predictive value of more than 25 perioperative variables on five outcome variables (length of intensive care unit stay, morbidity, and 30-day, 6-month and overall mortality) was assessed by multivariate analysis. RESULTS: There were no differences in risk profiles between the three groups. Selection for EVAR was based on anatomical grounds only. All five outcome variables were significantly better with EVAR than either former or recent open repair. The only significant predictors of failure were advanced age and the need to perform an additional procedure for former open repair; hypertension and the preoperative use of anticoagulants for recent open repair; and renal insufficiency and pulmonary insufficiency for EVAR. CONCLUSION: EVAR offered considerable benefits compared with conventional open repair at early and mid-term follow-up, which was not explained by selection of patients with a favourable risk profile. In the current era, in which patients are selected for open repair as a consequence of unfavourable anatomy, morbidity and mortality rates following conventional open treatment of AAA have increased at early and mid-term, but not at long-term, follow-up.     

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: a community hospital's experience

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the first-line approach for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Outcomes outside of tertiary care settings remain unknown. The purpose of this study is to report the midterm outcomes of EVAR in a community hospital. A retrospective review of 75 elective, consecutive EVARs performed at a single nonacademic community hospital was performed. There were no conversions to open repair during or after endovascular repair. The mean follow-up was 18 months. There were no postoperative ruptures or aneurysm-related deaths. At 24 months, freedom from aneurysm-related death was 100%, freedom from secondary interventions was 91%, and freedom from endoleak was 69%. EVAR in the community setting is a safe and durable procedure, even in a medically high-risk population. Comparable outcomes can be achieved to tertiary care centers, in carefully selected patients with favorable anatomy.     

The impact of race and insurance type on the outcome of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair

BACKGROUND: Although mortality and complication rates for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) have declined over the last 20 years, operative complication rates and perioperative mortality are still high, specifically for repair of ruptures. The goal of this study was to determine the influence of insurance type and ethnicity while controlling for the influences of potential confounders on procedure selection and outcome following endovascular AAA repair (EVAR). METHODS: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database, we identified patients who underwent EVAR repair of ruptured and elective infrarenal AAA, between 1990 and 2003. Insurance type and ethnicity were analyzed against the primary outcome variables of mortality and major complications. The potential confounders of age, gender, operative location, diabetes, and Deyo index of comorbidities, were controlled. RESULTS: Bivariate analyses demonstrated significant differences between insurance types and ethnicity and mortality and complications. Patients who were self pay had adverse outcomes in comparison to Private insurance. Whites encountered less perioperative mortality and postoperative complications than Blacks and Hispanics. CONCLUSIONS: After controlling for previously identified associative factors for AAA outcome, ethnicity and insurance type does influence EVAR surgical outcome. Subsequent studies that break down emergent repair vs elective surgery and that longitudinally stratify delay in surgery, or time to admission may be useful.     

Patient fitness and survival after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in patients from the UK EVAR trials

BACKGROUND: The aim was to use a validated fitness score to determine whether fitter patients with a large abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) benefited from having open rather than endovascular repair. METHODS: The Customized Probability Index (CPI) was applied to patients in the Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR) I and II trials. Interaction tests between CPI and randomized group assessed the effect of fitness and type of AAA repair on elective 30-day mortality and 4-year survival. RESULTS: The mean(s.d.) CPI scores were 3.6(9.3) for 1252 EVAR I patients and 10.0(11.3) for 404 EVAR II patients (range - 25 to + 43) (P < 0.001). The fitness of EVAR I patients was classified as good (579 patients, mean CPI - 4.2), moderate (331 patients, mean CPI 5.7) or poor (338 patients, mean CPI 15.1). Only in the good fitness group did 30-day mortality convincingly favour endovascular repair (odds ratio 0.24, P = 0.030), but overall the test of interaction was not significant (P = 0.363). For 4-year all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality, there was no benefit for either treatment across all fitness scores (P = 0.281 and P = 0.371 respectively). CONCLUSION: The benefit of endovascular repair was most convincing in the fittest patients. There was no evidence that the fittest patients benefited more from open surgery.     

Comparison of surveillance vs Aortic Endografting for Small Aneurysm Repair (CAESAR) trial: study design and progress.

OBJECTIVE: The CAESAR Trial aims to assess the outcome of endovascular repair (EVAR) vs surveillance of small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) with maximum diameter of 4.1-5.4 cm on computerised tomography (CT) scan. DESIGN: Patients between 50 and 80 years of age, with small AAA, anatomically suitable for EVAR, are randomly allocated to early EVAR or surveillance. The primary outcome measure is survival. Secondary endpoints include: aneurysm-related deaths (defined as any death caused directly or indirectly by rupture or endovascular/open aneurysm repair), AAA rupture, peri-operative or late complications, conversion to open repair, complications associated with delayed treatment including loss of treatment options, AAA growth rates and quality of life. Target recruitment is 740 patients to show that early EVAR is associated with a 15% survival benefit at 54 months. PROGRESS: Randomization started in September 2004. By the end of April 2005, 86 patients had been enrolled by 10 active European centres. Completion of recruitment is expected for September 2006 and publication of the results in mid 2007.     

Randomized EVAR Trials and Advent of Level I Evidence: A Paradigm Shift in Management of Large Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms?

The recent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) 1 and 2 and Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management (DREAM) trials addressed management of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) larger than 5.5 cm in diameter. The DREAM and EVAR 1 trials randomized patients appropriate for open repair between endovascular repair (EVAR) and open repair (OR), and the EVAR 2 trial randomized patients unfit for OR between EVAR and conservative nonoperative management (No Rx). The EVAR 1 trial showed a 3% lower initial mortality for EVAR, with a persistent reduction in aneurysm-related death at 4 years. Improvement in overall late survival was not demonstrated. Similarly, the DREAM trial observed an initial mortality advantage for EVAR, but overall 1-year survival was equivalent in both groups. Both trials found significantly higher complication and intervention rates and higher hospital costs with EVAR, and by 1 year a quality of life (QOL) benefit was not evident. The EVAR 2 trial did not demonstrate a survival advantage of EVAR with respect to nonoperative management, while noting that EVAR was associated with greater likelihood of treatment complications, subsequent interventions, and threefold higher costs. Both EVAR trials were limited by long delays between randomization and treatment. Moreover, 27% of patients in EVAR 2 crossed over from nonoperative to endovascular repair, and these patients had a lower procedure mortality from EVAR than those originally assigned to it (2% v 9%). These 47 cases, and the exclusion of 14 patients dying while waiting for EVAR, appears to confer a survival advantage to those receiving EVAR over those receiving no treatment in a post-hoc analysis, but per-protocol analysis of the EVAR 2 trial data performed by the EVAR investigators did not show a significant difference in either all-cause or aneurysm-related mortality. Thus, outcomes of the EVAR 2 trial have not settled the choice between EVAR and no treatment in this scenario to everyone's satisfaction. In patients with large AAAs who are fit for OR, EVAR offers an initial mortality advantage over OR, with a persistent reduction in AAA-related death at 4 years. However, EVAR offers no overall survival benefit, is more costly, and requires more interventions and indefinite surveillance with only a brief QOL benefit. It may or may not offer a mortality benefit over nonoperative management in patients with large AAAs who are unfit for open repair, but the statistical significance of this comparison is inconclusive.     

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.     

The multicenter experience with a third-generation endovascular device for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. A report from the EUROSTAR database

AIM: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of the preoperative diameter of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) upon the midterm outcome obtained by endovascular AAA repair, using a third-generation endovascular device, the Excluder bifurcated endoprosthesis (W. L. Gore & Associates, Inc. Sunnyvale, CA, USA). METHODS: The data of 676 patients, who had undergone endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) were analysed. Patients were enrolled over a 6-year period to April 2004 in the EUROSTAR database. Outcomes were compared between 2 groups defined by the preoperative diameter of the aneurysm: group A (n=300), smaller than 5.5 cm; group B (n=376), 5.5 cm or larger. Patient characteristics, details of aorto-iliac anatomy, operative procedure and postoperative complications in the 2 patient groups were compared. Outcome events included aneurysm-related death, overall death, conversion, and late rupture of the aneurysm. Life table analyses and log rank tests were used to compare outcome in the study groups. Multivariate Cox models were used to determine whether baseline and follow-up variables were independently associated with adverse outcomes. RESULTS: Patients in group B were significantly older than patients in group A (73 years vs 71 years respectively; p=0.006), and more frequently were at higher operative risk (ASA-classification >3; 44% vs 59%; p<0.0001). Anatomic differences included a higher incidence of aorto-iliac angulation, a wider and shorter infrarenal neck in group B. Risk factors that were more frequently observed in group B included hypertension, carotid disease and pulmonary disorders. Additional operative events including device migration occurred more frequently in group B (0% vs 2%; p=0.03). Device-related (type I and III combined) endoleaks were more frequently observed at completion arteriography in group B compared to group A (2% vs 4%; p=n.s.). Thirty-day mortality was comparable between the 2 study groups. However, the overall death rate after 3 years of follow-up was significantly higher in patients with larger aneurysms, group B (4% vs 14%; p=0.0025). Similarly, aneurysm-related death was significantly higher in group B (after 3 years 0.3% vs 3%; p=0.02). Aneurysm growth after EVAR was modest low in both study groups (after 2 years 6% vs 8%; non-significant). There was no correlation between growth of the sac and aneurysm-related death. CONCLUSIONS: The midterm outcome after endovascular repair by Excluder devices was satisfactory in patients with small and large AAAs. A higher rate in all-cause deaths and aneurysm-related deaths in patients with larger aneurysms was observed. Post-EVAR aneurysm growth was observed in a small percentage of patients but this did not contribute to aneurysm-related death.     

Elective surgery of abdominal aortic aneurysms in octogenarians: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is an age-related disease. In an aging population, the prevalence of AAA is likely to increase. Open AAA repair in patients aged >80 years is often not considered because of their advanced age as such or because of comorbidities. In addition, little is known about the natural history in such patients or survival after successful repair. We performed a systematic review of the literature to determine peri-operative and late survival after AAA repair in octogenarians METHOD: The Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched to identify all studies reporting on octogenarians undergoing AAA repair published between January 1966 and June 2006. Two independent observers assessed the methodologic quality of the included studies and the data extraction. Outcomes were rates of perioperative mortality, complications, and long-term survival after open or endovascular repair (EVAR). Summary estimates with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random effects model. RESULTS: Thirty-nine articles were included. The median aneurysm size was 6.7 cm in the conventional AAA repair group of 1534 patients. The perioperative mortality was 0% to 33%, with a pooled mortality of 7.5% (95% CI, 6.2% to 9.0%). The median 5-year survival rate for this group was 60% (range, 14% to 86%). In the 1045 patients treated with EVAR, the median aneurysm size was 5.9 cm. Their pooled perioperative mortality varied from 0% to 6%, with a pooled mortality of 4.6% (95% CI, 3.4 to 6.0%). We could not derive 5-year survival rates from articles describing endovascular repair of AAA. CONCLUSION: The mortality rate after open or endovascular AAA repair in carefully selected octogenarians seems acceptable but is higher than the mortality rate in younger patients. Long-term survival rates were acceptable, but small sample size, selection, and publication bias must be taken into account. Finally, selection criteria for successful surgery with low mortality and morbidity rates cannot be derived from the literature.     

The decline of open abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery among individual training programs and vascular surgery trainees

ObjectiveIn the past decade, treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has dramatically shifted from open repair to an endovascular approach. The decreasing number of open AAA repairs (OAR) has raised concerns regarding future vascular surgeons' competence to perform this complex and high-risk procedure. Prior work has documented decreasing open aortic volume among surgical residents. However, these studies report average national case volume with a limited understanding of the variation in OAR exposure among training programs and trainees. We sought to evaluate the current open AAA repair trends among individual accredited vascular surgery training programs and vascular surgery residents to better evaluate trainees' exposure to OAR.MethodsWe identified elderly Medicare beneficiaries undergoing OAR and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) between 2010 and 2014. Accredited vascular surgery training program hospitals were identified. OAR and EVAR volume was aggregated at the program level and the number of senior vascular surgery trainees per year at each program was captured. The training program all-payer total AAA repair volume was calculated based on the national proportion of patients undergoing AAA covered by Medicare in the Vascular Quality Initiative. Temporal trends in program and vascular surgery trainee OAR and EVAR volume were calculated.ResultsA total of 119,408 (77%) EVAR and 35,042 (23%) were identified in the Medicare database between 2010 and 2014. Of these, 21% were performed among the 111 training programs, including 22,227 (73%) EVAR and 8416 (27%) OAR. The total OAR volume among training programs decreased by 38% during the study period, from a median of 29.1 to 18.2 OAR. In 2014, 25% of programs performed fewer than 10 OARs annually. Among senior vascular surgery trainees, the median number of OAR decreased from 10.0 in 2010 to 6.4 in 2014 and approximately one-half of senior trainees had exposure to fewer than five OAR in 2014.ConclusionsExposure to OAR among vascular surgery training programs has dramatically decreased, with nearly one-half of senior trainees performing fewer than five OAR in 2014. The variable and diminishing OAR exposure among vascular surgery training program highlights growing concerns surrounding competence in complex open repairs and suggest that only a small proportion of current trainees have ample opportunity to develop confidence and proficiency in this high-risk operation.     

Concomitant colorectal cancer and abdominal aortic aneurysm: evolution of treatment paradigm in the endovascular era

BACKGROUND: Although the incidence of patients presenting with concomitant colorectal cancer (CRC) and abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is low, current treatment strategies in patients with both lesions remains controversial. Given recent advances in endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), we sought to analyze the surgical outcomes of patients with concomitant CRC and AAA. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective chart review was performed on all patients with CRC and AAA between December 1984 and July 2007. RESULTS: A total of 108 patients with concomitant CRC and AAA were identified. Forty-six patients presented with symptomatic or obstructing CRC, which was treated with colectomy followed by either open AAA repair (n=35, group A) or EVAR (n=11, group B). Thirty-eight patients underwent either open AAA (n=26, group C) or EVAR (n=12, group D) first, followed by staged CRC resection. Eight patients underwent combined CRC and open AAA repair (group E). The time delays after CRC resection to AAA repair in groups A and B were 42 and 35 days (NS), respectively. The time delays after open AAA or EVAR procedures before CRC resection in groups C and D were 115 days and 12 days (p < 0.0001), respectively. Two patients in group B developed sigmoid ischemia after EVAR and were treated with sigmoid resection. Increased perioperative morbidity and mortality rates were noted in group C (p < 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with concomitant colorectal cancer and AAA, the symptomatic lesion should be a treatment priority. Because EVAR results in early recovery and a shorter convalescence compared with open aneurysmorrhaphy, this modality offers potential treatment benefits in patients with suitable anatomy who have concomitant CRC. But EVAR treatment should be offered with caution because of the risk of sigmoid ischemia caused by inferior mesenteric artery occlusion.     

The outcome of endovascular repair of small abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE: To assess the outcome of endovascular repair (EVAR) of small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA, 相似文献   

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.