Experience in the United States with intact abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the current outcome in the United States and to identify predictors of mortality and "bad outcome" after open, intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. METHODS: In a retrospective analysis, data were obtained from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample during 1994-1996. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample is a 20% all-payer stratified sample of nonfederal United States hospitals. Patients older than 49 years were identified by the presence of primary diagnostic (441.4-intact AAA) and procedure (38.44-resection of abdominal aorta with replacement) codes of the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9 ). In-hospital mortality rate, discharge disposition, bad outcome (death or discharge to an institution), complications (ICD-9 postoperative codes), length of stay, and charges were determined. The mortality rate and bad outcome were analyzed by the use of patient demographics (age, sex, race), patient comorbidities (ICD-9 diagnostic codes), calendar year, and hospital characteristics (size, location, teaching status) with univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: We identified 16,450 intact AAAs repairs during the study years. The mean patient age was 72 +/- 7 (+/- SD) years, and most patients were male (79.7%) and white (94.6%). Most repairs were performed at large (67.3%), urban (92.5%), and nonteaching (66.7%) institutions. The in-hospital mortality rate was 4.2%, the overall complication rate was 32.4%, and 91.2% of patients were discharged home, whereas the bad outcome rate was 12.6%. The median length of stay was 8 days (mean, 10.0 +/- 8.1), and median hospital charges were $28,052 (mean, $35,681 +/- $33,006) in 1996 dollars. Multivariate analysis showed that the mortality rate (P <.05) increased with age (70-79 years, 1.8 odds ratio [OR] [95% CI, 1.4-2.3], > 79 years, 3.8 OR [95% CI, 2.9-4.9]), sex (female, 1.6 OR [95% CI, 1.3-1.9]), cerebral vascular occlusive disease (1.8 OR [95% CI, 1.3-2.5]), preoperative renal insufficiency (9.5 OR [95% CI, 7.7-11.7]), and more than three comorbidities (11.2 OR [95% CI, 3.6-35.4]). Multivariate analysis also showed that bad outcome was associated with the same variables in addition to hospital size (small/medium), year of procedure (1996), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and two to three comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Outcome after open repair of intact AAA across the United States is quite good. Older, sicker patients may benefit from nonoperative treatment or the potentially lower risk endovascular approaches.     

The impact of gender on presentation, therapy, and mortality of abdominal aortic aneurysm in the United States, 2001-2004

INTRODUCTION: The elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) may decrease a patient's risk of rupture and confers a significantly lower in-hospital mortality rate than emergency repair. Previous works have shown that AAA rupture rates are higher in women compared to men, and that women have higher associated in-hospital mortality rates. This study was performed to evaluate, currently, to what extent patient gender influences presentation and treatment of AAA and the associated outcomes in the United States. METHODS: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was used, with pertinent ICD-9 codes, to identify all patient-discharges that occurred with the primary diagnosis of intact (iAAA) or ruptured/dissecting (rAAA) abdominal aortic aneurysms between the years 2001 and 2004. Univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses of variables were performed. RESULTS: An estimated 220,403 AAA patient-discharges were identified during the study period. 37,016 (17%) patients presented with rAAA. A higher percentage of women with AAA presented with rupture compared to men (21% vs 16%; odds ratio [OR] 1.40, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-1.54). This rupture rate did not significantly change from 2001 to 2004 (P = .85 for trend). For iAAA, women had higher odds of in-hospital mortality than men (OR 1.60; 95% CI, 1.24-2.07). Compared to men, in-hospital mortality rates for women with iAAA were higher for both endovascular (2.1% vs 0.83%, P < .0001) and open repairs (6.1% vs 4.0%, P < .0001). For iAAA, fewer women underwent endovascular repair (32.4% vs 46.7%, P < .0001; O.R. 0.59, 95% CI, 0.52-0.67). For patients who presented with rAAA, women were less likely to undergo surgical intervention compared to men (59% vs 70%, P < .0001). For those that underwent repair, women had higher in-hospital mortality rates than men (43% vs 36%, P < .0001; OR 1.49, 95% CI, 1.16-1.91). CONCLUSION: A higher percentage of women currently present with aneurysm rupture. They have higher in-hospital mortality rates for both iAAA and rAAA. This gender difference in the outcomes following repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm has persisted over time, the cause of which is not explained by these or previous data, a fact that warrants further investigation.     

A statewide experience with endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: rapid diffusion with excellent early results

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare survival and outcomes of endovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in New York State (NYS). METHODS: We used the NYS discharge dataset Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) to analyze the outcomes of elective admission for nonruptured (International Classification of Diseases-9th revision [ICD-9] 441.4) open aneurysm repair (38.44) and endovascular aneurysm repair (39.71) during the years 2000-2002. The ICD-9 code for endovascular repair was introduced in late 2000, thus capturing 3 months of empiric data for 2000. RESULTS: There has been a significant increase in the number of AAA procedures performed in NYS (comparing before and after 2000: average, 1419 vs 1701; P =.0001), temporally coinciding with the implementation of training programs after US Food and Drug Administration approval of endovascular grafts and the new payment code. From 2000 to 2002 the number of NYS hospitals performing endovascular repairs increased from 24 to 60. By 2002 there were more endovascular repairs being performed than open repairs (871 vs 783). The target population for these surgical interventions showed interesting differences. In 2002, women had a 43% chance of receiving an endograft, whereas men had a 55% probability. The use of endovascular repair over the observation period was relatively constant in patients younger than 65 years. In patients older than 65 years, and especially those older than 75 years, endovascular use increased substantially, so that by 2002 older patients were more likely to undergo endovascular repair than open repair. Patients who underwent endovascular repair had significantly more hypertension, coronary artery disease, diabetes, and hyperlipidemia than did patients who underwent open repair. Yet the mean length of stay for endovascular procedures was approximately 3.6 days, and for open procedures was about 10.3 days, across all 3 years (P = <.0001). Moreover, patients who underwent endovascular repair had statistically fewer postoperative complications and significantly lower mortality. In-hospital mortality in 2001 was 3.55% for open repair and 1.14% for endovascular repair (P =.0018), and in 2002 these rates were 4.21% versus 0.8% (P <.0001), respectively. CONCLUSION: This dataset suggests that endovascular AAA repairs are being performed in a patient population with a higher frequency of comorbidities. However, endovascular repairs still are associated with significantly lower in-hospital mortality, fewer postoperative complications, and a dramatically shorter length of stay. These results suggest that, despite the rapid diffusion of this new technique, early perioperative outcomes may be superior to those with conventional open repair. However, prospective clinical studies are needed to confirm these insights, and such studies may require the infrastructure of consortia of hospitals or society-based registries.     

Perioperative complications and early outcome after endovascular and open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND: Open repair (OR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is a major surgical procedure with elevated morbidity and a low but definite mortality. Advocates of endovascular repair (EVAR) claim decreased complication rates and outcome equal to OR. METHODS: Data of all patients with infrarenal AAA that was treated electively, both with OR and EVAR, at Mayo Clinic Rochester between December 1, 1999 and December 1, 2001 were retrospectively reviewed. Thirty-day morbidity and mortality and early clinical outcomes were assessed and compared. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-five patients underwent treatment: 261 patients, including 229 males and 32 females (mean age: 73 years; range: 52 to 90 years) underwent OR, and 94 patients including 85 males and 9 females (mean age: 77 years; range: 61 to 98 years) underwent EVAR (AneuRx: 53, Ancure: 38, Endologix: 3). Median AAA size was 57 mm in both groups. There were more high-risk patients in the EVAR group (27% vs 14%, P =.007). Thirty-day mortality rates were 1.1 % (3/261) for OR and 0 for EVAR (P = NS). Cardiac and pulmonary complications were less frequent after EVAR (11% vs 22%, P =.02, and 3% vs 16%, P =.001, respectively), but graft-related complications were more frequent (13% vs 4%, P =.002). The association between type of repair and cardiac, pulmonary, and graft complications remained statistically significant after adjusting for age, gender, and high-risk status. The multivariate odds ratios (EVAR vs OR) for cardiac, pulmonary, and graft complications were 0.35 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.17 to 0.74), 0.14 (95% CI: 0.04 to 0.47), and 3.81 (95% CI: 1.51 to 9.58), respectively. Primary and secondary patency and freedom-from-reintervention rates at 1 year were lower after EVAR (83% vs 98%, P <.001; 96% vs 99%, P =.02; 65% vs 93%, P <.001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Both elective OR and EVAR can be performed with low mortality, but cardiac and pulmonary complications are less frequent and less severe after EVAR. The tradeoff of EVAR is a higher rate of graft-related complications, with more reinterventions and a lower graft patency rate at 1 year. These results should be considered before EVAR is offered to patients with AAA.     

Quality of life before and after endovascular and retroperitoneal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to evaluate changes in quality of life and to compare conventional outcomes in patients undergoing endovascular and open retroperitoneal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. METHODS: Between October 2000 and May 2003, 129 patients underwent elective AAA repair, endovascular repair in 22 patients and open retroperitoneal repair in 107 patients. The Short-Form Health Survey, 12 items (SF-12) was administered preoperatively and at 3 weeks, 4 months, and 1 year after discharge. Quality of life, hospital and intensive care unit stay, perioperative complications, discharge disposition, readmission, and hospital cost were statistically evaluated. RESULTS: For the total group, significant differences were observed for both Physical Component Summary scores (P<.001) and Mental Component Summary scores (P=.001) between time points. There were no significant differences for either Component Summary score between open and endovascular procedures for any time period. Number of weeks required to return to baseline functional status was similar after either open or endovascular repair (7.22 vs 5.47 weeks, respectively; P=.09). Mean hospital and intensive care unit stay was 4.4 and 1 days, respectively, for open repair versus 1.9 and 0 days, respectively, for endovascular repair (P<.0001). No significant difference between groups was observed in terms of perioperative complications, discharge disposition, or hospital readmission (P> or =.54). Mean total hospital cost for endovascular repair was 1.60 times that for open repair (mean difference, $11,662; P<.0001; 95% confidence interval, $17,799-$5525). CONCLUSIONS: Hospital stay is significantly shorter after endovascular AAA repair. However, hospital cost is almost twice that for open retroperitoneal repair. Perioperative complications, discharge disposition, and hospital readmission are not statistically different between the two groups. Effect on health-related quality of life is similar after either open retroperitoneal or endovascular AAA repair.     

Early outcomes of endovascular versus open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program-Private Sector (NSQIP-PS)

BACKGROUND: There remains no consensus on the appropriate application of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Information from administrative databases, industry-sponsored trials, and single institutions has inherent deficiencies. This study was designed to compare early outcomes of open (OPEN) versus EVAR in a contemporary (2000 to 2003) large, multicenter prospective cohort. METHODS: Fourteen academic medical centers contributed data to the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program-Private Sector (NSQIP-PS), which ensures uniform, comprehensive, prospective, and previously validated data entry by trained, independent nurse reviewers. A battery of clinical and demographic features was assessed with multivariate analysis for association with the principal study end points of 30-day operative mortality and morbidity. RESULTS: One thousand forty-two patients underwent elective infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repairs: 460 EVAR and 582 OPEN. EVAR patients were older (74 vs 71 years, P < .0001), included more men (84.6% vs 79.6%, P < .05), and had a higher incidence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (25.4% vs 17.9%, P < .01). EVAR resulted in significantly reduced overall morbidity (24% vs 35%, P < .0001) and hospital stay (4 vs 9 days, P < .0001). Cardiopulmonary and renal function-related comorbidities had the expected significant impact on mortality for both procedures at univariate analysis ( P < .05). While crude mortality rates between EVAR and OPEN did not differ significantly (2.8% vs 4.0%) ( P = 0.32). After multivariate analysis, correlates of operative mortality included OPEN (odds ratio [OR], 2.44; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03 to 5.78; P < .05), advanced age (OR, 1.11; P < .001), history of angina (OR, 5.54; P < .01), poor functional status (OR, 5.78; P < .001), history of weight loss (OR, 7.42; P < .01), and preoperative dialysis (OR, 51.4; P < .0001). EVAR also compared favorably to OPEN (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.58 to 2.89; P < .0001) for overall morbidity. CONCLUSION: Significant morbidity accompanies AAA repair, even at major academic medical centers. These data strongly endorse EVAR as the preferred approach in the presence of significant cardiopulmonary or renal comorbidities, or poor preoperative functional status.     

Durability of benefits of endovascular versus conventional abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

PURPOSE: Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair is reported to result in less initial patient morbidity and a shorter hospital length of stay (LOS) when compared with conventional AAA repair. We sought to examine the durability of this result during the intermediate follow-up interval. METHODS: The records of all admissions for all patients who underwent AAA repair during a 26-month interval were reviewed. RESULTS: Three hundred thirty-seven (337) patients underwent procedures to repair AAAs (163 open and 174 endovascular). Endovascular procedures were performed with a variety of devices (Talent, 108; Ancure, 36; AneuRx, 26; Zenith, 2; and Cordis, 2) and configurations (141 bifurcated and 33 aortomonoiliac). The mean follow-up period was 10.6 months (endovascular repair) and 12.3 months (open repair). LOS did not significantly vary by device (P =.24 to P =.92) or configuration (P =.24). The initial median LOS for procedures was significantly shorter (P =.009) for endovascular repairs (5 days) than for open procedures (8 days). However, the patients who underwent endovascular repair were more likely to be readmitted during the follow-up interval when compared with patients who underwent open procedure. The readmission-free survival rate after AAA repair at 12 months was 95% for patients for open AAA repair versus 71% for patients for endovascular repair (P <.001). If the total hospital days were compared, including the initial and all subsequent AAA-related admissions, there was no significant difference for mean LOS for patients who underwent endovascular versus open AAA procedures (11 days versus 13.6 days; P =.21). The patients for endovascular AAA repair most commonly needed readmission for treatment of endoleak (n = 31), wound infection (n = 12), and graft limb thrombosis (n = 9). Although women had similar LOS to men for endovascular repair (P =.44), they had longer initial LOS for open AAA repair (15 versus 10 days; P =.03). After endovascular repair, women were more likely than men to be readmitted by 12 months (51% versus 71% readmission-free survival rate; P =.03) and they had longer LOS on readmission (13.2 versus 5.2 days; P =.006). No gender differences were identified for patients after open AAA repair regarding readmission-free survival rate (P =.09) or LOS on readmission (P =.98). CONCLUSION: Although initial LOS was shorter for the patients who underwent endovascular as compared with conventional AAA repair, this advantage was lost during the follow-up interval because of frequent readmission for the treatment of procedure-related complications, chiefly endoleak. These readmissions frequently involved the performance of additional invasive procedures. Gender differences existed regarding LOS and the likelihood of complications after open and endovascular AAA repair.     

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.     

An analysis of standard open and endovascular surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in octogenarians

While elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair has been shown to be safe in selected octogenarians, very little is known about the role of endovascular AAA exclusion in this high-risk cohort. A retrospective review of our vascular surgical registry from January 1996 to December 2001 revealed 51 octogenarians that underwent infrarenal AAA repair. Since 1999 all octogenarians who presented for AAA repair were evaluated for preferential endovascular stent graft placement. Over the 6-year period, 35 patients underwent standard open repair while 16 patients were found to be anatomic candidates for and were treated with an endovascular stent graft. Hospital and office charts were reviewed to compare the endovascular cohort to the standard open cohort. Factors considered included patient comorbidities, perioperative data, and operative outcomes. Statistical analysis was done using Wilcoxon rank sum test and Fisher exact test. The median age for the entire group was 83 years. There were 11 females in the open group and 1 female in the endovascular group. There were no statistically significant differences in preoperative patient comorbidities between groups. Total mortality for the entire series was 11.8 per cent but this included 5 ruptured AAAs, all of which patients died, and 11 additional AAAs that were symptomatic, of which 1 patient died. Total nonruptured mortality for the entire series was 2.2 per cent (0% for the endo-group and 3.3% for the open group). There were statistically significant differences between the endovascular versus the open groups when comparing aneurysm diameter (5.6 cm vs. 6.2 cm; P = 0.016), estimated blood loss (225 cc vs. 2100 cc; P < 0.001), ICU days (0 vs. 3; P < 0.001), length of hospital stay (2 days vs. 12 days; P < 0.001), and patients with blood transfusions (1 vs. 27; P < 0.001). When comparing postoperative morbidities, 4 of the endovascular patients (25%) and 25 of the open patients (68.6%) had a complication (P = 0.006). In conclusion, endovascular stent graft treatment of nonruptured infrarenal AAAs in octogenarians led to significantly better outcomes and should probably be considered the preferred treatment whenever anatomically appropriate. Endovascular exclusion of ruptured AAAs may potentially improve future outcomes in this high-risk group.     

Contemporary results of juxtarenal aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE: The increasing use of aortic endografts predictably will add to the complexity of open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair and, therefore, the proportion of surgically treated infrarenal AAAs that are juxtarenal in location (JRA) will grow. This study reviews a single-center experience with JRAs. METHODS: Between June 1994 and December 2000, 138 patients underwent elective repair of a JRA, comprising 16.1% of 859 consecutive asymptomatic and intact symptomatic nonruptured infrarenal AAAs repaired over the same period. All patients with JRA needed proximal suprarenal clamping (SRC) or supravisceral (SVC) clamping. Patient demographics, selected risk factors, and operative details were recorded. Univariate analyses of selected risk factors for an adverse perioperative event were assessed, and multivariate analyses were performed with linear and logistic regression with backwards selection. RESULTS: SRC was used in 95 patients (69%), and 43 patients (31%) underwent SVC. The mortality rate was 5.1% (7/138) for JRA repair, and 2.8% (20/720) for infrarenal AAA repair (P =.03). The mortality rate was significantly greater for those patients who received SVC compared with SRC (11.6% versus 2.1%; P =.02). Multivariate analysis identified SVC position as the only independent predictor of mortality (odds ratio [OR], 6.1; 95% CI, 1.1 to 32.9; P =.035). Transient renal insufficiency occurred in 39 patients (28.3%), but only eight patients (5.8%) needed dialysis. Patients who had SVC had a significantly greater rate of renal insufficiency than those who received SRC (41.9% versus 22.1%; P =.02). Multivariate analysis showed SVC position (OR, 3.3; 95% CI, 1.4 to 7.8; P =.008), diabetes (OR, 3.7; 95% CI, 1.1 to 12.9; P =.04), and preoperative renal insufficiency (OR, 5.8; 95% CI, 2.2 to 15.4; P <.001) were independent predictors of postoperative renal insufficiency. Renal ischemia during proximal clamping cannot alone explain renal complications because clamp time was shorter in patients with SVC (24.9 +/- 2.4 minutes versus 32.2 +/- 1.5 minutes; P =.009). CONCLUSION: JRA repair can be accomplished with a low mortality rate, but a more proximal clamp position may adversely affect outcome in these patients. Postoperative renal insufficiency is related to diabetes, preoperative renal insufficiency, and SVC position. These results suggest SRC is safer than SVC for proximal aortic clamp control of JRAs. Although clamp level must be tailored to patient anatomy, outcome may be improved if the clamp level can be kept distal to the superior mesenteric artery origin.     

Predictors of renal dysfunction after endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

Objective

Renal complications after repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) have been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. However, limited data have assessed risk factors for renal complications in the endovascular era. This study aimed to identify predictors of renal complications after endovascular AAA repair (EVAR) and open repair.

Impact of endovascular repair on early outcomes of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE: Our purpose was to examine the impact of the introduction of endovascular treatment on the early outcomes of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) during 2 consecutive time periods at a single institution. METHODS: The hospital records of a single tertiary care center from 1997 to 2004 were retrospectively reviewed, and 36 consecutive patients who underwent treatment for acute ruptured AAA were identified. They were divided into 19 (53%) patients who were all treated with conventional open surgery from 1997 to 2001 (early) and 17 (47%) patients who were treated either with open (n = 4, 24%) or endovascular (n = 13, 76%) methods from 2002 to 2004 (late). All endovascular repairs were performed with commercially available bifurcated devices. Outcome measures included death, major complications, disposition at discharge (home or extended care facility), procedure time, blood loss, and hospital length of stay. RESULTS: Age, sex, and AAA size were similar between the 2 groups. Perioperative mortality in the early and late periods were 37% versus 12%, respectively (P =.13); rates of major complications were 84% versus 65%, respectively (P =.26); and discharge to home rather than extended care facility was 32% versus 59%, respectively (P =.18). Median procedure times (275 vs 149 minutes, P <.01), blood loss (3800 vs 138 mL, P <.0001), and length of stay (18 vs 6 days, P <.05) were all higher during the early period than in the late period. CONCLUSIONS: This preliminary study suggests that introduction of endovascular therapies may be potentially beneficial in the overall treatment scheme of patients with ruptured AAAs. However, longer follow-up and larger cohorts are needed to better establish its feasibility and efficacy compared with conventional open surgical repair.     

Colon ischemia following abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the era of endovascular abdominal aortic repair

OBJECTIVE: To review, in the era of endovascular abdominal aortic repair (EVAR), the clinical spectrum of colonic ischemia (CI) following abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair and to assess the rate, overall mortality, and associated factors of occurrence. METHODS: Between 1995 and 2005, 1174 patients with infrarenal AAA were treated either by open surgery (n = 682) or by EVAR (n = 492). Preoperative risk factors, clinical presentation, intraoperative data, and early postoperative outcomes were prospectively assessed. Overt colonic ischemia as proven by colonoscopy and/or by operation was considered as a validating event and was correlated to collected variables. RESULTS: CI occurred in 34 patients (2.9%). Eighteen out of 34 (53%) patients died within 1 month. At 2 years, the survival rate was 35% in the CI group vs 86% in the non-CI group. Associated factors of occurrence of CI were: type of operation (open group = 27/682 [4%] vs EVAR = 7/492 [1.4%] [P = .01]), aneurysm rupture (11/88 [12.5%] vs 23/1086 [2.1%], P < .001), preoperative renal insufficiency (4/30 [13.3%] vs 29/1133 [3.1%], P = .01), preoperative respiratory insufficiency (8/157 [7%] vs 23/1005 [2%], P = .01), duration of operation (<2 hours [518] = 1.7%, between 2 to 4 hours [558] 2.9%, more than 4 hours [66] 13.6%, P = .001). Mean blood loss was greater in patients with CI (CI = 2000 ml [650-3350] than in those without CI = 1000 ml [500-1800] P = .008). Logistic regression analysis showed that rupture (OR 6.03 [interval of confidence (IC) 95% 2.68-13.5] P = .0001), duration of operation (OR 5.73 [IC 95% 2.06-15.9] P = .001) and creatinin > 200 mol/l (OR 4.67 [IC 95% 1.39-15.7] P = .028) were independent factors of CI. The mortality due to colonic ischemia was not statistically different between open surgery 14/27 (52%) and EVAR 4/7 (57%). CONCLUSION: CI remains a serious complication following AAA repair. In the univariate analysis, EVAR was associated with a lower rate of colonic ischemia. However, the logistic regression analysis showed that only rupture, long duration of operation, and prior renal disease were independently associated with CI. Within the two treatment modalities, the mortality rate remained identical.     

Regionalization of abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: evidence of a shift to high-volume centers in the endovascular era

INTRODUCTION: Since the early 1990s, many studies have shown lower mortality for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair at high-volume centers compared with low-volume centers. The introduction of endovascular AAA repair (EVAR) also has changed the practice of AAA repair. The goal of this study was to determine if regionalization of AAA repair occurred in the United States. Etiologic factors were examined in addition to any reduction in operative mortality rates. METHODS: Patient discharges of nonruptured AAA repair were identified from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample between 1998 and 2004. Hospitals were stratified by yearly AAA surgical volume of low (< or =17 cases), medium (18 to 50), and high (>50). RESULTS: A total of 46,901 patients underwent AAA repair (72.7% open vs 27.3% endovascular). The percentage of AAA repairs performed at both low-volume (36.2% to 24.3%) and medium-volume (51.0% to 44.8%) centers fell; whereas, the percentage performed at high-volume centers nearly tripled (12.9% vs 30.9%). In 1998 there were 10 high-volume centers; by 2004 this had increased to 26. The number of low-volume centers decreased, from 412 to 328. EVAR was more rapidly adopted by high-volume centers compared with low-volume centers. By 2004, 64.3% of AAA repairs at high-volume centers were done with endovascular techniques compared with 31.8% in low-volume centers. A concurrent reduction occurred in patient mortality, from 4.4% in 1998 to 2.5% in 2004 (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Between 1998 and 2004, a trend towards the regionalization of AAA repair to high-volume centers occurred. Nearly one-third of all AAA repairs were performed at high-volume centers. There was a concurrent increase in the frequency of endovascular AAA repair, especially at high-volume centers. During this period of regionalization of AAA repair to high-volume centers, patient mortality after AAA repair decreased by 23%. Thus, the observed regionalization of AAA repair and the reduction in short-term patient mortality for this operation may be explained by increased utilization of endovascular technologies at high-volume centers.     

Outcomes associated with hyperglycemia after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Objective

We evaluated the association between postoperative hyperglycemia and outcomes after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair.

A decade of change in abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the United States: Have we improved outcomes equally between men and women?

OBJECTIVES: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair has undergone vast changes in the last decade. We reviewed a national database to evaluate the effect on utilization of services and rupture rates. METHODS: From the Centers for Medicare Services (CMS), a 5% inpatient sample was obtained for 1994 to 2003 as beneficiary encrypted files (5% BEF) and as a limited data set file after 2001. Files were translated into Microsoft Access by using a custom program. Queries were performed using International Classification of Diseases (9th Revision) (ICD-9) diagnosis codes 441.3 (ruptured AAA) or 441.4 (non-ruptured AAA) and ICD-9 procedure codes 38.34, 38.36, 38.44, 38.64, 39.25, 39.52 for open, and 39.71 (available after October 2000) for endovascular repair. The 5% BEF totals were multiplied by 20 to calculate yearly volumes. Total cases were divided into the yearly CMS population of elderly Medicare recipients for repair rates per capita and are reported as cases per 100,000 elderly Medicare recipients. Statistics were performed using chi2, Student's t test, nonparametric tests, and multiple regression analysis; P < or = .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Elective AAA repairs declined from 94.4/100,000 in 1994 to 87.7/100,000 in 2003. AAA rupture surgery declined from 18.7/100,000 (1994) to 13.6/100,000 (2003). Rupture repairs from 1994 to 2003 decreased by 29% for men and by 12% for women (P < .001). Rupture mortality has not changed, but the average is significantly higher for women at 52.8%, with men averaging 44.2% (P < .001). Mortality for elective AAA repair has decreased from 5.57% (1994) to 3.20% (2003) in men (P < .001) and from 7.48% (1994) to 5.45% (2003) in women (P < .001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated increasing age, female sex, and open surgery (vs endovascular) were significant predictors of elective and ruptured AAA repair mortality. For 2003 elective AAA repairs, the average length of stay was 6.9 days in men and 8.9 days in women (P < .01) For 2003, men were more likely to be discharged to home after rupture (32.9% of men vs 23.3% of women; P < .001) and elective repair (84.5% of men vs 70.1% of women; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in AAA management in the last decade have decreased aneurysm-related deaths and reduced the incidence of aneurysm ruptures, with a lower utilization of services. Women, however, continue to have a consistently higher mortality for open and ruptured AAA repair and are less likely to return to home after either.     

腔内修复术与开腹手术治疗腹主动脉瘤围手术期疗效的Meta分析

目的：系统评价方法比较血管腔内修复术与开腹术手术治疗腹主动脉瘤（AAA）的围手术期疗效。方法：检索国内外文献数据库,收集血管腔内修复术与开腹术手术治疗AAA的随机对照试验,采用RevMan5.1软件进行Meta分析。结果：共纳入7个随机对照试验,8篇文献,共2 807例患者,其中行血管腔内修复术1?433例（腔内组）,开腹手术1 374例（开腹组）。Meta分析结果显示,腔内组较开腹组手术时间减少（SMD=-0.87,95% CI=-1.43--0.31,P=0.002）,术中输血量减少（SMD=-0.83,95% CI=-0.94--0.72,P<0.00001）,ICU监护时间缩短（MD=-38.11,95% CI=-48.61--27.61,P<0.00001）,术后住院时间缩短（MD=-5.11,95% CI=-6.26--3.95,P<0.00001）,术后30 d病死例数降低（OR=0.30,95% CI=0.16-0.55,P=0.0001）。结论：腔内修复治疗AAA较开腹手术具有创伤小、失血少、术后恢复快的优点,围手术期具有较大优势,但长期预后有待研究。

     

Endovascular versus open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm with concomitant malignancy

BACKGROUND: The management of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and concurrent malignancy is controversial. This study retrospectively assessed the outcome of endovascular repair (EVAR) and open repair (OR) for the treatment of AAA in patients undergoing curative treatment for concomitant malignancies. METHODS: All patients who underwent surgery for a nonruptured infrarenal AAA of > or =5.5 cm and concomitant malignancy between 1997 and 2005 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Identified were 25 patients (22 men; mean age, 70.3 years) with nonruptured infrarenal AAA of > or =5.5 cm (mean size, 6.4 cm) and concomitant malignancy amenable for curative treatment. EVAR was used to treat 11 patients, and 14 underwent OR. The EVAR patients had a smaller mean aneurysm size (5.9 cm vs 6.8 cm; P = .006) than the OR patients. The mean cumulative length of stay for all patients who received treatment for both AAA and cancer was 12.8 days (range, 4 to 26) for EVAR and 18.2 days (range, 9 to 42 days) for OR. In the EVAR group, no patients died perioperatively; in the OR group, three patients died perioperatively (21.4%; P = NS). Postoperative complications occurred in one patient in the EVAR group and in seven in the OR group for a morbidity rate, respectively, of 9.1% and 50% (P = .04). One late complication (9.1%) occurred in the EVAR group. The mean follow-up was 37.7 months (range, 16 to 60 months) in the EVAR group and 29.6 months (range, 11 to 55 months) in the OR group. At 1 and 2 years, survival rates were 100% and 90.9% in the EVAR group and 71.4% and 49% in the OR group (log-rank P = .103) CONCLUSIONS: With low morbidity and mortality, EVAR is a safe technique for the treatment of AAA in patients with concomitant malignancy and could be considered as an alternative to OR.     

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.     

Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: eligibility rate and impact on the rate of open repair

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of eligibility among patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) considered for endovascular repair and to examine the effect of an endovascular program on the institutional pattern of AAA repair. METHODS: All patients evaluated for endovascular AAA repair since the inception of an endovascular program were reviewed for determination of eligibility rates and eventual treatment. Open AAA repairs were categorized as simple (uncomplicated infrarenal), complex (juxtarenal, suprarenal, thoracoabdominal, infected), or ruptured, and their rates before and after initiation of an endovascular program were compared. RESULTS: Over 3 years, 324 patients were considered for endovascular AAA repair; 176 (54%) were candidates, 138 (43%) were not candidates, and 10 (3%) did not complete the evaluation. The rate of eligibility increased significantly from 45% (66/148 patients) during the first half of this period to 63% (110/176 patients) during the second half (P <. 001). Candidates were significantly younger (74.4 +/- 7.6 years) than noncandidates (78.3 +/- 6.7 years) (P <.01), and their aneurysm diameter tended to be smaller (57.6 +/- 9.2 mm compared with 60.8 +/- 12.3 mm; P =.06). The most common reason for ineligibility was an inadequate proximal aortic neck. Of 176 candidates, 78% underwent endovascular repair, and 6% underwent open repair. Of 138 noncandidates, 56% underwent surgical repair. Over a period of 6 years, 542 patients with AAAs (429 simple, 86 complex, 27 ruptured) underwent open repair. The total number and ratio of simple to complex open repairs for nonruptured aneurysms during the 3 years before the initiation of the endovascular program (213 simple, 44 complex) were not significantly different from the repairs over the subsequent 3-year period (216 simple, 42 complex). Similarly, no difference in the total number and the ratio of simple to complex open repairs was found between the first and the second 18-month periods since the initiation of the endovascular program. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of eligibility of patients with AAA for endovascular repair appears to be higher than previously reported. The presence of an active endovascular program has not decreased the number or shifted the distribution of open AAA repair.