The cost-effectiveness of early surgery versus watchful waiting in the management of small abdominal aortic aneurysms

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the relative cost-effectiveness of two clinical strategies for managing 4 to 5 cm diameter abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs): early surgery (repair 4 cm AAA when diagnosed) versus watchful waiting (monitor AAA with ultrasound size measurements every 6 months and repair if the diameter reaches 5 cm).Methods: We used a Markov decision tree to compute the expected survival in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for each strategy, based on literature-derived estimates for the probabilities of different outcomes in this model. We determined hospital costs for patients undergoing elective and emergency AAA repair at our center. With standard methods of cost accounting, we then calculated the additional cost per year of life saved by early surgery compared with watchful waiting (cost-effectiveness ratio, dollars/QALY).Results: Mean hospital costs for elective and emergency AAA repair were $24,020 and $43,208, respectively (1992 dollars). For our base-case analysis (60-year-old men with 4 cm diameter AAAs, with 5% elective operative mortality rate and 3.3% annual rupture rate), early surgery improved survival by 0.34 QALYs compared with watchful waiting, at an incremental cost of $17,404/QALY. Increased elective surgical mortality rate, decreased AAA rupture risk, and increased patient age all reduced the cost-effectiveness of early surgery. Future increases in elective operative risk, noncompliance with ultrasound follow-up and increased threshold size for elective AAA repair during watchful waiting all improved the cost-effectiveness of early surgery. Future increases in elective operative risk, noncompliance with ultrasound follow-up and increased threshold size for elective AAA repair during watchful waiting all improved the cost-effectiveness of early surgery.Conclusions: The cost effectiveness of early surgery for 4 cm diameter AAAs in carefully selected patients compares favorably with that of other commonly accepted preventive interventions such as hypertension screening and treatment. With an upper limit of $40,000/QALY as an "acceptable" cost-effectiveness ratio, early surgery appears to be justified for patients 70 years old or younger, if the AAA rupture risk is 3%/year or more and the elective operative mortality rate is 5% or less. Although not a substitute for clinical judgment, this cost-effectiveness analysis delineates the essential tradeoffs and uncertainties in treating patients with small AAAs. (J VASC SURG 1994;19:980–91.)     

Cost-effectiveness of surgery for small abdominal aortic aneurysms on the basis of data from the United Kingdom small aneurysm trial

PURPOSE: Although the United Kingdom small aneurysm trial reported no survival benefit for early operation in patients with small (4. 0-5.5 cm) abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), the trial lacked statistical power to detect small but potentially meaningful gains in life expectancy, particularly for specific subgroups. We used decision analysis to better characterize the potential benefits and cost-effectiveness of early surgery. METHODS: We used a Markov model to assess the marginal cost-effectiveness (incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year [QALY] saved) of early surgery relative to surveillance for small AAAs, using data from the UK Trial. Subgroup analyses were performed by patient age and AAA diameter. Sensitivity analysis was used to evaluate the effect of elective operative mortality on cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: In our baseline analysis, early operations provided a small survival advantage (0.14 QALYs) at a small incremental cost of $1510. Thus, despite a small survival benefit, early surgery appeared cost-effective ($10, 800/QALY). The small cost differential resulted from the large proportion of patients who underwent surveillance, who eventually underwent AAA repair, and therefore incurred the cost of the surgical procedures. The survival advantage and cost-effectiveness of early operation increased with lower operative mortality, younger age, and larger AAA diameter. CONCLUSION: Despite the negative conclusions of the UK trial, early surgery may be cost-effective for patients with small AAAs, particularly younger patients (<72 years of age) with larger AAAs (> or = 4.5 cm). Because the gains in life expectancy are relatively small, however, clinical decision making should be strongly guided by patient preferences.     

Natural history of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm

Factors determining the outcome for patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) were analysed in a retrospective population-based study of 187 consecutively diagnosed AAAs at one hospital during a 9-year period. All aneurysms were diagnosed by ultrasound, and those cases that were not primarily operated upon, were followed by repeat ultrasound examinations. An expansion rate of more than 0.4 cm/year was seen in 27% of the aneurysms and a tendency towards a higher rate of expansion could be seen with larger lesions. The overall cumulative rupture rate was 12% at 5 years. For patients with small (less than 5 cm) aneurysms it was 2.5% at 7 years, and no aneurysm could definitively be shown to be smaller than 5 cm at the time of rupture. The rupture risk was significantly higher (28% at 3 years) for larger aneurysms (greater than or equal to 5 cm). The only reliable predictor for rupture was aneurysm size. The overall cumulative survival was 51% at 5 years. Patients with large aneurysms did not have a significantly shorter survival although a tendency for this to be the case was found. There was a significant difference between the proportion of deaths caused by aneurysm rupture in patients with small aneurysms when compared to those with large aneurysms, 5.5 and 53%, respectively. The expansion rate for AAA was highly individual and aneurysm diameter was the only recognisable predictor of rupture. The rupture rate for AAAs smaller than 5 cm was lower than previously reported.     

Selective management of abdominal aortic aneurysms in a prospective measurement program

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to clarify the treatment of patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) less than 5 cm in diameter and those believed to be unfit for operation with AAAs 5 cm diameter or greater.Methods: Four hundred ninety two patients with AAAs less than 5 cm when first seen were entered in a prospective measurement program by ultrasonography or computed tomography scan (exclusively after 1988) every 6 months. A decision regarding operative fitness was made when the AAA was 5 cm. Patients then underwent operation if fit or continued follow-up if their AAA was larger than 5 cm but they were unfit. A further group of 91 patients with aneurysms 5 cm or greater when first seen but unfit for repair were entered in the prospective measurement program.Results: In the group with AAAs less than 5 cm at entry, operation was performed in 201 patients as a result of increase in AAA size to 5 cm or greater (157), AAA expansion of more than 0.5 cm in 6 months (24), or for other reasons (20). Of those with AAAs smaller than 5 cm at entry, 291 have not undergone operation at a mean follow-up of 42 months. Expansion was significantly related to aneurysm size at entry and was highest in the 4.5 to 4.9 cm group at 0.7 cm/year. In the group of patients deemed unfit for operation with 5 cm AAAs [as a graduate of the less than 5 cm group at entry (85 patients) or first seen with AAA greater than 5 cm (91 patients)], 10 ruptures have occurred. Of these patients with ruptured AAAs, six had AAAs between 5.0 and 5.6 cm.Conclusions: Because of the risk of rupture demonstrated in our series in AAAs 5 cm or slightly greater and the progressive increase in expansion to a mean of 0.7 cm/year in those AAAs between 4.5 and 4.9 cm at entry, recommendation for elective operation in patients with AAAs between 4.5 and 5.0 cm should be strongly considered in a fit patient. (J VASC SURG1996;23:213-22.)     

Recommendations for screening intervals for small aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND: The aim was to determine the optimum rescreening interval for small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). METHODS: Data from 12 years of population screening of 65-year-old men were analysed and 1121 small AAAs (less than 4.0 cm in initial diameter) were divided into groups: group 1 (2.6-2.9 cm; n = 625), group 2 (3.0-3.4 cm; n = 330) and group 3 (3.5-3.9 cm; n = 166). Expansion rate and the cumulative proportions to expand to over 5.5 cm, or require surgery, or rupture were calculated. RESULTS: Expansion rate was related to initial aortic diameter: 0.09 cm per year in group 1, 0.16 cm per year in group 2 and 0.32 cm per year in group 3 (P < 0.001). Aneurysms in 2.4 per cent of patients in group 1 exceeded a diameter of 5.5 cm or required surgery within 5 years; there were no ruptures. In group 2, no aorta exceeded 5.5 cm but at 3 years 2.1 per cent had reached 5.5 cm and 2.9 per cent had required surgery. The rupture rate at 3 years was zero. In group 3, the aneurysm diameter exceeded 5.5 cm in 1.2 per cent of patients, but no patient required surgery or experienced rupture within 1 year; at 2 years 10.5 per cent of aneurysms had exceeded 5.5 cm in diameter or required surgery and 1.4 per cent had ruptured. CONCLUSION: The appropriate rescreening interval can be determined by initial aortic diameter in screened 65-year-old men. AAAs of initial diameter 2.6-2.9 cm should be rescanned at 5 years, those of 3.0-3.4 cm at 3 years and those of 3.5-3.9 cm at 1 year.     

Use of sequential B-mode ultrasonography to manage abdominal aortic aneurysms

The utility and safety of sequential B-mode ultrasonography to treat male patients with small (less than 6.0 cm in diameter) abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) were studied retrospectively in 149 consecutive patients. Sixty-three of these patients have had operative repair of the AAA. Eight-six remain unoperated on. Mean growth rate was 0.79 cm/y (1.06 cm/y in the operated-on group and 0.36 cm/y in the unoperated-on group). Seven patients sustained rupture of the AAA during follow-up and 4 patients died as a consequence of elective repair, for a combined mortality rate of 7.4% (11/149). Only one AAA that was less than 5.0 cm ruptured. This has proved to be an effective way to manage AAAs in this population.     

Should endovascular surgery lower the threshold for repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms?

PURPOSE: Because endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is less invasive, some investigators have suggested that this increasingly popular technique should broaden the indications for elective AAA repair. The purpose of this study was to calculate quality-adjusted life expectancy rates after endovascular and open AAA repair and to estimate the optimal diameter for elective AAA repair in hypothetical cohorts of patients at average risk and at high risk. METHODS: A Markov decision analysis model was used in this study. Assumptions were made on the basis of published reports and included the following: (1) the annual rupture rate is a continuous function of the AAA diameter (0% for <4 cm, 1% for 4.5 cm, 11% for 5.5 cm, and 26% for 6.5 cm); (2) the operative mortality rate is 1% for endovascular repair (excluding the risk of conversion to open repair) and 3.5% for open repair at age 70 years; and (3) immediate endovascular-to-open conversion risk is 5%, and late conversion rate is 1% per year. The main outcome measure in this study was the benefit of AAA repair in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The optimal threshold size (the AAA diameter at which elective repair maximizes benefit) was measured in centimeters. RESULTS: The benefit of endovascular repair is consistently greater than that of open repair, but the additional benefit is small-0.1 to 0.4 QALYs. For men in average health with gradually enlarging AAAs with initial diameters of 4 cm, endovascular surgery reduces the optimal threshold diameter by very little: from 4.6 to 4.6 cm (no change) at age 60 years, from 4.8 to 4.7 cm at age 70 years, and from 5.1 to 4.9 cm at age 80 years. For older men in poor health, endovascular surgery reduces the optimal threshold diameter substantially (8.1 to 5.7 cm at age 80 years), but the benefit of repair in this population is small (0.2 QALYs). CONCLUSION: For most patients, the indications for AAA repair are changed very little by the introduction of endovascular surgery. Only for older patients in poor health does endovascular surgery substantially lower the optimal threshold diameter for elective AAA repair.     

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Around two-thirds of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) are incidentaldiscoveries during the investigation of backache, hip pain orurinary tract complaints. They are much more common in men thanwomen (5:1) and account for 2% of all deaths in men aged >60yr. Open surgical repair of the aneurysm is considered as thestandard, traditional method of treatment. Surgery is recommendedwhen the AAA exceeds 55 mm in anteroposterior diameter as measuredby ultrasound scan. The risk of spontaneous rupture dependson aneurysm size, ranging from <1% per annum for AAA <55mm diameter to >17% per annum for aneurysms >60 mm diameter.Ninety per cent of AAAs are located distal to the renal arteries. Endovascular repair of an aortic aneurysm using an in-situ prostheticgraft was suggested as a technique in 1969 by Dotter, but wasonly first performed successfully by Parodi and colleagues in1990. Over the last 10 yr, the availability of endovascularstent grafts has provided an alternative treatment for patientswith AAA, especially the elderly with significant co-existingmedical conditions. Endovascular repair is much less invasive.However, it is challenging technically and requires a multidisciplinaryapproach. During endovascular surgery, an aortic stent graft is passedvia the femoral arteries through the aortic lumen to fit tightlyabove and below the AAA. The aim is to exclude the aneurysmsac from the systemic circulation, thereby decreasing or eliminatingthe risk of future rupture. The procedure is performed throughincisions in one or both groins; no laparotomy is required.However, certain anatomical considerations apply.     

Abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery for octogenarians

Purpose  To define the indications for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery in octogenarians. Methods  We reviewed septuagenarians and octogenarians with a nonspecific AAA diagnosed at our hospital between January, 1990 and June, 2006. Results  Among a total 628 patients seen, 306 were in their 70s (group A) and 108 were in their 80s or older (group B). The mortality rate associated with elective surgery was 1.9% in group A and 7.0% in group B. Of the survivors, 12 (5.7%) of 210 in group A and 8 (15.1%) of 53 in group B died within 2 years. Of the patients who did not undergo surgery, 8 of 53 in group A and 8 of 31 in group B had AAAs greater than 6 cm in diameter. The rupture-free rates of AAAs greater than 6 cm in diameter were 64% at 1 year and 0% at 4 years in group A, and 88% at 1 year and 26% at 3 years in group B. The rupture-free rates of AAAs smaller than 6 cm in diameter were 95% at 3 years and 85% at 5 years in group A, and 100% at 5 years in group B. Conclusions  We concluded that AAAs over 6 cm in diameter were an appropriate indication for surgery in octogenarians.     

Epidemiological study of the relationship between volume and outcome after abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery in the UK from 2000 to 2005

BACKGROUND: The aim was to assess the relationship between hospital volume and outcome after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery in the UK. METHODS: Hospital Episode Statistics (2000-2005) were classified as elective, urgent or ruptured AAA repair. Analysis was by modelling of mortality rate, complication rate and length of hospital stay with regard to the annual operative volume, after risk adjustment. RESULTS: There were 112,545 diagnoses, or repairs, of AAAs, of which 26,822 were infrarenal aneurysms. The mean mortality rate was 7.4, 23.6 and 41.8 per cent for elective, urgent and ruptured AAA repair respectively. Elective AAA repair undertaken at high-volume hospitals showed volume-related improvements in mortality (P < 0.001). Patients were discharged from hospital earlier (P < 0.001). The critical volume threshold was 32 elective AAA repairs per year. For urgent repair, patients at high-volume hospitals had a reduced mortality rate (P = 0.017) with an increased length of stay (P = 0.041). There was no relationship between volume and outcome for ruptured AAA repairs. CONCLUSION: Increased annual volumes were associated with significant reductions in mortality for elective and urgent AAA repair, but not for repair of ruptured AAAs.     

Influence of presentation on outcome in abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVES: In the absence of formal screening abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) are detected in an opportunistic manner. Many remain asymptomatic and undetected until they rupture. Incidentally discovered small AAAs are entered into a surveillance programme until they reach a suitable size for repair. The aim of this study was to examine trends in the management of AAA and whether the method of presentation had an effect on subsequent mortality. DESIGN: Observational study in UK district general hospital. MATERIALS/METHODS: This study reports a single surgeon case series identified using a prospectively maintained database. Data on mode of presentation, management and mortality were retrieved from case notes, PIMS hospital database and the Office of National Statistics. RESULTS: Two hundred and five patients were referred with AAAs between 1992 and 2004, 78% presenting in elective circumstances. The surveillance programme fed 33% of the operated cases. Two aneurysms ruptured whilst under surveillance. Overall elective operative mortality was 11.8% and has progressively decreased over time. Thirty-day operated mortality was significantly lower in patients having a period of surveillance than those having immediate elective repair (2.3 vs. 16.3%, p=0.018). A slight reduction in emergency AAA repairs was noted over the study period (r2=0.6) although registered aneurysm deaths continue to increase (r2=0.83). CONCLUSIONS: Elective mortality following AAA surgery decreased over the study period. Outcome was better in those patients who had surgery for aneurysms that had been under surveillance. Despite opportunistic screening the population adjusted mortality rate of aortic aneurysms showed a progressive increase. A reduction in deaths from aneurysms is unlikely without a formal screening programme.     

The natural history of abdominal aortic aneurysms

This study examines the rate of expansion of abdominal aortic aneurysms and the risk of rupture in relation to their size. To assess these variables, we conducted a prospective study of 300 consecutive patients who presented over a 6-year interval with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) that were initially managed nonoperatively. The mean age of the patients was 70.4 years, and 211 (70%) were men. The mean initial aneurysm diameter was 4.1 cm. Among the 208 patients who underwent more than one ultrasound or computed tomographic (CT) scan, the diameter of the aneurysm increased by a median of 0.3 cm per year. The 6-year cumulative incidence of rupture was 1% and 2% among patients with aneurysms less than 4.0 cm and 4.0 to 4.9 cm in diameter, respectively (p greater than 0.05). In comparison, the 6-year cumulative incidence of rupture was 20% among patients with aneurysms greater than 5.0 cm in diameter (p less than 0.004). We conclude that (1) abdominal aortic aneurysms expand at a median rate of 0.3 cm per year; and (2) the risk of rupture of abdominal aortic aneurysms less than 5.0 cm is substantially lower than the risk of rupture of aneurysms 5.0 cm or more in diameter.     

Variables that affect the expansion rate and outcome of small abdominal aortic aneurysms

Seventy-three patients with small (less than 6 cm in diameter) abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) were selected for nonoperative management and followed up with sequential ultrasound size measurements. Fifty-four men and 19 women, 51 to 89 years of age (mean 70 years), had an initial mean AAA size of 4.1 cm (anteroposterior) x 4.3 cm (lateral) diameter, with a calculated elliptic cross-sectional area of 14.3 cm2. After a mean of 37 months of follow-up, AAA area increased at a mean rate of 20% per year (3 cm2 yr; 0.4 to 0.5 cm/yr diameter). Expansion rate was not affected by initial aneurysm size. During follow-up, only 3 patients (4%) required urgent operation (1 died), 26 patients (36%) died of non-AAA causes, and 26 patients (36%) underwent elective AAA repair because of progressive size increase (1 died). Elective operations were performed at the rate of 10% per year, when mean AAA size had increased to 22 cm2 (5.1 cm in diameter). Multiple regression analysis of clinical parameters available at presentation indicated that subsequent elective AAA repair was predicted by younger age at diagnosis and larger initial aneurysm size. As anticipated, patients who underwent surgery had more rapid aneurysm expansion (5.3 cm2/yr) compared with patients who did not undergo surgery (1.6 cm2/yr; p less than 0.05). This difference was caused by more rapid expansion during later follow-up intervals among patients selected for operation and was not predicted by the change in aneurysm size observed during initial ultrasonographic follow-up. Final aneurysm size was predicted by initial size, duration of follow-up, and both systolic and diastolic pressure.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Prognosis of patients turned down for conventional abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the endovascular and sonographic era: Szilagyi revisited?

PURPOSE: The United Kingdom Small Aneurysm study has demonstrated the low risk of rupture in aneurysms less than 5.5 cm in diameter. With the advent of endoluminal techniques, patients considered unfit to undergo laparotomy are now considered for endovascular repair. However, the natural history of aneurysms larger than 5.5 cm remains uncertain, especially when severe comorbidity is present. In our center, we prospectively maintain records of all patients for whom elective aneurysm surgery was refused. This study documented the outcome of all patients referred with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) larger than 5.5 cm in diameter who were turned down for elective open repair and determined the cause of death and risk of rupture in all patients. METHODS: Details of all patients with AAAs from January 5, 1989, to January 5, 1999, were recorded, and demographic details on all patients with AAAs larger than 5.5 cm were collected. Copies of death certificates were obtained from the Office of National Statistics, local in-hospital patient records, and general practitioner records. Results of postmortem examinations were also obtained. Aneurysms were stratified according to their size at presentation (5.5-5.9 cm, 6.0-7.0 cm, and > 7.0 cm), and the reasons no intervention was made were documented. RESULTS: A total of 106 patients were turned down for elective aneurysm surgery in the 10-year period (10.6 per year). The mean age of the patients was 78.4 years (SD, 7.4), and 70 were men and 36 were women. At the end of the study, 76 patients (71.7%) had died. Overall, the 3-year survival rate was 17%. Patients with AAAs larger than 7.0 cm lived a median of 9 months. A ruptured aneurysm was certified as a cause of death in 36% of the patients with an AAA of 5.5 to 5.9 cm, in 50% of the patients with an AAA of 6 to 7.0 cm, and 55% of the patients with an AAA larger than 7.0 cm. Reasons given for not intervening were patient refusal (31 cases), the patient being "unfit for surgery" (18 cases), the "advanced age" of the patient (18 cases), cardiac disease (9 cases), cancer (9 cases), respiratory disease (6 cases), and other (15 cases). CONCLUSION: Although we recognize the problems with death certification, we found that rupture was a significant cause of death in patients with an untreated AAA that was larger than 5.5 cm. Although little difference in outcome was observed in aneurysms in the 5.5 to 7.0 cm size range, patients with an AAA that was larger than 7.0 cm seemed to have a much poorer prognosis.     

In vivo analysis of mechanical wall stress and abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture risk

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to calculate abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) wall stresses in vivo for ruptured, symptomatic, and electively repaired AAAs with three-dimensional computer modeling techniques, computed tomographic scan data, and blood pressure and to compare wall stress with current clinical indices related to rupture risk. METHODS: CT scans were analyzed for 48 patients with AAAs: 18 AAAs that ruptured (n = 10) or were urgently repaired for symptoms (n = 8) and 30 AAAs large enough to merit elective repair within 12 weeks of the CT scan. Three-dimensional computer models of AAAs were reconstructed from CT scan data. The stress distribution on the AAA as a result of geometry and blood pressure was computationally determined with finite element analysis with a hyperelastic nonlinear model that depicted the mechanical behavior of the AAA wall. RESULTS: Peak wall stress (maximal stress on the AAA surface) was significantly different between groups (ruptured, 47.7 +/- 6 N/cm(2); emergent symptomatic, 47.5 +/- 4 N/cm(2); elective repair, 36.9 +/- 2 N/cm(2); P =.03), with no significant difference in blood pressure (P =.2) or AAA diameter (P =.1). Because of trends toward differences in diameter, comparison was made only with diameter-matched subjects. Even with identical mean diameters, ruptured/symptomatic AAAs had a significantly higher peak wall stress (46.8 +/- 4.5 N/cm(2) versus 38.1 +/- 1.3 N/cm(2); P =.05). Maximal wall stress predicted risk of rupture better than the LaPlace equation (20.7 +/- 5.7 N/cm(2) versus 18.8 +/- 2.9 N/cm(2); P =.2) or other proposed indices of rupture risk. The smallest ruptured AAA was 4.8 cm, but this aneurysm had a stress equivalent to the average electively repaired 6.3-cm AAA. CONCLUSION: Peak wall stresses calculated in vivo for AAAs near the time of rupture were significantly higher than peak stresses for electively repaired AAAs, even when matched for maximal diameter. Calculation of wall stress with computer modeling of three-dimensional AAA geometry appears to assess rupture risk more accurately than AAA diameter or other previously proposed clinical indices. Stress analysis is practical and feasible and may become an important clinical tool for evaluation of AAA rupture risk.     

The rupture rate of large abdominal aortic aneurysms: is this modified by anatomical suitability for endovascular repair?

BACKGROUND: There are no precise estimates of the rate of rupture of large abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). There is recent suspicion that anatomic suitability for endovascular repair may be associated with a decreased risk of AAA rupture. METHODS: Systematic literature review of rupture rates of AAA with initial diameter > or =5 cm in patients not considered for open repair, with stratification by size (<6.0 cm and 6.0+ cm), and gender, combined using random-effects meta-analysis. Proportional hazards regression to analyze factors (including gender, diabetes, initial AAA diameter, aneurysm neck, and sac lengths) associated with rupture in patients anatomically suitable for endovascular repair (EVAR 2 trial). RESULTS: Previous studies (2 prospective, 2 retrospective, and 1 mixed) were identified for meta-analysis and patients with elective repair excluded. The pooled rupture rates was 18.2 [95% confidence interval (CI) 13.7-24.1] per 100 person-years. There was a 2.5-fold increase in rupture rates for patients with AAA of 6.0+ cm versus <6.0 cm, rupture rates = 2.54 (95% CI 1.69-3.85). The pooled rupture rates was nonsignificantly higher in women than men, rupture rates = 1.21 (95% CI 0.77-1.90). For EVAR 2 patients with 6+ cm aneurysms the rupture rates was 17.4 [95% CI 12.9-23.4] per 100 person-years significantly lower than the pooled rate from the meta-analysis, rupture rates = 27.0 [95% CI 21.1-34.7] per 100 person-years, P = 0.026. Patients with shorter neck lengths appeared to have a higher rupture rates than those with longer necks, but this was of borderline significance P = 0.10. CONCLUSIONS: Rupture rates of large AAAs reported in different studies are highly variable. There is emerging evidence that patients anatomically suitable for endovascular repair have lower rupture rates.     

Maximal aortic diameter affects outcome after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

Objective

The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether maximal aortic diameter affects outcome after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).

Abdominal aortic aneurysm in high-risk patients. Outcome of selective management based on size and expansion rate.

Low mortality rates for elective surgical treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms justify an aggressive approach in most patients. However, in high-risk patients with small aneurysms and no symptoms, the decision to operate remains a delicate balance of risk and benefit. Our observations include 99 high-risk patients with asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms initially measuring 3 to 6 cm in the largest transverse diameter, who have been followed 1 to 9 years (average 2.4 years) with serial echographic measurements. Elective operations were performed for aneurysmal enlargement greater than 6 cm or symptom development. An additional 11 patients with aneurysms initially greater than 6 cm, whose initial evaluation did not result in elective surgery, were also followed. Serial data documented a mean expansion rate of 0.4 cm/year for aneurysms smaller than 6 cm. Forty-one of these 99 high-risk patients with small aneurysms eventually underwent an elective resection with two deaths (4.9%). Thirty-four patients (34%) died from causes unrelated to their unoperated aneurysms, and 21 patients (21%) are alive without symptoms. Three of the 99 patients suffered aneurysm rupture and emergency operation with two deaths. Thus, of the 99 high-risk patients with small aneurysms, four have died of elective aneurysm surgery or rupture (4%). A protocol of re-echo (or computerized tomography) examination at 3-month intervals appears to define which of these high-risk patients require elective aneurysm surgery, and has limited rupture to less than 5%. Improved criteria may emerge from recent advances in high-resolution computerized tomography.     

Anatomic characteristics of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm on conventional CT scans: Implications for rupture risk

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to analyze anatomic characteristics of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), with conventional two-dimensional computed tomography (CT), including comparison with control subjects matched for age, gender, and size. METHODS: Records were reviewed to identify all CT scans obtained at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center or referring hospitals before emergency AAA repair performed because of rupture or acute severe pain (RUP group). CT scans obtained before elective AAA repair (ELEC group) were reviewed for age and gender match with patients in the RUP group. More than 40 variables were measured on each CT scan. Aneurysm diameter matching was achieved by consecutively deleting the largest RUP scan and the smallest ELEC scan to prevent bias. RESULTS: CT scans were analyzed for 259 patients with AAAs: 122 RUP and 137 ELEC. Patients were well matched for age, gender, and other demographic variables or risk factors. Maximum AAA diameter was significantly different in comparisons of all patients (RUP, 6.5 +/- 2 cm vs ELEC, 5.6 +/- 1 cm; P <.0001), and mean diameter of ruptured AAAs was 5 mm smaller in female patients (6.1 +/- 2 cm vs 6.6 +/- 2 cm; P =.007). Two hundred patients were matched for diameter, gender, and age (100 from each group; maximum AAA diameter, 6.0 +/- 1 cm vs 6.0 +/- 1 cm). Analysis of diameter-matched AAAs indicated that most variables were statistically similar in the two groups, including infrarenal neck length (17 +/- 1 mm vs 19 +/- 1 mm; P =.3), maximum thrombus thickness (25 +/- 1 mm vs 23 +/- 1 mm, P =.4), and indices of body habitus, such as [(maximum AAA diameter)/(normal suprarenal aorta diameter)] or [(maximum AAA diameter)/(L3 transverse diameter)]. Multivariate analysis controlling for gender indicated that the most significant variables for rupture were aortic tortuosity (odds ratio [OR] 3.3, indicating greater risk with no or mild tortuosity), diameter asymmetry (OR, 3.2 for a 1-cm difference in major-minor axis), and current smoking (OR, 2.7, with the greater risk in current smokers). CONCLUSIONS: When matched for age, gender, and diameter, ruptured AAAs tend to be less tortuous, yet have greater cross-sectional diameter asymmetry. On conventional two-dimensional CT axial sections, it appears that when diameter asymmetry is associated with low aortic tortuosity, the larger diameter on axial sections more accurately reflects rupture risk, and when diameter asymmetry is associated with moderate or severe aortic tortuosity, the smaller diameter on axial sections more accurately reflects rupture risk. Current smoking is significantly associated with rupture, even when controlling for gender and AAA anatomy.     

Biomechanical properties of ruptured versus electively repaired abdominal aortic aneurysm wall tissue

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the biomechanical properties of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) wall tissue from patients who experienced AAA rupture with that of those who received elective repair. METHODS: Rectangular, circumferentially oriented AAA wall specimens (approximately 2.5 cm x 7 mm) were obtained fresh from the operating room from patients undergoing surgical repair. The width and thickness were measured for each specimen by using a laser micrometer before testing to failure with a uniaxial tensile testing system. The force and deformation applied to each specimen were measured continuously during testing, and the data were converted to stress and stretch ratio. The tensile strength was taken as the peak stress obtained before specimen failure, and the distensibility was taken as the stretch ratio at failure. The maximum tangential modulus and average modulus were also computed according to the peak and average slope of the stress-stretch ratio curve. RESULTS: Twenty-six specimens were obtained from 16 patients (aged 73 +/- 3 years [mean +/- SEM]) undergoing elective repair of their AAA (diameter, 7.0 +/- 0.5 cm). Thirteen specimens were resected from nine patients (aged 73 +/- 3 years; P = not significant in comparison to the electively repaired AAAs) during repair of their ruptured AAA (diameter, 7.8 +/- 0.6 cm; P = not significant). A significant difference was noted in wall thickness between ruptured and elective AAAs: 3.6 +/- 0.3 mm vs 2.5 +/- 0.1 mm, respectively (P < .001). The tensile strength of the ruptured tissue was found to be lower than that for the electively repaired tissue (54 +/- 6 N/cm2 vs 82 +/- 9.0 N/cm2; P = .04). Considering all specimens, no significant correlation was noted between tensile strength and diameter (R = -0.10; P = .55). Tensile strength, however, had a significant negative correlation with wall thickness (R = -0.42; P < .05) and a significant positive correlation with the tissue maximum tangential modulus (R = 0.76; P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that AAA rupture is associated with aortic wall weakening, but not with wall stiffening. A widely accepted indicator for risk of aneurysm rupture is the maximum transverse diameter. Our results suggest that AAA wall strength, in large aneurysms, is not related to the maximum transverse diameter. Rather, wall thickness or stiffness may be a better predictor of rupture for large AAAs.