Chronic H2 receptor antagonist treatment and pulmonary complications post cardiac surgery

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of chronic H2 receptor antagonist treatment and pulmonary complications, length of stay in intensive care (ITU), high dependency (HDU), and stay in hospital in patients who undergo pulsatile cardiopulmonary bypass. DESIGN: An analysis from a prospective database of patients undergoing cardiac surgery with pulsatile perfusion during cardiopulmonary bypass. SETTING: Hammersmith Hospital, regional cardiothoracic surgical centre. SUBJECTS: 2,642 patients who had undergone cardiac surgery involving pulsatile perfusion. Of these, 255 were on H2 receptor antagonist treatment. MAIN OUTCOME: Time to extubation, re-intubation rate, incidence of pulmonary oedema, measures incidence of lobar collapse and consolidation, incidence of antibiotic treatment for pulmonary infection, length of ITU, HDU and total hospital stay. RESULTS: 75.8% of patients on H2 receptor antagonists compared with 74.5% of control patients had no respiratory complications after cardiac surgery (P > 0.5). There was no significant difference between collapse and consolidation (P > 0.5), collapse and consolidation requiring antibiotics (P > 0.5), re-intubation (P > 0.5), pulmonary oedema (P > 0.5), time to extubation (P > 0.5), length of ITU stay (P > 0.5), length of HDU stay (P > 0.5), length of hospital stay (P > 0.5), and mortality (P > 0.5). CONCLUSION: Chronic H2 receptor antagonist treatment has no effect on pulmonary complications after cardiac surgery.     

Epidural analgesia in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease undergoing transperitoneal abdominal aortic aneurysmorraphy--a multi-institutional analysis

INTRODUCTION: Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are more likely to develop pulmonary morbidity following major abdominal surgery. The purpose of this study was to examine the utility of epidural analgesia in patients with COPD who underwent elective transperitoneal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. METHODS: During a 7-year period, all patients diagnosed with COPD undergoing elective AAA repair (n=425) from three hospitals were reviewed. Inclusion criteria were an FEV(1)/FVC ratio <75% and/or a PaCO(2)>45 mmHg. Clinical outcomes were compared between those who received epidural analgesia (epidural group) and those who did not (control group). Primary endpoints measured were duration of intubation, ICU stay, hospital days, and pulmonary complications. RESULTS: Strict inclusion criteria were met by 131 patients, which included 86 patients in the epidural group and 45 patients in the control group. When comparing the epidural vs. control group, the mean AAA size was 6.3+/-0.9 cm vs. 6.0+/-1.5 cm (NS), FEV(1) was 57.2+/-24.7% vs. 49.0+/-10.3% (NS), and the mean FEV(1)/FVC ratio was 52.0+/-11.4% vs. 50.6+/-6.7% (NS), respectively. The epidural group had a significantly lower incidence of post-operative ventilator dependency and ICU stay (p<0.05), as well as a decreased trend in pulmonary complications when compared to the control group. The overall hospital stay remained similar between the two groups. The relative risk of developing a pulmonary complication in the absence of epidural analgesia was 2.3. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative epidural analgesia is beneficial in patients with COPD undergoing AAA repair by reducing both the post-operative ventilator duration and ICU stay. Epidural analgesia should be considered in all COPD patients undergoing elective transperitoneal AAA repair.     

Predictors of Early Discharge following Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Patients undergoing endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair have lower perioperative morbidity and leave the hospital earlier than patients undergoing open repair. However, potential complications require continuous surveillance of endografts and there are few data regarding their long-term fate. If an open operation were well tolerated, this might be a preferable alternative. The purpose of this study was to identify patients with lower morbidity and shorter hospital stay following open AAA repair and to analyze factors that might point to open repair as the preferred approach. We performed a retrospective review of all patients who underwent AAA repair between 1995 and 2000 at our institution. All patients with ruptured aneurysms and those that required renal, celiac, or superior mesenteric reconstructions during the AAA repair were excluded. Patient demographics, preoperative comorbid conditions, intraoperative data, and postoperative complications were analyzed in detail. A total of 115 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. There was only one perioperative death (0.9%). The mean hospital stay was 8.1 days. A history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and longer operative time were independent factors associated with prolonged hospital stay. Forty-one patients (35.6%) left the hospital in 5 or less days. Compared to the group with hospital stay >5 days, these patients had a lower incidence of COPD (7.3% vs. 25.7%, p < 0.05) and smaller-size AAAs (5.6 vs. 6.4 cm, p < 0.0001), and were more often operated on via a retroperitoneal approach (61% vs. 40.5%, p < 0.05). Their time in the operating room was less (3.5 vs. 4.5 hr, p < 0.0001), and they had less estimated blood loss (750 vs. 1500 cc, p < 0.001) and fewer transfusions (0.95 vs. 2.45 units, p < 0.0001). Patients without COPD and smaller AAAs that can be repaired via a retroperitoneal approach have a lower incidence of perioperative complications and a shorter hospital stay following open AAA repair. Until long-term results for endografts are available, our data suggest that these patients are well served with an open repair.     

Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in Veterans Affairs medical centers

Purpose: This study was performed to define outcomes after abdominal ortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers during fiscal years 1991 through 1993.Methods: With VA patient treatment file data, patients were selected from diagnosis-related groups 110 and 111 and were then classified in a patient management category. In the categories of repair of nonruptured and ruptured AAA, mortality and postoperative complication rates were defined for patients who underwent AAA repair in VA medical centers during the 3-year study period.Results: Hospital mortality rates were 4.86% (166 of 3419) after repair of nonruptured AAA and 47.0% (126 of 268) after repair of ruptured AAA ( p < 0.001). Of 292 deaths after AAA repair, 126 (43.2%) followed repair of ruptured AAA, even though ruptured AAA comprised only 7.3% of total AAA surgical volume. AAA repairs were performed at 116 VA medical centers, with 31.8 ± 23.1 (range, 1 to 140) procedures performed at each center. Although many lower-volume centers had excellent results, centers that performed ≥32 AAA repairs tended to have lower in-hospital mortality rates after repair of nonruptured AAA than those that performed ≤31 procedures (4.2% ± 3.5% compared with 6.7% ± 7.8%; p < 0.05). Poisson regression analysis revealed an inverse relationship between the volume of AAA repairs and individual hospital mortality ( p = 0.001) and a direct relationship between illness severity and hospital mortality ( p = 0.008). The proportion of ruptured AAAs treated in a hospital was also directly related to individual hospital mortality rates ( p < 0.005). Postoperative complications were associated with an increased hospital mortality rate (11.7% with complication compared with 6.5% without; p < 0.001) and length of stay (23.6 ± 17.1 days compared with 18.0 ± 12.4 days; p < 0.0001). In a logistic regression model, increased mortality rates after AAA repair were associated with hospital type (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 0.6), increasing age (OR = 1.1), patient management category severity score (OR = 2.2), hemorrhage (OR = 2.3), myocardial infarction (OR = 2.6), disseminated intravascular coagulation (OR = 4.7), AAA rupture (OR = 6.0), postoperative shock (OR = 10.7), cardiopulmonary arrest (OR = 15.4), central nervous system complications (OR = 16.0) and urologic complications (OR = 2.4).Conclusions: Mortality rates after AAA repair in VA hospitals were comparable with those previously reported in other large series. Outcomes for veterans with AAA may improve by referring patients eligible for elective repair to VA medical centers with a greater operative volume or to lower-volume centers that have had excellent results. (J VASC SURG 1996;23:191-200.)     

Glasgow Aneurysm Score in Patients Undergoing Elective Open Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Finnvasc Study

OBJECTIVE: To use Finnvasc to determine whether the Glasgow Aneurysm Score predicts postoperative outcome after open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). DESIGN: Retrospective study. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The operative risk of 1911 patients undergoing open repair of AAA was retrospectively graded according to the Glasgow Aneurysm Score. RESULTS: At 30 days 100 (5%) patients had died and 21% had developed severe postoperative complications. Receiver operating characteristics (ROCs) curve analysis showed that the Glasgow Aneurysm Score was predictive of postoperative mortality (area under the curve (AUC): 0.668, p<0.0001), severe complications (AUC: 0.654, p<0.0001), cardiac complications (AUC: 0.689, p<0.0001) and intensive care unit stay >5 days (AUC: 0.634, p<0.0001). Patients scoring >76 had significantly higher mortality (9% vs. 3%, p<0.0001), severe (31% vs. 15%, p<0.0001) and cardiac complications (12% vs. 4%, p<0.0001) and intensive care unit stay >5 days (12% vs. 6%, p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The Glasgow Aneurysm Score is a rather good predictor of immediate postoperative mortality and morbidity after elective open repair of AAA.     

Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in patients with chronic renal disease.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the outcome of AAA repair in patients with established renal failure (RF), including patients on dialysis. DESIGN: Retrospective case-control study in a teaching hospital. Methods. All patients with established RF undergoing AAA repair were identified during the last eight years. Data was collected from patient notes on operative difficulty, hospital mortality, survival time and future dialysis requirements. For comparison, 28 consecutive patients undergoing AAA repair without RF were studied prospectively. RESULTS: Thirteen RF patients were identified. Three were receiving Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis (CAPD), three were receiving Haemodialysis (HD) and seven had established RF, but were not receiving dialysis. Compared with the control patients, RF patients had a longer total hospital stay (p=0.03, 95% CI for median stay -24.3 to -4.0 days), more postoperative complications (p<0.01, 95% CI 26.4-73.7%) and had an increased in-hospital mortality (p=0.02, 95% CI 4.6-54.3%). Four of the six survivors who were non-dialysis-dependent required long-term dialysis postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: AAA repair in RF patients is associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. Previously non-dialysis-dependent patients have a high risk of subsequent long-term dialysis.     

Prediction of organ‐specific complications following abdominal aortic aneurysm repair using cardiopulmonary exercise testing

This study aimed at assessing whether measures of aerobic fitness can predict postoperative cardiac and pulmonary complications, 30‐day mortality and length of hospital stay following elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. We prospectively collected cardiopulmonary exercise testing data over two years for 130 patients. Upon multivariate analysis, a decreased anaerobic threshold (OR (95% CI) 0.55 (0.37–0.84); p = 0.005) and open repair (OR (95% CI) 6.99 (1.56–31.48); p = 0.011) were associated with cardiac complications. Similarly, an increased ventilatory equivalent for carbon dioxide (OR (95% CI) 1.18 (1.05–1.33); p = 0.005) and open repair (OR (95% CI) 14.29 (3.24–62.90); p < 0.001) were associated with pulmonary complications. Patients who had an endovascular repair had shorter hospital and critical care lengths of stay (p < 0.001). Measures of fitness were not associated with 30‐day mortality or length of hospital stay. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing variables, therefore, seem to predict different postoperative complications following abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, which adds value to their routine use in risk stratification and optimisation of peri‐operative care.     

Analysis of medical risk factors and outcomes in patients undergoing open versus endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE: The emergence of endovascular repair (ER) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has provided surgeons with a new technique that should ideally improve patient outcomes. To more accurately characterize the advantages of ER versus traditional/open AAA repair (TOR), we compared the preoperative medical risk factors (PMRFs) and perioperative outcomes (PO) of those patients undergoing elective treatment of infrarenal AAA with ER and TOR over a recent 18-month period at our center. METHODS: Through our institutional vascular surgery patient registry, all patients undergoing aortic aneurysm repair of any type between December 1999 and June 2001 were identified. Only those patients undergoing elective infrarenal AAA repair were analyzed. Hospital records were examined for all patients, and PMRF and PO were assessed via Society for Vascular Surgery/International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery reporting guidelines. Student t, chi(2), Fisher exact, or Wilcoxon rank sum tests were applied where appropriate to determine differences among PMRF and PO according to method of aneurysm repair. RESULTS: During the 18-month study period, a total of 199 aortic aneurysms were repaired at our institution. Ninety-nine elective infrarenal AAA repairs made up the study cohort (ER, n = 33; TOR, n = 66). When examined by method of aneurysm repair, no differences existed in demographics or AAA size. Patients undergoing ER had a significantly greater degree of preoperative pulmonary comorbidity than patients undergoing TOR (P <.001). However, no differences existed in terms of American Society of Anesthesiologists classification or cardiac (P =.52), cerebrovascular (P =.44), diabetic (P =.51), hypertensive (P =.90), hyperlipidemia (P =.91) or renal (P =.23) comorbidities between the two groups. Perioperative morbidity and mortality rates were also not significantly different by method of repair. ER was associated with shorter operative time, intensive care unit stay, and overall hospital length of stay (P <.0001). However, subsequent operative procedures related to the AAA repair were performed more frequently after ER (TOR = 1.5% versus ER = 15.2%; P = 0.015). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that ER offers improvements in hospital convalescent and operating room times but no beneficial impact on overall morbidity and mortality rates when similar PMRFs exist, especially when used at medical centers where low morbidity and mortality rates are already established for TOR. Other centers performing ER should undertake such an analysis to assess its impact on their patients.     

Outcome after Simultaneous Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair and Aortocoronary Bypass

Myocardial infarction remains the leading cause of early and late death after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. Myocardial revascularization is staged either before or concomitant with AAA resection, but results are far from uniform. We retrospectively analyzed our experience with patients who underwent concomitant AAA resection and aortocoronary bypass (ACB) to examine the factors affecting early morbidity/mortality and early results. Forty-two patients (all men; mean age, 67.2 years) underwent simultaneous ACB grafting and AAA repair between 1975 and 1998. All were managed postoperatively in the cardiothoracic intensive care unit (mean stay, 6.1 days). The mean total hospital stay was 17.2 days. Two died in the early postoperative period (4.8%): 1 of sustained myocardial failure following a third ACB, and 1 of coagulopathy after concomitant ACB, aortic valve replacement, and AAA. One patient developed a nonfatal MI on postoperative day 3. The incidence of wound and bleeding complications was higher for patients undergoing both ACB and AAA repair than for patients undergoing AAA resection alone. On follow-up (mean, 10 years; range, 7 months to 15 years), only 2 of 10 late deaths were due to cardiovascular causes. We believe that concomitant myocardial revascularization is warranted in select patients requiring elective or urgent AAA resection in order to decrease perioperative risk and improve late survival. Cardiac failure or ischemia during aortic surgery can be prevented by proper perfusion with or without cardiopulmonary bypass. In patients undergoing simultaneous procedures, the increased risk is related to the severity of the vascular and coronary artery disease and not to the combined operations.     

Historic control comparison of outcome for matched groups of patients undergoing endoluminal versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

Purpose: Currently no randomized studies show the relative morbidity and mortality of the open and endoluminal methods of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcome of two matched groups of patients with AAA, one undergoing open repair and the other undergoing endoluminal repair.Methods: Two groups of patients who had undergone repair of AAA by open technique (group 1) or by endoluminal methods (group 2) were compared. A historic control cohort of 27 patients was selected from 56 consecutive patients who underwent open repair of AAA between January 1991 and February 1992. Patients considered unsuitable for the endoluminal method on the basis of computed tomography and aortography were excluded (n = 29). Between May 1992 and November 1994 prospective data were recorded for 62 consecutive patients who underwent endoluminal repair by tube or bifurcated endografts. Twenty-eight patients who had been specifically referred for endoluminal AAA repairs because of preexisting severe medical comorbidities were excluded. Six of the endoluminal cases had failure, requiring conversion to open operation, and were excluded for separate analysis, leaving 28 patients in group 2. Patients in both groups were thus fit and suitable for either open or endoluminal repair and were comparable in relation to age, sex, risk factors, dimensions, and form of AAA.Results: The mean values for operation time, blood loss, intensive care stay, and hospital stay for group 1 and group 2 were 2.6 versus 3.1 hours, 1422 versus 873 ml,* 1.8 versus 0.7 days,* and 12.4 versus 11.1 days, respectively (*p < 0.05). Local/vascular complications occurred in 15% of patients in group 1 compared with 25% in group 2 (p = 0.55), whereas remote/systemic complications occurred in 37% and 29%, respectively (p = 0.3). Five of 28 patients in the endoluminal group had complications requiring early operative repair (n = 3) or late revision (n = 2). When comparison was made on an intention-to-treat basis (with failed procedures included), the incidence of local/vascular complications was significantly greater for endoluminal repair (p = 0.047).Conclusions: The incidence of systemic/remote complications was similar for the two groups in spite of significantly less blood loss and shorter intensive care unit stay with endoluminal repair. The incidence of local/vascular complications had a tendency to be higher for endoluminal compared with standard open method (and was significantly greater if failed procedures were included). In this early experience with prototype devices, patients who were medically suitable for open surgical procedures did not derive benefit from the less invasive endoluminal technique with respect to duration of operation, length of hospital stay, or perioperative morbidity and mortality. On the other hand, because they also did not have worse outcome, a randomized study is now justified in this group. (J VASC SURG 1996;23:201-12.)     

Laparoscopically assisted abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Background: Laparoscopic surgery decreases postoperative pain and length of hospital stay. Whether laparoscopically assisted abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair can be safely and reliably performed is unknown. This prospective study was designed to establish the feasibility of laparoscopically assisted AAA repair and its effects on intraoperative and postoperative variables. Methods: With IRB approval, 10 patients with infrarenal AAA requiring a tube graft underwent laparoscopically assisted AAA repair. The procedure consisted of laparoscopic dissection of the aneurysm neck and iliac vessels. Then, through an 8–11-cm minilaparotomy, a standard endoaneurysmorrhaphy was performed. Data included laparoscopic and total operative times, blood loss, fluid requirements, duration of nasogastric suction (NGT), and lengths of intensive care unit (ICU) and postoperative hospital stays. Results: Laparoscopically assisted AAA was completed in nine of 10 patients. The first patient was converted to a standard incision because the aneurysm neck could not be adequately dissected. Laparoscopic and total operative times were 1.8 ± 0.4 and 4.5 ± 0.7 h, respectively. Mean blood loss was 1 ± 0.6 l. Intraoperative fluid requirement was 6.6 ± 1.3 l. The duration of NGT suction was 1.8 ± 1.0 days. The ICU stay was 2.1 ± 0.8 days and hospital stay was 6.7 ± 2.5 days. There were two minor complications and no deaths. Conclusions: Laparoscopically assisted AAA repair is technically feasible with acceptable blood loss, operative time, morbidity, and mortality. Potential advantages may be early removal of the NGT and shorter ICU and hospital stays. Prospective randomized trials are needed to determine if laparoscopically assisted AAA repair is advantageous.     

Minimal incision aortic surgery.

PURPOSE: In this study we evaluated the clinical and economic impact of minimal incision aortic surgery (MIAS) for treatment of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) and aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). METHOD: Fifty patients with either AAA (34) or AIOD (16), prospectively treated with the MIAS technique, were compared with 50 patients (40 AAA and 10 AIOD) treated in the same time period with long midline incision and extracavitary small bowel retraction. MIAS was also compared with a cohort of 32 patients with AAA treated by means of endoaortic stent-grafts. Outcomes and cost (based on metric mean length of stay) were compared for the open and endoaortic techniques. RESULTS: Patients who experienced no perioperative complications after the MIAS or endovascular repair technique had shorter hospital stays than patients with uncomplicated aortic repairs performed with a traditional long midline abdominal incision (3 days vs 3 days vs. 7.2 days). Hospital stay was also significantly shorter for the less invasive procedures when perioperative complications were included (4.8 days vs. 4.3 days vs 9.3 days). The MIAS and endovascular aortic repair groups had a shorter intensive care unit stay (< or = 1.0 day) and a quicker return to general dietary feeding (2.5 days) than patients treated with standard open repair (1.8 days, 4.7 days). The overall morbidity for the MIAS technique (14%) and endovascular technique (21%) was not significantly different from standard open repair (24%). The mortality rate for the different treatment groups was equivalent (MIAS, 2%; endovascular repair, 3%; standard repair, 2%). The MIAS was more cost-efficient than standard open repair ($12,585 vs $18,445) because of shorter intensive care unit and hospital stay and was more cost-efficient than endoaortic repair ($12,585 vs $32,040) because of reduced, direct intraoperative costs. CONCLUSIONS: MIAS is as safe as standard open or endovascular repair in the treatment of AAA and AIOD. MIAS is more cost-efficient than standard open or endoaortic repair.     

Is preoperative cardiac evaluation for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair necessary?

Purpose: It is reported that 25% to 50% of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) have severe coronary artery disease (CAD) and should undergo an aggressive cardiac workup before AAA repair. In contrast, it has been our policy that patients referred for AAA repairs undergo no cardiac testing before surgery.Methods: This report reviews the last 113 consecutive patients who underwent elective AAA repair by the senior author using this policy. Seventy-four patients (group A) had only an electrocardiogram before surgery. The remaining 39 patients (group B) were referred having already had additional testing that included a thallium stress test (n = 20), echocardiogram (n = 18), multiple gated acquisition (MUGA) scan (n = 3), cardiac catheterization (n = 8), or some combination of these.Results: There was no statistical difference between group A and group B with regard to age, sex, tobacco use or history of coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, stroke (CVA), hypertension, peripheral vascular disease, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Group B more commonly had a history of myocardial infarction (41% vs 19%, p < 0.03) and congestive heart failure (23% vs 7%, p < 0.03). During surgery there was no significant differences in blood loss, transfusion requirements, or operative times. There were no myocardial infarctions in group A and two (5.1%) in group B, which was not significantly different. Other complications, such as CVA, renal failure, pulmonary failure, pneumonia, wound infection, and hemorrhage, were not significantly different between the two groups. Postoperative hospital stay was not significantly different. There were three deaths in the entire series (2.7%), and only one in group B was cardiac-related in a patient with known end-stage cardiac disease and a symptomatic 8 cm AAA.Conclusions: These data indicate that most patients with AAA can safely undergo repair with no cardiac workup and that cardiac workup before AAA repair contributes little information that impacts on treatment or final clinical outcome. We conclude that cardiac testing in preparation for AAA repair is not usually necessary and that intraoperative hemodynamic management may be the most important variable in determining outcome. (J Vasc Surg 1997;25:152-6.)     

Endovascular versus "fast-track'' abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Recent studies have shown that endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has decreased costs, as well as decreased intensive care unit and total hospital length of stays when compared to abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair using a retroperitoneal exposure. The authors hypothesized that the fast-track AAA repair, which combines a retroperitoneal exposure with a patient care pathway that includes a gastric promotility agent and patient-controlled analgesia, would have no differences when compared to EVAR. Records of 58 patients who underwent AAA repair between April 14, 2000, and July 12, 2002, were reviewed retrospectively. Demographic information, length of stay, intraoperative and postoperative complications, mortality, and costs were evaluated. Fifty-eight AAA repairs were performed with the EVAR (n=28) and fast-track (n=30) techniques. The EVAR group was slightly older (72 vs 68 years, p=0.04), had slightly smaller average aneurysm size (5.5 +/-0.13 vs 6.1 +/-0.17 cm, p=0.008), and had more patients designated American Society of Anesthesia class 4 (p<0.0001). Both groups were predominantly male. Otherwise there were no statistically significant differences in risk factors. Patients who underwent fast-track repair tended to have a longer operation (216 +/-7.4 vs 158 +/-6.8 minutes, p<0.0001), with a greater volume of blood (1.8 +/-0.29 vs 0.32 +/-0.24 units, p=0.0005), colloid (565 +/-89 vs 32 +/-22 cc, p<0.0001), and crystalloid transfusions (4,625 +/-252 vs 2,627 +/-170 cc, p<0.0001). There were no statistically significant differences in the number of intraoperative or postoperative complications between the 2 groups. EVAR patients resumed a regular diet earlier (0.21 +/-0.08 vs 1.8 +/-0.11 days, p<0.0001). Intensive care unit stay was shorter for EVAR (0.50 +/-0.10 vs 0.87 +/-0.10 days, p=0.01), but floor (2.1 +/-0.23 vs 2.6 +/-0.21 days, p=0.17), and total hospital lengths of stay (2.8 +/-0.32 vs 3.4 +/-0.18 days, p=0.07) were similar between the 2 groups. Total hospital cost was lower in the fast-track (10,205 dollars +/-736 dollars vs 20,640 dollars +/- 1,206 dollars, p<0.0001) leading to greater overall hospital earnings (6,141 dollars +/- 1,280 dollars vs 107 dollars +/- 1,940 dollars, p=0.01). Fast-track AAA repair is a viable alternative for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Compared to endovascular repair, the fast-track method had increased transfusions of blood and intravenous fluids and increased operating room times, but equivalent lengths of floor and total hospital stay and increased total hospital earnings.     

Abdominal aortic aneurysms in "high-risk" surgical patients: comparison of open and endovascular repair

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the early results of endovascular grafting for high-risk surgical candidates in the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Since the approval of endoluminal grafts for treatment of AAA, endovascular repair of AAA (EVAR) has expanded to include patients originally considered too ill for open AAA repair. However, some concern has been expressed regarding technical failure and the durability of endovascular grafts. METHODS: The University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) Computerized Vascular Registry identified all patients who underwent abdominal aneurysm repair between January 1, 2000, and June 12, 2002. Patients were stratified by type of repair (open AAA vs. EVAR) and were classified as low risk or high risk. Patients with at least one of the following classifications were classified as high risk: age more than 80 years, chronic renal failure (creatinine > 2.0), compromised cardiac function (diminished ventricular function or severe coronary artery disease), poor pulmonary function, reoperative aortic procedure, a "hostile" abdomen, or an emergency operation. Death, systemic complications, and length of stay were tabulated for each group. RESULTS: During this 28-month period, 404 patients underwent AAA repair at UAB. Eighteen patients (4.5%) died within 30 days of their repair or during the same hospitalization. Two hundred seventeen patients (53%) were classified as high risk. Two hundred fifty-nine patients (64%) underwent EVAR repair, and 130 (50%) of these were considered high-risk patients (including four emergency procedures). One hundred forty-five patients (36%) underwent open AAA repair, including 15 emergency operations. All deaths occurred in the high-risk group: 12 (8.3%) died after open AAA repair and 6 (2.3%) died after EVAR repair. Postoperative length of stay was shorter for EVAR repair compared to open AAA. CONCLUSIONS: High-risk and low-risk patients can undergo EVAR repair with a lower rate of short-term systemic complications and a shorter length of stay compared to open AAA. Despite concern regarding the durability of EVAR, high-risk patients should be evaluated for EVAR repair before committing to open AAA repair.     

Outcomes after Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Those ≥80 Years of Age: Recent Veterans Affairs Experience

n = 231) of the patients. A total of 5833 patients underwent repair of nonruptured AAA: mortality was 4.1% (228/5627) in those <80 and 8.25% (17/206) in those ≥80 years old (p < 0.009). Logistic regression analysis indicated age ≥80 was independently associated with higher mortality (odds ratio 1.834:1, 95% bounds 1.117-3.012). Octogenarian status (defined as ≥80 years of age), however, had a less important association with in-hospital death than did surgical complications of the heart or genitourinary tract, postoperative hemorrhage, septicemia, respiratory insufficiency, myocardial infarction (MI), acute renal failure, surgical complications of the central nervous system (CNS), aneurysm rupture, postoperative shock, or disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC), in ascending order of importance. Only 5.9% (n= 25) of the 427 patients undergoing repair of ruptured AAA were ≥80 years old. In those ≥80 undergoing repair of ruptured aneurysms, mortality was 48% which did not differ from the 45% mortality in those <80 (NS). The likelihood that one would be operated for rupture was statistically greater (1.66:1) for those ≥80 years (p < 0.025). Length of stay (LOS) for those ≥80 undergoing AAA repair was longer being 22.3 ± 14.8 days versus 18.3 ± 13.2 days for younger patients (p < 0.001). Mortality and LOS after AAA repair were statistically greater for those ≥80 years of age. Severity of illness, however, was also greater for octogenarians. Patient Management Category (PMC) software defined illness severity was 4.06 ± 1.22 in octogenarians versus 3.84 ± 1.13 for those younger (p < 0.005). Though age ≥80 was independently associated with increased mortality, selected elderly patients could benefit from AAA repair.     

Perioperative outcomes after open and endovascular repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms in the United States during 2001

OBJECTIVE: Small patient numbers, mixed data from clinical trials, and longitudinal series representing institutional learning curves have characterized previous studies of early outcomes after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. We compared the perioperative outcomes of endovascular and open surgical AAA repair in an unselected sample of patients in a single calendar year using a national administrative database. METHODS: The 2001 National Inpatient Sample database was retrospectively reviewed. This database represents 20% of all-payer stratified sample of non-federal US hospitals. Patients older than 49 years were identified by primary diagnostic codes (International Classification of Disease, ninth revision [ICD-9], 441.4, intact, nonruptured AAA) and procedure codes (ICD-9 38.44 for open, 39.71 for endovascular repair). Patient demographic data (age, sex), comorbid conditions (ICD-9 coded), inpatient complications (ICD-9 coded), length of stay, final discharge disposition (home vs institution vs death), and hospital charges were examined with univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: In calendar year 2001, 7172 patients underwent either open (64%) or endovascular (36%) repair of intact, nonruptured AAAs. Despite comparable rates of preoperative comorbid conditions and a greater proportion of octogenarians (23% vs 16%%; P =.0001), morbidity (18% vs 29%; P =.0001) and mortality (1.3% vs 3.8%; P =.0001) were significantly lower for endovascular repair than for open repair. The median length of stay (2 vs 7 days; P =.0001) and the rate of discharge to an institutional facility versus home (6% vs 14%; P =.0001) were also much lower in the endovascular group than in the open repair group. At multivariate analysis, open AAA repair and age older than 80 years were strong independent predictors (P =.0001 for all) for death (open repair: odds ratio [OR], 3.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3-4.9; age: OR, 14.2; 95% CI, 3.5-58.1), complications (open repair: OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.7-2.1; age: OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.5-2.5), and not being discharged to home (open repair: OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 2.9-4.1; age: OR, 12.0; 95% CI, 7.0-20.4). Mean hospital charges were significantly greater (difference, $3337; P =.0009) for endovascular repair than for open repair. Extrapolated to the total number of endovascular AAA repairs performed during the single 2001 calendar year, this resulted in a staggering $50.3 million in additional hospital charges. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular repair of intact AAAs results in a significantly lower number of complications and deaths, shorter hospital stay, and improved likelihood of discharge to home, even in older patients, when compared with open surgical repair. These impressive gains in clinical outcome, however, are achieved at similarly impressive increases in health care costs.     

To compare general, epidural and local anaesthesia for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

OBJECTIVES: to compare general, epidural and local anaesthesia for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: retrospective analysis of 91 consecutive patients (age 43 to 89 years) who underwent EVAR under local (LA, 63 patients), epidural (EDA, 8 patients) and general (GA, 20 patients) anaesthesia. RESULTS: EVAR was successfully achieved in all patients without mortality or neurological, cardiac and respiratory complications. Vasopressive support as well as median fluid balance were significantly lessened in the LA group compared to GA group (p<0.0002). Stay in the Intensive Care Unit was necessary in 17 (27%), four (50%) and 14 (70%) patients, respectively, and median hospital stay was 3, 4.5, and 5.5 days, with a statistically significant difference between LA and GA group (p<0.0005). CONCLUSION: LA is a safe anaesthetic method for the endovascular repair of infrarenal abdominal aneurysm, offering several advantages: simplicity, stable haemodynamics, and reduced consumption of ICU and hospital beds.     

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

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

Identifying Patients With AAA With the Highest Risk Following Endovascular Repair

Introduction: It has been demonstrated that endovascular repair of arterial disease results in reduced perioperative morbidity and mortality compared to open surgical repair. The rates of complications and need for reinterventions, however, have been found to be higher than that in open repair. The purpose of this study was to identify the predictors of endograft complications and mortality in patients undergoing endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair; specifically, our aim was to identify a subset of patients with AAA whose risk of periprocedure mortality was so high that they should not be offered endovascular repair. Methods: We undertook a prospective review of patients with AAA receiving endovascular therapy at a single institution. Collected variables included age, gender, date of procedure, indication for procedure, size of aneurysm (where applicable), type of endograft used, presence of rupture, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, major medical comorbidities, type of anesthesia (general, epidural, or local), length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and length of hospital stay. These factors were correlated with the study outcomes (overall mortality, graft complications, morbidity, and reintervention) using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Results: A total of 199 patients underwent endovascular AAA repair during the study period. The ICU stay, again, was significantly correlated with the primary outcomes (death and graft complications). In addition, length of hospital stay greater than 3 days, also emerged as a statistically significant predictor of graft complications in this subgroup (P = .024). Survival analysis for patients with AAA revealed that age over 85 years and ICU stay were predictive of decreased survival. Statistical analysis for other subgroups of patients (inflammatory AAA or dissection) was not performed due to the small numbers in these subgroups. Conclusions: Patients with AAA greater than 85 years of age are at a greater risk of mortality following endovascular repair. In addition, patients who are expected to require postprocedure ICU admission are also at an increased risk of mortality following endovascular repair.