Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in octogenarians: myth or reality?

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

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.     

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.     

Improved survival after introduction of an emergency endovascular therapy protocol for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND: The study was conducted to demonstrate improved survival (30-day mortality) after the introduction of an emergency endovascular therapy protocol for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA). Numerous authors have successfully demonstrated reduced mortality in patients with rAAA using endovascular techniques. Comparison of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with open repair for rAAA may be misleading, however, because EVAR cannot be performed on all patients, and selection bias may explain the superior performance of any given surgical or endovascular strategy. We developed a model to predict mortality in patients before the introduction of EVAR (preprotocol population), applied this model to predict 30-day mortality among prospective patients (postprotocol population), and compared observed vs expected results. METHODS: We assessed 126 patients with rAAA. Primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Potential confounding variables were age, sex, presurgical lowest recorded systolic blood pressure (SBP), and glomerular filtration rate (GFR). A logistic regression model incorporating significant confounders was used to evaluate changes in 30-day mortality for all patients with rAAA after introduction of the EVAR protocol. Separate logistic regressions were done to compare 30-day mortality for preprotocol vs patients receiving EVAR and preprotocol vs patients receiving postprotocol open repair. Cumulative sum (CUSUM) analysis was used to assess shifts in the performance of the rAAA program over time. RESULTS: Significant confounders were SBP, absence of SBP, and GFR. Logistic regression found evidence of lower mortality after the protocol was introduced, 17.9% vs 30.0% (odds ratio [OR], 0.385; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.141 to 0.981; P = .046). Comparison of all open repairs (preprotocol and postprotocol) and EVAR demonstrated decreased risk for EVAR of 5.0% vs 28.3% (OR, 0.109; 95% CI, 0.013 to 0.906; P = .0084). Unstable patients (SBP 相似文献   

Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Retrospective Assessment of Open Versus Endovascular Repair

Aortic stent graft repair has recently been applied as an alternative therapy for infrarenal ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs). We retrospectively assessed outcome in a continuous series at a single institution (an academic tertiary referral center) of patients with infrarenal rAAAs treated by either open or endovascular repair. Between October 1999 and July 2004, 24 patients were treated at the University of Alabama Hospital for infrarenal rAAA. They were treated by either open procedure (n = 15) or endovascular stent graft repair (n = 9). Outcome parameters included mortality, morbidity, procedure time, blood loss, and length of stay. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) was performed whenever the anatomy was deemed suitable and experienced personnel were available. Age (mean 70.8 years for EVAR vs. 72.2 years for open), gender (men 71% vs. women 75%), AAA size (mean 6.7 vs. 6.4 cm), early mortality (22% vs. 26%), and major morbidity (56% vs. 53%) were similar in both groups. Blood loss difference between the two groups was statistically significant (p = 0.0001). Our series supports the feasibility and short-term viability of EVAR for infrarenal rAAA when anatomy is suitable and patient and facility conditions are favorable. Presented at the Fifteenth Annual Winter Meeting of the Peripheral Vascular Surgery Society, Steamboat Springs, CO, January 28-30, 2005.     

Early and mid-term results of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms in the endovascular era in a community hospital

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular repair (EVAR) has been increasingly used for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs), especially in major academic centers. The goal of this article is to report our results with an EVAR-first approach for rAAA which we adopted in 2001 in our community hospital. METHODS: All consecutive patients who underwent attempted repair for rAAA between February 2001 and July 2006 were analyzed. Only patients with computed tomographic or visual verification of extraluminal blood were included. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients (30 men; mean age, 76.4 +/- 7.2 years; range, 57-89 years) presented with rAAA. Thirty patients underwent attempted EVAR for rAAA, constituting 4.1% of all EVAR cases (n = 738), and 10 patients had attempted open repair. Twenty-one (53%) were transferred from another institution. Computed tomography was performed in 97.5%. On arrival to the emergency department, 43%% were hypotensive (systolic blood pressure <80 mm Hg). Transfemoral balloon occlusion was used in 12 cases (30%; 10 in the EVAR group and 2 in the open group). The length of operation was 128 +/- 35 minutes (range, 77-210 minutes) in EVAR cases. EVAR was completed in 93.3% (iliac anatomy and proximal endoleak caused open conversion in two cases). Out of the 10 open treated cases, 1 was converted to EVAR and survived. The grafts used for EVAR were AneuRx (n = 21), Zenith (n = 5), and Ancure (n = 4), and 97% were bifurcated. Five patients (16.6%) in the EVAR group died within 30 days (four required balloon occlusion). The mean length of stay was 9.1 +/- 6.2 days (range, 4-30 days) in survivors of EVAR. In the EVAR-treated group, two patients died (7 and 9 months; unrelated), and six of the surviving patients (23%) required secondary procedures (five femorofemoral bypasses for limb occlusions and one proximal cuff for a type I endoleak that caused repeat rupture) during a mean follow-up of 13.8 +/- 10.4 months (range, 3-39 months). The mortality rate was 40% (4/10) in patients who underwent open procedures during this period, with an overall mortality rate of 22.5% for all ruptures treated. The difference in 30-day mortality in the EVAR and open groups did not reach statistical significance (17% vs 40%; P = .19). In the entire cohort, hypotension (systolic blood pressure <80 mm Hg) on arrival and loss of consciousness were associated with 30-day mortality. Balloon occlusion was correlated with mortality in the EVAR-treated group (44% vs 4%; P = .019). The multivariate analysis using logistic regression showed that hypotension (odds ratio [OR], 7.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-42.0; P = .025), loss of consciousness (OR, 37.5; 95% CI, 3.4-40.8; P = .003), and the need for balloon occlusion (OR, 5.2; 95% CI, 1.8-25.5; P = .042) were correlated with higher perioperative mortality, whereas age greater than 76 years, coronary artery disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, diabetes, renal insufficiency, and type of procedure did not. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that EVAR is feasible with favorable outcomes in patients presenting with rAAA in a busy community hospital. There is a high secondary intervention rate, which can potentially be decreased by ensuring good iliac limb anatomy at the end of the procedure and by a closer follow-up.     

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.     

Acute renal failure after endovascular vs open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is an increasingly used alternative to open surgical repair of unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). The effect of EVAR on postprocedure acute renal failure has not been determined. We hypothesized that EVAR would be associated with a lower risk of acute renal failure and acute renal failure requiring hemodialysis. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of the 2002 Nationwide Inpatient Sample, the largest all-payer inpatient care database in the United States, reflecting discharges from a representative sample of United States hospitals. We identified 6614 discharges with a primary diagnosis of unruptured AAA and a primary procedure code for open AAA repair or EVAR. We excluded 56 patients with end-stage renal disease and 42 patients who underwent concomitant aortorenal bypass. We compared EVAR vs open repair in this cohort. The main outcome measures were acute renal failure and acute renal failure requiring dialysis. RESULTS: A total of 6516 patient discharges met the inclusion criteria for the study, and postprocedure acute renal failure developed in 439 (6.7%). EVAR was associated with lower odds of acute renal failure (adjusted odds ratio, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.33 to 0.53) and acute renal failure requiring dialysis (adjusted odds ratio, 0.30, 95% confidence interval, 0.15 to 0.63). Results were similar when EVAR and open AAA repair were compared within quintiles of the propensity score for the receipt of EVAR. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with open AAA repair, EVAR is associated with a lower risk of postprocedure acute renal failure.     

National audit of the recent utilization of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in Canada: 2003 to 2004

OBJECTIVES: Worldwide, increasing proportions of aortic aneurysms are repaired electively via the endovascular route. The purpose of this study was to report the recent utilization of endovascular repair in Canada by reviewing a national administrative database. METHODS: The Canadian Institute for Health Information database (a collection of all acute care hospitalizations) was reviewed to identify patients who received nonemergent repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) between April 1, 2003 and March 31, 2004. During this 1-year period, differentiation between endovascular (EVAR) and open repair was possible using ICD-10-CA procedural codes in eight of ten provinces. Case volumes, patient age, length of hospitalization, and mortality were stratified by method of repair, province, and size and teaching status of hospitals. RESULTS: In this 1-year period, 1996 patients in eight provinces (representing 72% of Canada's population) underwent open repair (n = 1818, 91.1%) or EVAR (n = 178, 8.9%) of a nonruptured AAA. National utilization rates were 8.4 and 0.8 per 100,000 population for open repair and EVAR. These rates were more constant for EVAR (0 to 1.3) then for open repair (4 to 18.3) when analyzed on a provincial basis. Mean patient age did not differ between EVAR and open repair (73.7 vs 71.9 years, P = 0.4) while mean length of stay (5.8 vs 11.9 days, P = 0.03) and in-hospital mortality (0.6% vs 4.6%, P = .025) were significantly lower for EVAR than for open repair. Most EVAR (96%) and more than half of open repairs (56%) were performed in academic teaching centers. CONCLUSIONS: Although EVAR results in significant reductions in length of hospitalization and early mortality, it continues to be underutilized in Canada compared with other national reports involving administrative databases.     

Emergency treatment of acute symptomatic or ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Outcome of a prospective intent-to-treat by EVAR protocol.

OBJECTIVE: Outcome of treatment of patients with ruptured or symptomatic non-ruptured aneurysm (rAAA and snrAAA), preferentially treated by emergency endovascular repair was assessed. The outcome was compared with a historical group of patients treated by open repair. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two groups of patients presenting with acute symptomatic AAA were compared. Group I (study group) consisted of 40 consecutive prospectively enrolled patients from May 2001 until June 2002, in whom emergency endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (e-EVAR) was the preferential management. Short or wide neck or profound hypovolemic shock were exclusion criteria for e-EVAR. Group II (control group) consisted of 28 patients, retrospectively analysed, all treated by conventional surgical repair between January 1999 and May 2001. In group I, 26 patients had rAAA and in group II 22 patients. The other patients had snrAAA. RESULTS: In group I, 14 patients were treated by open repair. Unsuitable anatomy or profound hypovolemia was the cause of open repair in eight patients, while logistic reasons were the reasons for use of open repair in six patients (off-protocol use of open surgery). Thus, in this prospective series the feasibility of EVAR was 80% (32/40). Patient characteristics, proportion rAAA or hemodynamically unstable patients were comparable in group I and II. Volume of blood loss and need for fluid transfusion were significantly less in group I compared to group II. The perioperative mortality in group I was significantly less than in group II (20% vs. 43%, respectively, p = 0.04). If patients with rAAA were considered the mortality was 31% in group I and 50% in group II, which difference did not reach the level of statistical significance. CONCLUSION: e-EVAR was a feasible treatment in the majority of patients with rAAA and snrAAA. Blood loss and the requirements of fluid transfusion were significantly decreased. Most importantly in this institutional series significantly lower first-month mortality was observed in the group with preferential e-EVAR compared to a control group. A multi-center study assessing the outcome of preferential use of e-EVAR in patients with acute symptomatic AAA is required.     

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

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

Reduction in ruptured aortic aneurysms is not due to increases in endovascular repairs

We sought to determine if the shift from open abdominal aortic repair to endovascular methods has affected the incidence of rupture of abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA). The Nationwide Inpatient Samples 2001 to 2007 was used. The incidence of rAAA and myocardial infarction (MI) as well as the number and type of aneurysm repairs were tabulated. There were no significant changes in the number of diagnosed (56,991 to 51,122; P = 0.26) and repaired (45,828 to 43,900; P = 0.79) abdominal aortic aneurysms between 2001 and 2007. Open abdominal aortic repair decreased from 31,989 to 13,876 (P < 0.001) whereas the number of endovascular aneurysm repairs increased from 13,839 to 30,025 (P < 0.001). In the same time, rAAA decreased from 7,749 to 5,267 (-32%, P < 0.001). The reduction of rAAA was greatest (-35.5%) in patients 65 to 84 years of age and less in patients 85 years and older (-15%). The number of MI decreased from 773,871 to 624,936 (P = 0.005). The decrease in rAAA was significantly correlated with decreases in MI (r = 0.97, P = 0.0003). Although endovascular aneurysm repair increased, the overall application of abdominal aortic aneurysms repair did not change and does not account for the reduction in rAAA. It is more likely that environmental or other risk factor modifications also predisposing to decreases in MI account for the reduction in rAAA.     

Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: endovascular repair is feasible in 40% of patients.

INTRODUCTION: Open repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) still has a high mortality. Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) may be the way to improve survival rates. However, it is not clear how many patients with rAAA will be suitable for acute EVAR. METHODS: Between October 2000 and April 2002 all patients with acute symptomatic or ruptured AAA were assessed for EVAR on an intention-to-treat basis with emergency computed tomographic angiography (CTA). Patient and logistic characteristics were analysed. We used two commercially available aorto uni-iliac devices with a maximum proximal diameter of 28 and 34 mm. RESULTS: Five out of 26 patients were excluded for CTA and EVAR because of severe and persistent hypotension (3 pts) or logistic reasons (2 pts, both eligible). Twelve patients were found not eligible for EVAR due to unsuitable infrarenal aortic neck length (3 pts), neck diameter (1 pt) or a combination of both (8 pts). The remaining six patients were treated with EVAR. After 6 months no graft failure or aneurysm related deaths were recorded in the EVAR group. CONCLUSION: A total of 28% of patients with symptomatic or ruptured AAA was treated with EVAR. A potential 42% of patients could have been suitable for EVAR, if the correct devices had been in stock and all patients had been properly assessed.     

The impact of an interventional vascular specialty team on institutional endovascular aneurysm repair outcomes

BACKGROUND: Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a technically demanding, resource-intensive procedure associated with a significant learning curve. In July 2002, the Department of Defense allocated nearly $5,000,000 for "Advances in Medical Practice" (AMP) and EVAR within the six major military medical centers in the United States Army. We sought to determine the impact of several institutional changes associated with the use of these funds. METHODS: We performed a single-institution, retrospective comparison of our early EVAR outcomes in physiologically similar patients before and after the use of AMP capital and the acquisition of a trained and equipped endovascular operative team. Morbidity, mortality, and operative variables were the main outcomes. Mean follow-up interval was 17.6 months. RESULTS: As of November 2004, a total of 114 conventional open and endovascular AAA repairs were performed at our institution since our first EVAR in May 2000. Ten of 51 (20%) total AAA patients were treated with EVAR by a general vascular surgical team before the addition of an endovascular specialty team to the service in July 2002. An additional 28 of 63 (44%) patients have been treated with EVAR since that time for a total of 38 repairs. During the first year evaluated, 20% of aneurysms were repaired with EVAR versus 83% during the most recent year. Devices from four different manufacturers were used during the study interval. Patients treated by the endovascular team had significantly less mean estimated blood loss (EBL), packed red blood cells (PRBCs) transfused, intravenous (IV) contrast used, and shorter operative times. Morbidity, mortality, endoleaks, and other variables were similar. In linear regression analysis adjusting for complex, time-consuming repairs that required adjunctive procedures outside the realm of normal EVAR, endovascular team EVAR was independently associated with decreased mean operative time, EBL, PRBCs transfused, and IV contrast used. CONCLUSIONS: At a major military medical center, EVAR has become the preferred technique for the repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. EVAR by a dedicated endovascular surgical team favorably impacts several important operative variables and may improve overall outcomes. Some of these operative variables may be device specific.     

Emergency endovascular treatment of acute symptomatic or ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: a single-center experience

The purpose of this study is to report our early experience with endovascular treatment of patients with symptomatic non-ruptured (sAAA) or ruptured (rAAA) abdominal aortic aneurysms. Between September 2005 and September 2008, all patients with a diagnosis of sAAA or rAAA were evaluated for endovascular suitability. We did not consider hemodynamic instability to be a contraindication for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Patients whose aneurysm anatomy was not suitable for EVAR received open repair (OR). A total of 46 patients with sAAA or rAAA underwent emergency EVAR: in particular, 18/46 patients were treated for sAAA and 28/46 for rAAA. Successful stent-graft deployment was achieved in 44 patients (96%); we had two open surgical conversions. The 30-day mortality rate was 19.5%. Nine patients died during the first 30 postoperative days: four patients died within 24 hours because of severe hypovolemic shock, two died of respiratory failure, one died as a result of bowel ischemia and two because of myocardial infarction after hospital discharge. Complete follow-up data were available for 35 patients (median 185 days; range 30-730 days). In conclusion, endovascular treatment is feasible and the early experience is promising. The capability of offering EVAR and OR for sAAA and rAAA according to our experience suggests that EVAR and OR should be regarded as complementary techniques to improve outcome of patients with acute AAA.     

Elective endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in octogenarians

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

Ruptured AAA: open surgical management

Ruptured abdominal aorta aneurysm (rAAA) is the 13th leading cause of death in the United States. Despite many advances in the field of vascular surgery, the improvement in mortality rates of rAAA have been very modest. Although endovascular repair has surpassed open repair for elective AAA repair in the United States, open rAAA repair remains the most common therapy for this devastating vascular emergency. In this article, we discuss open surgical management for rAAA. We also describe a fast-track algorithm we have developed at the University of Massachusetts where open and endovascular repairs play equally important roles in management of rAAA.     

Therapie des Bauchaortenaneurysmas

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

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.     

Common iliac artery aneurysm: expansion rate and results of open surgical and endovascular repair

OBJECTIVES: To assess expansion rate of common iliac artery aneurysms (CIAAs) and define outcomes after open repair (OR) and endovascular repair (EVAR). METHODS: Clinical data of 438 patients with 715 CIAAs treated between 1986 and 2005 were retrospectively reviewed. Size, presentations, treatments, and outcomes were recorded. Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank tests and chi2 test were used for analysis. RESULTS: Interventions for 715 CIAAs (median, 4 cm; range, 2-13 cm) were done in 512 men (94%) and 26 women (6%); 152 (35%) had unilateral and 286 (65%) had bilateral CIAAs. Group 1 comprised 377 patients (633 CIAAs) with current or previously repaired abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Group 2 comprised 15 patients (24 CIAAs) with associated internal iliac artery aneurysm (IIAA). Group 3 comprised 46 patients (58 isolated CIAAs). Median expansion rate of 104 CIAAs with at least two imaging studies was 0.29 cm/y; hypertension predicted faster expansion (0.32 vs 0.14 cm/y, P = .01). A total of 175 patients (29%) were symptomatic. The CIAA ruptured in 22 patients (5%, median, 6 cm; range, 3.8-8.5 cm), and the associated AAA ruptured in 20 (4%). Six (27%) ilioiliac or iliocaval fistulas developed. Repairs were elective in 396 patients (90%) and emergencies in 42 (10%). OR was performed in 394 patients (90%) and EVAR in 44 (10%). The groups had similar 30-day mortality: 1% for elective, 27% for emergency repairs (P < .001); 4% after OR (elective, 1%; emergency, 26%), and 0% after EVAR. No deaths occurred after OR of arteriovenous fistula. Complications were more frequent and hospitalization was longer after OR than EVAR (P < .05). Mean follow-up was 3.7 years (range, 1 month-17.5 years). The groups had similar 5-year primary (95%) and secondary patency rates (99.6%). At 3 years, secondary patency was 99.6% for OR and 100% for EVAR (P = .66); freedom from reintervention was similar after OR and EVAR (83% vs 69%, P = .17), as were survival rates (76% vs 77%, P = .70). CONCLUSIONS: The expansion rate of CIAAs is 0.29 cm/y, and hypertension predicts faster expansion. Because no rupture of a CIAA <3.8 cm was observed, elective repair of asymptomatic patients with CIAA >or=3.5 cm seems justified. Although buttock claudication after EVAR remains a concern, results at 3 years support EVAR as a first-line treatment for most anatomically suitable patients who require CIAA repair. Patients with compressive symptoms or those with AVF should preferentially be treated with OR.