Endovascular treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms: a shift of the paradigm?

PURPOSE: To compare endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA) to the results with open surgery. METHODS: Between May 2001 and January 2004, 50 patients were diagnosed with rAAA. Fifteen (30%) patients (14 men; median age 73 years, range 58-85) underwent EVAR, while 26 (52%) patients (23 men; median age 75 years, range 60-84) had open surgery. Nine (18%) patients (5 men; median age 86 years, range 77-91) were not operated upon. Circulatory shock was defined as systolic blood pressure<80 mmHg. Mortality was defined as death within 30 days after operation; in cases where hospital stay exceeded 30 days, in-hospital mortality was registered. Five risk factors (age>76 years, loss of consciousness, hemoglobin<90 g/L, creatinine>190 micromol/L, and electrocardiographic ischemia) were analyzed. RESULTS: In the EVAR group, 93% (14/15) of the aneurysms were excluded from the bloodstream; there were 2 (13%) conversions: 1 intraoperatively for stent-graft migration and another owing to dissection prior to hospital discharge. Mortality after open surgery was 46% (12/26) versus 13% (2/15) in the EVAR group (p>0.05). Univariate analysis without considering variables other than mortality resulted in OR 5.4 (95% CI 0.9 to 58; p=0.07). Considering risk factors and shock, multivariate analysis resulted in OR 6.5 (95% CI 0.8 to 96; p=0.08). In the EVAR group, 60% (9/15) had complications; in the group with open surgery, the complication rate was 85% (22/26; p=0.13). CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to treat rAAA with EVAR. Hypotensive patients can, at least initially, be operated under local anesthesia to stabilize blood pressure utilizing a percutaneously inserted occlusion balloon. There was a trend in our study for reduced mortality and morbidity with EVAR, but further studies are required to conclude whether EVAR significantly increases survival and reduces complications.     

Role of the Hardman index in predicting mortality for open and endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.

PURPOSE: To correlate the Hardman prognostic index with perioperative mortality in patients undergoing open and endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA). METHODS: Over a 5-year period, 126 patients (109 men; mean age 74 years, range 51-91) underwent open (n=74) or endovascular (n=52) repair of rAAA in a single unit. Five Hardman factors (age>76 years, history of loss of consciousness, ECG evidence of ischemia, hemoglobin<9.0 g/dL, and serum creatinine>0.19 mmol/L) were assessed, and their association with in-hospital or 30-day mortality was evaluated retrospectively by chi-square or logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: The mortality for open repair was 51.4% (38/74) in comparison to 32.7% (17/52) for the endovascular group (p=0.05). On multivariate analysis, loss of consciousness (p=0.03, OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.1 to 7.5) was the only significant predictor of mortality in both groups. The mortality rates for open repair patients with Hardman scores<2 were 43.5% (20/46) in comparison to 22.9% (8/35) for the endovascular group (p=0.06), whereas mortality rates for patients with scores>or=2 were 64.3% (18/28) and 52.9% (9/17) for the respective groups (p=0.54). CONCLUSION: The Hardman index correlates well with mortality in both the open and endovascular groups. Those with a score<2 have a trend toward better survival following endovascular repair compared to open repair, while this benefit is not obvious in patients with a score>or=2.     

Open surgery (OS) versus endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for hemodynamically stable and unstable ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA)

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is an alternative treatment for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA) in hemodynamically (hd) stable patients. Treatment for patients with hd-unstable rAAA remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of EVAR and open surgery (OS) in hd-stable and hd-unstable rAAA patients using meta-analysis. The first part of this study included 48 articles that reported the treatment outcomes of rAAA managed with EVAR (n = 9610) and OS (n = 93867). The second part, which is the focus of this study, included 5 out of 48 articles, which further reported treatment results in hd-stable (n = 198) and hd-unstable (n = 185) patients. When heterogeneity among the groups was observed, a random-effects model was used to calculate the adjusted odds ratios (OR) or in cases of non-heterogeneity, a fixed-effects model analysis was employed. In the first part of this study, the in-hospital mortality rate was found to be lower in the EVAR group than in the OS group (29.9 vs 40.8 %; OR 0.59; 95 % CI 0.52–0.66; P < 0.01). In the second part of this study, 383 patients from 5 articles were included: 152 patients were treated by EVAR, and 231 were treated by OS. The total mortality was 147/383 (38.4 %), while the mortality of the EVAR group and the OS group was 25.7 % (39/152) and 46.8 % (108/231), respectively. In the hd-stable group, the in-hospital mortality after EVAR was significantly lower than that after OS [18.9 % (18/95) vs 28.2 % (29/103); OR 0.47; 95 % CI 0.22–0.97; P = 0.04]. For the hd-unstable rAAA patients, the in-hospital mortality after EVAR was significantly lower than that after OS [36.8 % (21/57) vs 61.7 % (79/128); OR 0.40; 95 % CI 0.20–0.79; P < 0.01]. This study indicated that compared with OS, EVAR in hd-unstable rAAA patients is associated with improved outcomes. Available publications are currently limited; thus, the best treatment strategy for this subgroup of patients remains unclear. Further clinical studies are needed to provide more detailed data, such as the shock index and long-term results.     

Sexual dysfunction after conventional and endovascular AAA repair: results of the DREAM trial.

PURPOSE: To assess sexual function in the first postoperative year after elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open repair (OR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). METHODS: In the Dutch Randomized Endovascular Aneurysm Management (DREAM) trial, 153 patients (141 men; mean age 71 years, range 53-85) were randomly allocated to EVAR (n=77) or OR (n=76). Sexual functioning was evaluated preoperatively and at 5 times in the first postoperative year (3, 6, 13, 26, and 52 weeks) using a questionnaire derived from the Medical Outcomes Study. The proportions of patients reporting sexual dysfunction for any of 5 aspects (interest, pleasure, engagement, orgasm, and erection) and any increase in the magnitude of dysfunction were compared between EVAR and OR. RESULTS: Preoperatively, the proportion of patients reporting sexual dysfunction in at least 1 aspect was 66% for the OR group and 74% in the EVAR group (p=NS). Surgery had a clear impact on sexual dysfunction. The proportion of patients reporting sexual dysfunction on at least 1 aspect increased to 79% in the OR group and 82% in the EVAR group. The magnitude of sexual dysfunction increased in both groups on all 5 aspects at 3 weeks postoperatively, but this was more pronounced in the OR group (interest: OR p=0.038 vs. EVAR p=0.071; pleasure: OR p=0.009 vs. EVAR p=0.065; engagement: OR p=0.006 vs. EVAR p=0.054; orgasm OR p=0.023 vs. EVAR p=0.112, and erection: OR p=0.046 vs. EVAR p=0.030). At 6 weeks, the OR group still reported a significant increase in 3 aspects (pleasure p=0.031, engagement p=0.010, and orgasm p=0.003), whereas the EVAR group no longer showed a significant difference. From 3 months on, both groups had returned to baseline. CONCLUSIONS: EVAR and open elective AAA repair both have an impact on sexual function in the early postoperative period. After EVAR, recovery to preoperative levels is faster than after open repair, but at 3 months, sexual dysfunction levels are similar in both groups.     

Impact of gender on the outcome of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair using the Zenith stent-graft: midterm results.

PURPOSE: To analyze the 2-year outcomes of female patients after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) with the Zenith AAA Endovascular Graft. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of data from the US Zenith multicenter trial and the Zenith female registry on 40 women (10.9%, study group) and 326 men (89.1%, control group) enrolled. All patients had completed their 2-year follow-up. Primary study endpoints were survival, aneurysm rupture, and conversion rate. Significance was assumed if p<0.05. RESULTS: Overall rates of mortality (12.5% for women versus 13.2% for men, p = 0.94) and aneurysm rupture (2.5% for women versus 0% for men, p = 0.11) were comparable between groups. Conversion to open repair within 2 years was significantly more frequent in women compared to men (7.5% versus 0.6%, p = 0.01). The incidence of endoleaks of any type was equivalent between groups at 2 years (13.3% for women versus 6.9% for men, p = 0.30). No difference was observed in the need for secondary interventions (15% for women versus 13.5% for men, p = 0.81) or aneurysm dilatation >5 mm (10.5% for women versus 2.3% for men, p = 0.10). None of the patients developed device migration >10 mm or required intervention for migration. CONCLUSION: While women underwent conversion to open repair more frequently compared to men at 2 years post EVAR, there was no difference in survival, freedom from aneurysm rupture, or need for secondary interventions between groups. As in men, the Zenith AAA Endovascular Graft provides reliable protection from aneurysm rupture and aneurysm-related death in women in a midterm follow-up.     

腹主动脉瘤开放手术和腔内修复术的短期随访研究

目的:比较腹主动脉瘤(AAA)腔内修复术(EVAR)和开放手术(OR),术后6个月内的疗效。方法:选择同时满足OR和EVAR手术条件的AAA患者共100例,随机分配接受OR或EVAR手术,随访至术后6个月,记录分析两组术中情况、病死率、全身并发症及手术相关并发症。结果:至术后6个月,仅OR组死亡1例,两组病死率差异无统计学意义。EVAR组中位手术时间更短、出血量及输血量更少(P<0.05)。EVAR组患者可以更早出院,但是花费也远高于OR组(P<0.05)。EVAR组围术期全身并发症发生率略低于OR组(16.4%vs.20.5%),但手术相关并发症高于OR组(29.5%vs.12.8%),差异无统计学意义。随访至术后6个月,两组各项并发症情况差异无统计学意义。结论:对于AAA来说,OR与EVAR手术都是安全有效的治疗方法。EVAR手术在围术期显示出微创手术的优势。     

Comparison of the incidences of cardiac arrhythmias, myocardial ischemia, and cardiac events in patients treated with endovascular versus open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

This study examines differences in cardiac arrhythmias, perioperative myocardial ischemia, troponin T release, and cardiovascular events between endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Of 175 patients, 126 underwent open AAA repair and 49 underwent endovascular AAA repair. Continuous 12-lead electrocardiographic monitoring, starting 1 day before surgery and continuing through 2 days after surgery, was used for cardiac arrhythmia and myocardial ischemia detection. Troponin T was measured on postoperative days 1, 3, and 7 and before discharge. Cardiac events (cardiac death or Q-wave myocardial infarction) were noted at 30 days and at follow-up (mean 2.3 years). New-onset atrial fibrillation, nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, sustained ventricular tachycardia, and ventricular fibrillation occurred in 5%, 17%, 2%, and 1% of patients, respectively. Myocardial ischemia, troponin T release, and 30-day and long-term cardiac events occurred in 34%, 29%, 6%, and 10% of patients, respectively. Significantly higher heart rates and less heart rate variability were observed in the open AAA repair group. Cardiac arrhythmias were less prevalent in the endovascular AAA repair group (14% vs 29%, p = 0.04). Endovascular repair was also significantly associated with less myocardial ischemia (odds ratio 0.14, 95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.40, p <0.001) and troponin T release (odds ratio 0.10, 95% confidence interval 0.02 to 0.32, p <0.001) and lower 30-day mortality (zero vs 8.7%, p = 0.03) and 30-day cardiac event rates (zero vs 7.9%, p = 0.04). Long-term mortality and cardiac event rates were not significantly lower in the endovascular AAA repair group. In conclusion, endovascular AAA repair is associated with a lower incidence of perioperative cardiac arrhythmias, myocardial ischemia, troponin T release, cardiac events, and all-cause mortality compared with open AAA repair.     

Resultados a cinco años de la reparación electiva del aneurisma de aorta abdominal infrarrenal en un hospital universitario de Argentina

Objective:

Few data about outcomes of elective infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in Latin America have been published. The objective of the present study is to address this aspect in our population.

Method:

Retrospective cohort, in which patients with infrarenal AAA undergoing elective surgical or endovascular repair from January 2011 to May 2017 at a university hospital in Autonomous City of Buenos Aires were consecutively included. The primary endpoints were perioperative mortality and all-cause mortality during follow-up. Among the secondary endpoints, the requeriment of reinterventions was assessed.

Results:

195 patients were included. Open surgery was performed in 72 patients (36.9%) and endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in 123 (63.1%). Perioperative mortality in the surgery group was 2.8%, while no deaths were recorded in the endovascular group (p = 0.06). The median follow-up was 38 months. No statistically significant difference was found in long-term mortality incidence rate between patients who underwent EVAR and those who underwent open surgery (7% per year vs. 6.7% per year, p = 0.8). The requirement of reinterventions was significantly higher in the endovascular group (9.0% vs. 0%, p = 0.01).

Conclusions:

Survival analyses demonstrated no statistically significant differences in perioperative and long-term mortality for patients who underwent EVAR compared with those who underwent open surgery, while the former had a higher rate of reinterventions. The results observed in our population do not differ from those published in the United State or Europe.     

腔内修复术与药物治疗胸降主动脉穿透性溃疡近远期疗效分析

目的 对比评价腔内修复术(EVAR)与药物治疗（MT）对胸降主动脉穿透性溃疡(PAU)的近、远期疗效。方法 观察2006年3月~2014年3月住院的85例PAU患者，根据治疗方式分为EVAR组（47例）和MT组（38例），EVAR组在强化药物治疗基础上行EVAR治疗，MT组单纯行药物强化治疗，随访观察2组间近期、远期的肢体缺血、截瘫、肾功能衰竭、脑卒中、新发主动脉夹层、死亡等不良事件的发生情况。结果 EVAR组患者47例手术均成功，术中无内漏、支架移位、主动脉破裂死亡及脑卒中等发生。首次入院至30 d随访，2组随访率均为100%，2组无截瘫、脑卒中及死亡事件发生。EVAR组肢体缺血、肾功能衰竭的发生率均略低于MT组，但差异均未达到显著性水平（0 vs. 10%，2% vs. 5%）。MT组新发主动脉夹层发生率显著高于EVAR组（16% vs. 0%，P<0.01）。2组远期随访时间、随访率差异无统计学意义〔（34±22）个月 vs.（32±23）个月，87% vs. 82%〕。远期随访2组间均无截瘫发生，MT组肢体缺血、肾功能衰竭的发生率均略高于EVAR组，但差异均未达到显著水平（16% vs. 2%;13% vs. 5%）。EVAR组总的病死率及主动脉破裂病死率均略低于MT组，但2组间差异均未达到显著水平（5% vs. 13%；2% vs. 6%）。结论 与MT相比，EVAR治疗PUA , 可降低近、远期主动脉夹层的发生率。     

Long-Term Outcomes of Endovascular vs Open Surgical Repair for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

ObjectiveThe aim of this meta-analysis was to investigate whether Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is inferior to open surgical repair in terms of adverse events during late follow up, defined as >8 years after the procedure.BackgroundEVAR is associated with reduced morbidity and mortality compared to open surgery in the early perioperative period. However, it is unknown whether this pattern remains during long-term follow up >8 years.MethodsA meta-analysis was conducted with the use of random effects modeling. Hazard ratios were calculated for mortality at different time intervals, and risk ratios were calculated in cases where the total number of events was available.ResultsThere was no difference in all-cause mortality during follow up of each study (HR: 1.04; 95%CI: 0.93–1.17; I² = 16.0%). Subgroup analyses for all-cause mortality at 4 to 8 years of follow up (HR: 1.13; 95%CI: 0.94–1.35; I² = 0.0%) and all-cause mortality at follow up >8 years (HR: 1.07; 95%CI: 0.89–0.28; I² = 36.6%) also did not show any significant difference between the two approaches. The risks of aneurysm-related mortality and aneurysm rupture were similar during follow-up. However, the cumulative risk for reintervention during follow up was greater in the EVAR group (RR: 2.18; 95%CI: 1.50–3.17; I² = 76.1%) and occurred in 29% vs 15% of patients in the EVAR vs surgery groups respectively.ConclusionsEVAR and open surgical repair of AAA are equally safe and have no difference in all-cause mortality. However, endovascular repair is associated with an increased need for re-intervention. Emerging technology in endovascular devices will likely further improve the outcomes of EVAR.Subject codes: Meta-analysis; aneurysm; atherosclerosis; complications.     

Midterm survival after endovascular versus open repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms.

PURPOSE: To report the midterm survival after endovascular repair (ER) of infrarenal aortic aneurysms and to compare the outcomes to contemporaneous patients treated with open repair (OR). METHODS: Between January 1995 and December 2001, 498 patients were treated for abdominal aortic aneurysm: 289 (52%) underwent OR and 209 (48%) underwent ER at a single center. Preoperative risk factors were graded according to the SVS/AAVS risk stratification. A computerized database was used to record demographic, clinical, and follow-up data. RESULTS: Significant benefits (p<0.0001) were observed in the ER group in terms of mean procedural time (163+/-66 versus 132+/-61 minutes), mean blood loss (1268+/-923 versus 122.5+/-284 mL), and mean hospital length of stay (16.24+/-13.3 versus 9.3+/-11.6 days). The perioperative mortality for OR and ER patients were, respectively, 5.1% and 1.5% (p=0.04). The mean follow-up was 40 months in the OR group (range 0-85) and 19 months in the ER group (range 2-80). Contact was lost with 31 (6%) patients during the study. No overall survival advantage was observed for OR over ER, and comparison of OR and ER according the risk classifications did not yield any significant differences. No patients died of aneurysm rupture, but 7 ER patients had to be converted to open surgery. The cumulative freedoms from reinterventions at 4 years for the OR and ER groups, respectively, were 87% and 63% (p=0.001). Patients treated by OR had better clinical success (p=0.001). Patients in the ER group without iliac artery aneurysm showed a significant improvement (p=0.035) over patients with aneurysmal iliac arteries. CONCLUSIONS: Over the 7 years of this study, ER realized its goal: prevention of aneurysm rupture. Despite a greater number of reinterventions for ER patients, no overall survival difference was observed.     

Endovascular Aortic Repair in Nonagenarian Patients

BackgroundThe increasing proportion of elderly patients being treated for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in the endovascular era is controversial.ObjectivesThis study compared 30-day outcomes of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in nonagenarians (NAs) with non-nonagenarians (NNAs).MethodsThis retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database included EVAR procedures performed from 2011 to 2017. Multivariate logistic regression in the unadjusted cohort, followed by propensity-score matching (PSM), was performed. Primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and 30-day major adverse events.ResultsA total of 12,267 patients were included (365 NAs). Ruptured aneurysms accounted for 6.7% (n = 819): 15.7% (n = 57) in NAs versus 6.5% (n = 762) in NNAs (p < 0.001). Mean aneurysm diameter was 6.5 ± 1.8 cm in NAs versus 5.8 ± 1.7 cm in NNAs (p < 0.001). The unadjusted 30-day mortality was 9.9% in NA versus 2.2% in NNAs (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed age ≥90 years (odds ratio [OR]: 3.36), male sex (OR: 1.78), functional status (OR: 4.22), pre-operative ventilator dependency (OR: 3.80), bleeding disorders (OR: 1.52), dialysis (OR: 2.56), and ruptured aneurysms (OR: 17.21) as independent predictors of mortality. After PSM, no differences in 30-day mortality (intact AAA [iAAA]: 5.3% NA vs. 3% NNA [p = 0.15]; ruptured AAA [rAAA]: 38% NA vs. 28.6% NNA [p = 0.32]) or 30-day major adverse events (iAAA: 7% NA vs. 4.6% NNA [p = 0.22]; rAAA: 28% NA vs. 36.7% NNA [p = 0.35]) were observed.ConclusionsAge was identified as an independent predictor of 30-day mortality after EVAR on multivariate analysis. However, no differences were found after PSM, suggesting that being ≥90 years of age but with similar comorbidities to younger patients is not associated with a higher short-term mortality after EVAR. Age ≥90 years alone should not exclude patients from EVAR, and tailored indications and carefully balanced risk assessment are advised.     

Similar cost for elective open and endovascular AAA repair in a population-based setting.

PURPOSE: To compare cost differences between elective open repair (OR) and endovascular repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm in a population-based setting. METHODS: Clinical data and hospital-related costs (pre-, peri-, and postoperative) were analyzed for 109 consecutive AAA procedures (98 men; mean age 73 years, range 48-95; mean aneurysm diameter 61 mm, range 42-120) performed from 2001 to 2005 (58 OR, 51 EVAR) in our primary catchment area. Data were obtained through case records and hospital accounting systems. Nonparametric bootstrap was used for cost comparison. RESULTS: EVAR patients were older (76 versus 70 years, p<0.001) and had more comorbidities (ASA class 2.6 versus 2.3, p = 0.025). OR patients more often had anatomically complex aneurysms (52% versus 14%, p<0.001). Comparison of data with diagnosis-based reimbursement levels nationally and internationally indicated adequate cost level in the study. No difference was observed in total cost between OR and EVAR (euro29,786 versus euro26,382; p = 0.336). Preoperative cost was lower for OR compared to EVAR (euro661 versus euro1494, p = 0.002). OR patients had higher cost of intensive care [36% (euro8921) of perioperative cost versus 7% (euro1460), p = 0.001], while EVAR had higher implant cost [36% (euro7468) versus 2% (euro448), p<0.001]. Mean follow-up was 2.5 years (range 0.5-5.4). Mean postoperative cost was similar (OR euro4613 versus EVAR euro4403, p = 0.209; 16% and 17% of total cost, respectively). Postoperative cost after OR was high early on, with lower cost thereafter. Postoperative cost after EVAR was more homogeneously distributed, leveling off at euro500 to euro1000 annually over 5 years. CONCLUSION: In a population-based setting, total cost was similar for OR and EVAR. There were, however, important differences in patient characteristics and cost structure.     

A prospective clinical, economic, and quality-of-life analysis comparing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), open repair, and best medical treatment in high-risk patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms suitable for EVAR: the Irish patient trial.

PURPOSE: To report the results of a trial comparing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) to open repair (OR) and best medical therapy (BMT) involving high-risk patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) suitable for EVAR. METHODS: From 2002 to 2007, 1083 patients with aortic aneurysm disease were referred to a tertiary care university hospital. Of these, 162 (119 men; mean age 76 years) were high-risk patients with AAAs anatomically suitable for EVAR. Following comprehensive consultation with the patient, the family, and the primary physician, elective treatment was selected: OR (n=52), EVAR (n=66), or BMT (n=44). Outcomes were compared using Kaplan-Meier survival analyses and a parameter that measured the quality time spent without symptoms of disease or toxicity of treatment (Q-TWIST). RESULTS: Four-year freedom from aneurysm-related death following EVAR (96.7%) was markedly better compared to BMT (66.8%; p=0.002) and was similar to OR (93.9%, p=0.483). Four-year freedom from major adverse clinical events was significantly better with EVAR (78%) compared with BMT (28%; p=0.001) and was equivalent to OR (75%; p=0.519). The 4-year intervention-free survival rate for EVAR (95%) almost matched OR (98%; p=0.410). At 4 years, Q-TWIST was 3.64 years for EVAR patients, 3.60 years for OR, and 2.22 years for BMT. Q-TWIST significantly improved with EVAR compared to OR (p<0.003). In the cost analysis, 52 high-risk patients were treated with OR over the 5-year period (2002-2007) at a total inpatient cost of 1,257,457 euro. The 66 patients treated with EVAR (14 patients more than OR) incurred a lower cost of 1,129,138 euro. Including the cost of follow-up over 4 years, the mean cost per patient was 18,476 euro for EVAR and 24,252 euro for OR, a savings of 5,776 euro per patient treated with EVAR. CONCLUSION: In high-risk patients, EVAR reduces aneurysm-related death compared to BMT. Equated to the gold standard of open repair, EVAR, as a "one-time procedure," substantially reduces operative morbidity, hospital stay, costs, and utilization of intensive care facilities if performed in a high-volume center.     

Influence of pulmonary status and diabetes mellitus on aortic neck dilatation following endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: a EUROSTAR report.

PURPOSE: To elucidate the association of impaired pulmonary status (IPS) and diabetes mellitus (DM) with clinical outcome and the incidences of aortic neck dilatation and type I endoleak after elective endovascular infrarenal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: In 164 European institutions participating in the EUROSTAR registry, 6383 patients (5985 men; mean age 72.4+/-7.6 years) underwent EVAR. Patients were divided into patients without versus with IPS or with/without DM. Clinical assessment and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) were performed at 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months and annually thereafter. Cumulative endpoint analysis comprised death, aortic rupture, type I endoleak, endovascular reintervention, and surgical conversion. RESULTS: Prevalence of IPS was 2733/6383 (43%) and prevalence of DM was 810/6383 (13%). Mean follow-up was 21.1+/-18.4 months. Thirty-day mortality, AAA rupture, and conversion rates did not differ between patients with versus without IPS and between patients with versus without DM. All-cause and AAA-related mortality, respectively, were significantly higher in patients with IPS compared to patients with normal pulmonary status (31.0% versus 19.0%, p<0.0001 and 6.8% versus 3.3%, p = 0.0057) throughout follow-up. In multivariate analysis adjusted for smoking, age, gender, comorbidities, fitness for open repair, co-existing common iliac aneurysm, neck and aneurysm size, arterial angulations, aneurysm classification, endograft oversizing >or=15%, and type of stent-graft, the presence of IPS was not associated with significantly higher rates of aortic neck dilatation (30.6% versus 38.0%, p>0.05) and did not influence cumulative rates of type I endoleak, endovascular reintervention, or conversion to open surgery (p>0.05). Similarly, the presence of DM did not influence the above-mentioned study endpoints. CONCLUSION: In contrast to observations regarding the natural course of AAAs, impaired pulmonary status does not negatively influence aortic neck dilatation, while the presence of diabetes does not protect from these dismal events after EVAR.     

Outcomes following endovascular or open repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm in a Chinese population

To determine whether emergent endovascular repair (eEVAR) can be an alternative for anatomically suitable ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAA) in a Chinese population compared to open aneurysm repair (OAR), 36 patients with RAAA undergoing either OAR or eEVAR in National Taiwan University Hospital from 2005 to 2012 were analyzed retrospectively. Thirty-five (97.2 %) patients were treated. Among them, 20 (57.1 %) were treated by OAR and 15 (42.9 %) by eEVAR. The overall 30-day survival rate was 77.1 %. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality rate (OAR 15.0 % vs. eEVAR 33.3 %, p = 0.201) and midterm mortality rate (OAR 20.0 % vs. eEVAR 46.7 %, p = 0.093) between these two groups. On univariate analysis, free peritoneal rupture (p < 0.001), pre-operative shock (p = 0.001) and female gender (p = 0.016) are related to a higher 30-day mortality rate, while free peritoneal rupture (p = 0.012) and pre-operative shock (p = 0.030) are associated with a higher midterm mortality rate in both repair techniques. On multivariate analysis, free peritoneal rupture was associated with higher 30-day (OR 26.0, 95 % CI 2.2–295.6, p = 0.009) and midterm (OR 13.1, 95 % CI 1.2–37.6, p = 0.032) mortality rates. In patients with RAAA, there is no significant difference in 30-day mortality and midterm mortality between eEVAR and OAR groups in our study. eEVAR could be an alternative therapy for anatomically suitable RAAA in a Chinese population.     

Persistent chronic peri-aortitis ('inflammatory aneurysm') after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: systematic review of the literature

Data on the outcome of aneurysmal chronic peri-aortitis ('inflammatory aneurysm') after open surgical aneurysm repair are few and contradictory. To what extent this inflammatory process is reversed after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is even more unclear. The objective of this review was to study the outcome of peri-aortic fibrosis (PAF) and ureteral obstruction in patients with aneurysmal chronic peri-aortitis treated with open surgery or EVAR. Medical literature was searched for pertinent articles on the outcome of PAF and ureteral obstruction after open surgery or EVAR from 1970 through October 2007. Studies were included if specific follow-up data were available on outcomes of interest. A total of 19 studies were included comprising 478 patients (open surgical, n = 426; EVAR, n = 52). Age, sex and percentage of patients with ureteral obstruction (31% vs 37%) did not differ between groups. Regression of PAF occurred more frequently after open surgery compared to EVAR (86% vs 60%; p < 0.0001). Complete regression of PAF was more frequent after open surgery compared to EVAR (52% vs 14%; p < 0.0001). After excluding patients in whom concurrent ureterolysis was performed, the frequency of persistent ureteral obstruction remained lower in patients treated surgically compared to patients treated with EVAR, albeit not statistically significant (32% vs 56%; p = 0.09). In conclusion, although open surgery is superior to EVAR in achieving regression of chronic peri-aortitis, the frequency of persistent PAF and/or ureteral obstruction is not negligible. Additional medical and/or urological treatment should be considered in selected cases of aneurysmal chronic peri-aortitis.     

Does chronic oral anticoagulation with warfarin affect durability of endovascular aortic aneurysm exclusion in a midterm follow-up?

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effect of oral anticoagulation on durability of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: Retrospective review was conducted of 182 consecutive EVAR patients (169 men; mean age 75.3 years, range 53-89) between 1999 and 2003. Patients on warfarin anticoagulation (WA, n=21; International Normalized Ratio of 2 to 3) were compared against a control group (CG) with no postoperative anticoagulation (n=161). Death, aneurysm rupture, and reintervention were considered primary endpoints; endoleaks, endograft migration, and aneurysm remodeling were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 16.3+/-12.6 months. One-year mortality was 6.6% (9.5% WA versus 6.2% CG); overall mortality was 14.3% (p=0.414). No aneurysm rupture occurred. At 1, 2, and 3 years, respectively, cumulative reinterventions (20%/20%/20% WA versus 12%/15%/20% CG; p=0.633) and endoleak rates (25%/25%/25% WA versus 17%/22%/34% CG; p=0.649) were comparable. In both groups, most completion endoleaks resolved (42.9% WA versus 74.4% CG; p=0.474), but few de novo endoleaks did (0% WA versus 12.8% CG; p=0.538). Anticoagulation did not affect mean time to aneurysm sac shrinkage (1.3+/-0.3 WA versus 1.4+/-0.1 years CG; p=0.769). CONCLUSIONS: After EVAR, anticoagulation appears safe and does not significantly alter mortality, risk for rupture, or the incidence of reintervention. Early endoleaks appear more common in anticoagulated patients, but anticoagulation does not preclude spontaneous endoleak resolution nor does it increase late endoleak rates. Irrespective of the anticoagulation status, early but not late endoleaks usually sealed spontaneously. Observing type II endoleaks appears safe in the absence of aneurysm enlargement.     

Endovascular Repair of a Large Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Using Monitored Anesthesia Care and Local Anesthesia

Over the last decade, there has been a paradigm shift in the treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) from open repair to endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Regardless of the method used during emergent rupture, open verses endovascular repair, the overall mortality remains high. Recent studies have compared patient outcomes using different types of anesthesia during elective EVAR procedures. The data show that during an elective EVAR, monitored anesthesia care (MAC) with local anesthesia is not only just as safe as general anesthesia, but it offers other potential benefits as well. There is limited data in regards to patient outcomes using MAC and local anesthesia during cases of large ruptured aneurysms that are treated with EVAR. This case report discusses the treatment of a patient who presented with a large 13 cm ruptured AAA which was successfully repaired using EVAR with MAC and local anesthesia.     

Influence of infrarenal neck length on outcome of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the influence of the infrarenal neck length on clinical outcome after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). METHODS: Data were analyzed from 3499 patients enrolled in the EUROSTAR registry between January 1999 and April 2005 who underwent EVAR with a Talent or Zenith endograft and had detailed morphological data recorded. The study cohort was divided into 3 groups according to infrarenal neck length: >15 mm (reference group A, n=2822), 11 to 15 mm (group B, n=485), and < or =10 mm (group C, n=192). Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate differences in clinical outcomes among the study groups. RESULTS: After correction for confounders, proximal type I endoleak within 30 days occurred in 10.9% of group C compared to 2.6% of group A (OR 4.46, 95% CI 2.61 to 7.61). Within 48 months of follow-up (median 12 months), the incidence of proximal endoleaks was higher in groups B (9.6%; HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.16 to 3.38) and C (11.3%; HR 2.132, 95% CI 1.17 to 4.60) compared to group A (3.4%). CONCLUSION: Our study indicates that endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms with infrarenal neck length <15 mm is associated with significantly increased risk of short- and midterm proximal endoleaks after EVAR. The greater risk of proximal endoleaks should be weighed against the risks of alternative treatment modalities.