Nationwide Outcomes of Octogenarians Following Open or Endovascular Management After Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

PURPOSE: Octogenarians are known to have less-favorable outcomes following ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair compared with their younger counterparts. Accurate information regarding perioperative outcomes following rAAA-repair is important to evaluate current treatment practice. The aim of this study was to evaluate perioperative outcomes of octogenarians and to identify factors associated with mortality and major complications after open surgical repair (OSR) or endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of a rAAA using nationwide, real-world, contemporary data. METHODS: All patients that underwent EVAR or OSR of an infrarenal or juxtarenal rAAA between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2018, were prospectively registered in the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA) and included in this study. The primary outcome was the comparison of perioperative outcomes of octogenarians versus non-octogenarians, including adjustment for confounders. Secondary outcomes were the identification of factors associated with mortality and major complications in octogenarians. RESULTS: The study included 2879 patients, of which 1146 were treated by EVAR (382 octogenarians, 33%) and 1733 were treated by OSR (410 octogenarians, 24%). Perioperative mortality of octogenarians following EVAR was 37.2% versus 14.8% in non-octogenarians (adjusted OR=2.9, 95% CI=2.8-3.0) and 50.0% versus 29.4% following OSR (adjusted OR=2.2, 95% CI=2.2-2.3). Major complication rates of octogenarians were 55.4% versus 31.8% in non-octogenarians following EVAR (OR=2.7, 95% CI=2.1-3.4), and 68% versus 49% following OSR (OR=2.2, 95% CI=1.8-2.8). Following EVAR, 30.6% of the octogenarians had an uncomplicated perioperative course (UPC) versus 49.5% in non-octogenarians (OR=0.5, 95% CI=0.4-0.6), while following OSR, UPC rates were 20.7% in octogenarians versus 32.6% in non-octogenarians (OR=0.5, 95% CI=0.4-0.7). Cardiac or pulmonary comorbidity and loss of consciousness were associated with mortality and major complications in octogenarians. Interestingly, female octogenarians had lower mortality rates following EVAR than male octogenarians (adjusted OR=0.7, 95% CI=0.6-0.8). CONCLUSION: Based on this nationwide study with real-world registry data, mortality rates of octogenarians following ruptured AAA-repair were high, especially after OSR. However, a substantial proportion of these octogenarians following OSR and EVAR had an uneventful recovery. Known preoperative factors do influence perioperative outcomes and reflect current treatment practice.

Treatment Outcome Trends for Non-Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Nationwide Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: The Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA) initiative was established in 2013 to monitor and improve nationwide outcomes of aortic aneurysm surgery. The objective of this study was to examine whether outcomes of surgery for intact abdominal aortic aneurysms (iAAA) have improved over time. METHODS: Patients who underwent primary repair of an iAAA by standard endovascular (EVAR) or open surgical repair (OSR) between 2014 and 2019 were selected from the DSAA for inclusion. The primary outcome was peri-operative mortality trend per year, stratified by OSR and EVAR. Secondary outcomes were trends per year in major complications, textbook outcome (TbO), and characteristics of treated patients. The trends per year were evaluated and reported in odds ratios per year. RESULTS: In this study, 11 624 patients (74.8%) underwent EVAR and 3 908 patients (25.2%) underwent OSR. For EVAR, after adjustment for confounding factors, there was no improvement in peri-operative mortality (aOR [adjusted odds ratio] 1.06, 95% CI 0.94 - 1.20), while major complications decreased (2014: 10.1%, 2019: 7.0%; aOR 0.91, 95% CI 0.88 - 0.95) and the TbO rate increased (2014: 68.1%, 2019: 80.9%; aOR 1.13, 95% CI 1.10 - 1.16). For OSR, the peri-operative mortality decreased (2014: 6.1%, 2019: 4.6%; aOR 0.89, 95% CI 0.82 - 0.98), as well as major complications (2014: 28.6%, 2019: 23.3%; aOR 0.95, 95% CI 0.91 - 0.99). Furthermore, the proportion of TbO increased (2014: 49.1%, 2019: 58.3%; aOR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01 - 1.10). In both the EVAR and OSR group, the proportion of patients with cardiac comorbidity increased. CONCLUSION: Since the establishment of this nationwide quality improvement initiative (DSAA), all outcomes of iAAA repair following EVAR and OSR have improved, except for peri-operative mortality following EVAR which remained unchanged.

Outcomes in Octogenarians and the Effect of Comorbidities After Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in the Netherlands: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: Age is an independent risk factor for mortality after both elective open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). As a result of an ageing population, and the less invasive nature of EVAR, the number of patients over 80 years (octogenarians) being treated is increasing. The mortality and morbidity following aneurysm surgery are increased for octogenarians. However, the mortality for octogenarians who have either low or high peri-operative risks remains unclear. The aim of this study was to provide peri-operative outcomes of octogenarians vs. non-octogenarians after OSR and EVAR for intact aneurysms, including separate subanalyses for elective and urgent intact repair, based on a nationwide cohort. Furthermore, the influence of comorbidities on peri-operative mortality was examined. METHODS: All patients registered in the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA) undergoing intact AAA repair between 2013 and 2018, were included. Patient characteristics and peri-operative outcomes (peri-operative mortality, and major complications) of octogenarians vs. non-octogenarians for both OSR and EVAR were compared using descriptive statistics. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to examine whether age and the presence of cardiac, pulmonary, or renal comorbidities were associated with mortality. RESULTS: This study included 12 054 EVAR patients (3 015 octogenarians), and 3 815 OSR patients (425 octogenarians). Octogenarians in both the EVAR and OSR treatment groups were more often female and had more comorbidities. In both treatment groups, octogenarians had significantly higher mortality rates following intact repair as well as higher major complication rates. Mortality rates of octogenarians were 1.9% after EVAR and 11.8% after OSR. Age ≥ 80 and presence of cardiac, pulmonary, and renal comorbidities were associated with mortality after EVAR and OSR. CONCLUSION: Because of the high peri-operative mortality rates of octogenarians, awareness of the presence of comorbidities is essential in the decision making process before offering aneurysm repair to this cohort, especially when OSR is considered.

A Composite Measure for Quality of Care in Patients with Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis Using Textbook Outcome.

OBJECTIVE: Composite measures may better objectify hospital performance than individual outcome measures (IOM). Textbook outcome (TO) is an outcome measure achieved for an individual patient when all undesirable outcomes are absent. The aim of this study was to assess TO as an additional outcome measure to evaluate quality of care in symptomatic patients treated by carotid endarterectomy (CEA). METHODS: All symptomatic patients treated by CEA in 2018, registered in the Dutch Audit for Carotid Interventions, were included. TO was defined as a composite of the absence of 30 day mortality, neurological events (any stroke or transient ischaemic attack [TIA]), cranial nerve deficit, haemorrhage, 30 day readmission, prolonged length of stay (LOS; > 5 days) and any other surgical complication. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify covariables associated with achieving TO, which were used for casemix adjustment for hospital comparison. For each hospital, an observed vs. expected number of events ratio (O/E ratio) was calculated and plotted in a funnel plot with 95% control limits. RESULTS: In total, 70.7% of patients had a desired outcome within 30 days after CEA and therefore achieved TO. Prolonged LOS was the most common parameter (85%) and mortality the least common (1.1%) for not achieving TO. Covariates associated with achieving TO were younger age, the absence of pulmonary comorbidity, higher haemoglobin levels, and TIA as index event. In the case mix adjusted funnel plot, the O/E ratios between hospitals ranged between 0.63 and 1.27, with two hospitals revealing a statistically significantly lower rate of TO (with O/E ratios of 0.63 and 0.66). CONCLUSION: In the Netherlands, most patients treated by CEA achieve TO. Variation between hospitals in achieving TO might imply differences in performance. TO may be used as an additive to the pre-existing IOM, especially in surgical care with low baseline risk such as CEA.

Patients with a Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Are Better Informed in Hospitals with an "EVAR-preferred" Strategy: An Instrumental Variable Analysis of the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit.

BACKGROUND: While several observational studies suggested a lower postoperative mortality after minimal invasive endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in patients with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA) compared to conventional open surgical repair (OSR), landmark randomized controlled trials have not been able to prove the superiority of EVAR over OSR. Randomized controlled trials contain a selected, homogeneous population, influencing external validity. Observational studies are biased and adjustment of confounders can be incomplete. Instrumental variable (IV) analysis (pseudorandomization) may help to answer the question if patients with an RAAA have lower postoperative mortality when undergoing EVAR compared to OSR. METHODS: This is an observational study including all patients with an RAAA, registered in the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit between 2013 and 2017. The risk difference (RD) in postoperative mortality (30 days/in-hospital) between patients undergoing EVAR and OSR was estimated, in which adjustment for confounding was performed in 3 ways: linear model adjusted for observed confounders, propensity score model (multivariable logistic regression analysis), and IV analysis (two-stage least square regression), adjusting for observed and unobserved confounders, with the variation in percentage of EVAR per hospital as the IV instrument. RESULTS: 2419 patients with an RAAA (1489 OSR and 930 EVAR) were included. Unadjusted postoperative mortality was 34.9% after OSR and 22.6% after EVAR (RD 12.3%, 95% CI 8.5-16%). The RD adjusted for observed confounders using linear regression analysis and propensity score analysis was, respectively, 12.3% (95% CI 9.6-16.7%) and 13.2% (95%CI 9.3-17.1%) in favor of EVAR. Using IV analysis, adjusting for observed and unobserved confounders, RD was 8.9% (95% CI -1.1-18.9%) in favor of EVAR. CONCLUSIONS: Adjusting for observed confounders, patients with an RAAA undergoing EVAR had a significant better survival than OSR in a consecutive large cohort. Adjustment for unobserved confounders resulted in a clinical relevant RD. An "EVAR preference strategy" in patients with an RAAA could result in lower postoperative mortality.

National Numbers of Secondary Aortic Reinterventions after Primary Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Surgery from the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit.

BACKGROUND: Long-term secondary aortic reinterventions (SARs) can be a sign of (lack of) effectiveness of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery. This study provides insight into the national number of SARs after primary AAA repair by endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) or by open surgical repair in the Netherlands. METHODS: Observational study included all patients undergoing SAR between 2016 and 2017, registered in the compulsory Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA). The DSAA started in 2013, SARs are registered from 2016. Characteristics of SAR and postoperative outcomes (mortality/complications) were analyzed, stratified by urgency of SAR. Data of SARs were merged with data of their preceded primary AAA repair, registered in the DSAA after January 2013. In these patients undergoing SAR, treatment characteristics of the preceded primary AAA repair were additionally described, with focus on differences between stent grafts. RESULTS: Between 2016 and 2017, 691 patients underwent SAR, this concerned 9.3% of all AAA procedures (infrarenal/juxtarenal/suprarenal) in the Netherlands (77% elective/11% acute symptomatic/12% ruptured). Endoleak (60%) was the most frequent indication for SAR. SARs were performed with EVAR in 66%. Postoperative mortalities after SAR were 3.4%, 11%, and 29% in elective, acute symptomatic, and ruptured patients, respectively. In 26% (n = 181) of the patients undergoing SAR their primary AAA repair was performed after January 2013 and data of primary and SAR procedures could be merged. In 93% (n = 136), primary AAA repair was EVAR. Endografts primarily used were nitinol/polyester (62%), nitinol/polytetrafluoroethylene (8%), endovascular sealing (21%), and others (9%), compared with their national market share of 76% (odds ratio [OR], 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.71), 15% (OR, 0.50; CI, 0.29-0.89), 4.9% (OR, 5.04; CI, 3.44-7.38), and 4.1% (OR, 2.81; CI, 1.66-4.74), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In the Netherlands, about one-tenth of the annual AAA procedures concerns an SAR. A quarter of this cohort had an SAR within 1-5 years after their primary AAA repair. Most SARs followed after primary EVAR procedures, in which an overrepresentation of endovascular sealing grafts was seen. Postoperative mortality after SAR is comparable with primary AAA repair.

Variation in Surgical Treatment of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms With Small Aortic Diameters in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate reasons to deviate from aneurysm diameter thresholds, and focus on the difference in how Dutch vascular surgical units (VSUs) perceive their deviation and their actual deviation. BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend surgical treatment for asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) with a diameter of at least 55 mm for men and 50 mm for women. We evaluate reasons to deviate from these guidelines, and focus on the difference in how Dutch vascular surgical units (VSUs) perceive their deviation and their actual deviation. METHODS: All patients undergoing elective AAA repair between 2013 and 2016 registered in the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA) were included. Surgery at diameters of <55 mm for men and <50 mm for women were considered guideline deviations. National deviation and hospital variation in deviation were evaluated over time. Questionnaires were distributed among all Dutch VSUs, inquiring for acceptable reasons for guideline deviation. VSUs were asked to estimate the guideline deviation percentage in their hospital which was then compared with their DSAA percentage. RESULTS: In all, 9039 patients were included. In 15%, we found guideline deviation, varying from 2% to 40% between VSUs. Over time, 21 VSUs were identified with a lower percentage of deviation than the national mean each year and 8 VSUs with a higher percentage. 44/60 VSUs completed the questionnaire. Most commonly reported reasons to deviate were concomitant large iliac diameter (91%) and saccular aneurysm (82%). The majority of the VSUs (77%) estimated their guideline deviation to be <5%. Eleven VSUs (25%) estimated their deviation concordant with their DSAA percentage, but 75% of VSUs underestimated their deviation. CONCLUSIONS: Dutch VSUs regularly deviate from the guidelines regarding aneurysm diameter, with variation between VSUs. Consensus exists amongst VSUs on acceptable reasons for guideline deviations; however, the majority underestimates their actual deviation percentage.

Saccular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Patient Characteristics, Clinical Presentation, Treatment, and Outcomes in the Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this was to analyze differences between saccular-shaped abdominal aortic aneurysms (SaAAAs) and fusiform abdominal aortic aneurysms (FuAAAs) regarding patient characteristics, treatment, and outcome, to advise a threshold for intervention for SaAAAs. BACKGROUND: Based on the assumption that SaAAAs are more prone to rupture, guidelines suggest early elective treatment. However, little is known about the natural history of SaAAAs and the threshold for intervention is not substantiated. METHODS: Observational study including primary repairs of degenerative AAAs in the Netherlands between 2016 and 2018 in which the shape was registered, registered in the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA). Patients were stratified by urgency of surgery; elective versus acute (symptomatic/ruptured). Patient characteristics, treatment, and outcome were compared between SaAAAs and FuAAAs. RESULTS: A total of 7659 primary AAA-patients were included, 6.1% (n = 471) SaAAAs and 93.9% (n = 7188) FuAAAs. There were 5945 elective patients (6.5% SaAAA) and 1714 acute (4.8% SaAAA). Acute SaAAA-patients were more often female (28.9% vs 17.2%, P = 0.007) compared with acute FuAAA-patients. SaAAAs had smaller diameters than FuAAAs, in elective (53.0 mm vs 61 mm, P = 0.000) and acute (68 mm vs 75 mm, P = 0.002) patients, even after adjusting for sex. In addition, 25.2% of acute SaAAA-patients presented with diameters <55 mm and 8.4% <45 mm, versus 8.1% and 0.6% of acute FuAAA-patients (P = 0.000). Postoperative outcomes did not significantly differ between shapes in both elective and acute patients. CONCLUSIONS: SaAAAs become acute at smaller diameters than FuAAAs in DSAA patients. This study therefore supports the current idea that SaAAAs should be electively treated at smaller diameters than FuAAAs. The exact diameter threshold for elective treatment of SaAAAs is difficult to determine, but a diameter of 45 mm seems to be an acceptable threshold.

Factors Associated with Hospital Dependent Delay to Carotid Endarterectomy in the Dutch Audit for Carotid Interventions.

OBJECTIVES: As the risk of a recurrent neurological event in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis requiring carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is highest in the early phase after the first neurological event, guidelines recommend operating on these patients as soon as possible or at least within 14 days of their initial event. However, in real world practice this is often not met. The aim of this study is to identify factors that cause hospital dependent delay to CEA. METHODS: All consecutive patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis undergoing CEA registered in the mandatory Dutch Audit for Carotid Interventions from January 2014 up to and including December 2017 were included in the current analysis. Univariable followed by multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent factors associated with hospital dependent waiting time, defined as time from the first consultation at any hospital to CEA of more than 14 days. RESULTS: A total of 8620 patients were included. The median time to CEA was 11 days (IQR 8-14). Seventy-eight per cent of patients underwent CEA within 14 days of first hospital consultation. Factors associated with a hospital dependent waiting time longer than 14 days were age (OR 0.99 per year, 95% CI 0.98-0.99), any previous CEA (OR 1.67, 95% CI 1.32-2.09), ocular symptoms as index event (OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.15-1.50), and indirect referral (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.34-1.73). Hospital surgical volume was not identified as a factor for delay, except for the delay of indirectly referred patients where high volume hospitals reported the shortest delay. CONCLUSION: This cohort derived from a validated nationwide prospective audit identified younger age, previous CEA, ocular symptoms, and indirect referral as hospital dependent factors for delay. High volume hospitals had a similar hospital dependent waiting time to middle and low volume hospitals. However, high volume hospitals had more indirect referrals, implying that their logistics are more efficiently organised.

Treatment and survival of locally recurrent rectal cancer: A cross-sectional population study 15 years after the Dutch TME trial.

INTRODUCTION: Optimized treatment of primary rectal cancer might have influenced treatment characteristics and outcome of locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC). Subgroup analysis of the Dutch TME trial showed that preoperative radiotherapy (PRT) for the primary tumour was an independent poor prognostic factor after diagnosis of LRRC. This cross-sectional population study aimed to evaluate treatment and overall survival (OS) of LRRC patients, stratified for prior preoperative radiotherapy (PRT) and intention of treatment of LRRC. METHODS: All patients developing LRRC were selected from a collaborative Snapshot study on 2095 surgically treated rectal cancer patients from 71 Dutch hospitals in the year 2011. Cox proportional hazard analysis was performed to determine predictors for OS. RESULTS: A total of 107 LRRC patients (5.1%) were included, of whom 88 (82%) underwent PRT for their primary tumour. LRRC was treated with initial curative intent in 31 patients (29%), with eventual resection in 20 patients (19%). Median OS was 22 and 8 months after curative and palliative intent treatment, respectively (p < 0.001). Initial CRM positivity and palliative intent treatment were associated with worse OS after LRRC, while prior PRT was not. CONCLUSIONS: This cross-sectional study revealed that rectal cancer patients, who underwent curative resection in the Netherlands in 2011 and subsequently developed local recurrence, were amenable for again curative intent treatment in 29%, with a corresponding median survival of 22 months. Prior PRT was not significantly associated with survival after diagnosis of LRRC.

The Dutch Audit of Carotid Interventions: Transparency in Quality of Carotid Endarterectomy in Symptomatic Patients in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: The Dutch Audit for Carotid Interventions (DACI) registers all patients undergoing interventions for carotid artery stenosis in the Netherlands. This study describes the design of the DACI and results of patients with a symptomatic stenosis undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA). It aimed to evaluate variation between hospitals in process of care and (adjusted) outcomes, as well as predictors of major stroke/death after CEA. METHODS: All patients with a symptomatic stenosis, who underwent CEA and were registered in the DACI between 2014 and 2016 were included in this cohort. Descriptive analyses of patient characteristics, process of care, and outcomes were performed. Casemix adjusted hospital procedural outcomes as (30 day/in hospital) mortality, stroke/death, and major stroke/death, were compared with the national mean. A multivariable logistic regression model (backward elimination at p > 0.10) was used to identify predictors of major stroke/death. RESULTS: A total of 6459 patients, registered by 52 hospitals, were included. The majority (4,832, 75%) were treated <2 weeks after their first hospital consultation, varying from 40% to 93% between hospitals. Mortality, stroke/death, and major stroke/death were, respectively, 1.1%, 3.6%, and 1.8%. Adjusted major stroke/death rates for hospital comparison varied between 0 and 6.5%. Nine hospitals performed significantly better, none performed significantly worse. Predictors of major stroke/death were sex, age, pulmonary disease, presenting neurological symptoms, and peri-operative shunt. CONCLUSION: CEA in The Netherlands is associated with an overall low mortality and (major) stroke/death rate. Whereas the indicator time to intervention varied between hospitals, mortality and (major) stroke/death were not significantly distinctive enough to identify worse practices and therefore were unsuitable for hospital comparison in the Dutch setting. Additionally, predictors of major stroke/death at population level could be identified.

Failure to Rescue - a Closer Look at Mortality Rates Has No Added Value for Hospital Comparisons but Is Useful for Team Quality Assessment in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Surgery in The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: Failure to rescue (FTR) is a composite quality indicator, defined as the proportion of deceased patients following major complications. The aims of this study were to compare FTR with mortality for hospital comparisons in abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery in The Netherlands and investigate hospital volume and associated factors. METHODS: Patients prospectively registered between 2013 and 2015 in the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA) were analysed. FTR was analysed for AAA patients and subgroups elective (EAAA) and acute (AAAA; symptomatic or ruptured) aneurysms. Variables and hospital volume were analysed by uni- and multivariable regression analysis. Adjusted hospital comparisons for mortality, major complications, and FTR were presented in funnel plots. Isomortality lines were constructed when presenting FTR and major complication rates. RESULTS: A total of 9258 patients were analysed in 61 hospitals: 7149 EAAA patients (77.2%) and 2109 AAAA patients (22.8%). There were 2785 (30.1%) patients with complications (unadjusted range 5-65% per hospital): 2161 (77.6%) with major and 624 (28.4%) patients with minor complications. Overall mortality was 6.6% (adjusted range 0-16% per hospital) and FTR was 28.4% (n = 613) (adjusted range 0-60% per hospital). Glasgow Coma Scale, age, pulse, creatinine, electrocardiography, and operative setting were independently associated with FTR. Hospital volume was not associated with FTR. In AAAA patients hospital volume was significantly associated with a lower adjusted major complication and mortality rate (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.49-0.78; and 0.64, 95% CI 0.48-0.87). Four hospitals had a significant lower adjusted FTR with different major complication rates on different isomortality lines. CONCLUSIONS: There was more variation in FTR than in mortality between hospitals. FTR identified the same best performing hospitals as for mortality and therefore was of limited additional value in measuring quality of care for AAA surgery. FTR can be used for internal quality improvement with major complications in funnel plots and diagrams with isomortality lines.

Textbook Outcome: A Composite Measure for Quality of Elective Aneurysm Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate a new composite quality measurement, which comprises a desirable outcome for elective aneurysm surgery, called "Textbook Outcome" (TO). BACKGROUND: Single-quality indicators in vascular surgery are often not distinctive and insufficiently reflect the quality of care. METHODS: All patients undergoing elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, registered in the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit between 2014 and 2015 were included. TO was defined as the percentage of patients who had abdominal aortic aneurysm-repair without intraoperative complications, postoperative surgical complications, reinterventions, prolonged hospital stay [endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) ≤4 d, open surgical repair (OSR) ≤10 d], readmissions, and postoperative mortality (≤30 d after surgery/at discharge). Case-mix adjusted TO rates were used to compare hospitals and to compare individual hospital results for different procedures. RESULTS: Five thousand one hundred seventy patients were included, of whom 4039 were treated with EVAR and 1131 with OSR. TO was achieved in 71% of EVAR and 53% of OSR. Important obstacles for achieving TO were a prolonged hospital stay, postoperative complications, and readmissions. Adjusted TO rates varied from 38% to 89% (EVAR) and from 0% to 97% (OSR) between individual hospitals. Hospitals with a high TO for OSR also had a high TO for EVAR; however, a high TO for EVAR did not implicate a high TO for OSR. CONCLUSIONS: TO generates additional information to evaluate the overall quality of the care of elective aneurysm surgery, which subsequently can be used by hospitals to improve the quality of their care.

Clinical presentation, management, follow-up, and outcomes of isolated celiac and superior mesenteric artery dissections.

OBJECTIVE: Isolated visceral artery dissections are rare entities with no current consensus guidelines for treatment and follow-up. This study aims to evaluate the presentation, management, outcomes, and follow-up practices for patients with isolated visceral artery dissections and to compare those with and without symptoms. METHODS: In this retrospective analysis, we identified all patients with isolated celiac artery and/or isolated superior mesenteric artery dissections at a single institution between September 2006 and December 2014. Patients with concomitant aortic dissections were excluded. Cases were stratified by symptom status. Presentation, anatomic findings, treatment, outcomes, and follow-up imaging were then compared between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. RESULTS: We identified 25 patients including 15 with symptoms and 10 without. There were no differences in patient comorbidities; however, symptomatic patients more frequently presented with thrombus (n = 10; 67% vs n = 1; 10%; P = .01) and inflammation (n = 8; 53% vs n = 1; 10%; P = .04), and trended toward increased stenosis (n = 12; 80% vs n = 4; 40%; P = .09) compared with asymptomatic patients. All asymptomatic patients were treated with observation alone with vessel diameter enlargement noted in 33% (n = 2) of patients on follow-up imaging. Among symptomatic patients, standard treatment included a short course of anticoagulation (mean, 4.5 months) with lifelong antiplatelet therapy. Three patients underwent operative intervention for persistent or worsening symptoms, two during the index admission and one 10 months after presentation for chronic abdominal pain. Approximately 70% (n = 17) of patients in each group had follow-up imaging (computed tomography angiography: n = 14; 56%; magnetic resonance angiography: n = 4; 16%; ultrasound: n = 13; 52%). Among patients treated nonoperatively, no patients complained of symptoms at follow-up, and 50% of those with inflammation on initial imaging had resolution. Twenty-five percent (n = 4) of patients had an increase in vessel size; however, all vessels remained less than 2 cm in maximal diameter. There were no ruptures or related deaths in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with visceral artery dissection, no ruptures occurred but diameter enlargement was documented. This disease progression suggests that routine surveillance may be appropriate; however, transitioning early to ultrasound imaging should be considered to decrease radiation, contrast, and associated costs.

Spontaneous aortoenteric fistula involving the sigmoid: A case report and review of literature.

INTRODUCTION: Primary aortoenteric fistula (PAEF) is a pathological communication between the aorta and any portion of the gastrointestinal tract. The pathology is very rare and easily overlooked during the diagnostic process. PRESENTATION OF CASE: We report the exceptional case of an 86-year-old man with episodes of abdominal pain and rectal bleeding of unknown cause over a period of 1,5 months due to a PAEF to the sigmoid. A sigmoidectomy was performed and a rifampicin-soaked aortic graft was placed. The patient had an uneventful post-operative recovery. The duration of symptoms, the anatomic location of the fistula and the outcome after surgery makes this case unique. DISCUSSION: With an incidence of 0.04-0.07% in all patients with aortic aneurysms a PAEF is very rare. Only 2% of PAEF's involves the sigmoid. The most common cause is an atherosclerotic aortic aneurysm. Patients with PAEF can present with a triad of symptoms including gastrointestinal bleeding, abdominal pain and a pulsating mass. A contrast-enhanced computer-tomography scan (CTa) is the most accurate tool to demonstrate a PAEF. Without a strong clinical suspicion, diagnosing a PAEF is hard and frequently delayed. The overall PAEF-related mortality is high (61-100%) and decreases after surgery (30-40%). CONCLUSION: A primary aortoenteric fistula involving the sigmoid is very rare. Clinical presentation can vary, diagnosis can be difficult and surgical options may differ. Even with low suspicion of PAEF, we recommend performing a CTa. With a high overall mortality of more than 60% due to exsanguinating, surgical treatment is always indicated.

Percutaneous versus femoral cutdown access for endovascular aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Prior studies suggest that percutaneous access for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (pEVAR) offers significant operative and postoperative benefits compared with femoral cutdown (cEVAR). National data on this topic, however, are limited. We compared patient selection and outcomes for elective pEVAR and cEVAR. METHODS: We identified all patients undergoing either pEVAR (bilateral percutaneous access, whether successful or not) or cEVAR (at least one planned groin cutdown) for abdominal aortic aneurysms from January 2011 to December 2013 in the Targeted Vascular data set from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Emergent cases, ruptures, cases with an iliac conduit, and cases with a preoperative wound infection were excluded. Groups were compared by χ(2) test or t-test or the Mann-Whitney test where appropriate. RESULTS: We identified 4112 patients undergoing elective EVAR, 3004 cEVAR patients (73%) and 1108 pEVAR patients (27%). Of all EVAR patients, 26% had bilateral percutaneous access; 1.0% had attempted percutaneous access converted to cutdown (4% of pEVARs); and the remainder had a planned cutdown, 63.9% bilateral and 9.1% unilateral. There were no significant differences in age, gender, aneurysm diameter, or prior open abdominal surgery. Patients undergoing cEVAR were less likely to have congestive heart failure (1.5% vs 2.4%; P = .04) but more likely to undergo any concomitant procedure during surgery (32% vs 26%; P < .01) than patients undergoing pEVAR. Postoperatively, pEVAR patients had shorter operative time (mean, 135 vs 152 minutes; P < .01), shorter length of stay (median, 1 day vs 2 days; P < .01), and fewer wound complications (2.1% vs 1.0%; P = .02). On multivariable analysis, the only predictor of percutaneous access failure was performance of any concomitant procedure (odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-4.0; P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: Currently, one in four patients treated at Targeted Vascular National Surgical Quality Improvement Program centers are getting pEVAR, which is associated with a high success rate, shorter operation time, shorter length of stay, and fewer wound complications compared with cEVAR.