Assessment of fitness for open repair in patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) was originally designed as a treatment modality for patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) deemed unfit for open repair. However, the definition of "unfit for open repair" is largely subjective and heterogenous. The purpose of this study was to compare patients deemed unfit for open repair who underwent EVAR to a matched cohort who underwent open repair for infrarenal AAAs. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative of the Society for Vascular Surgery was queried for patients who underwent EVAR and open infrarenal AAA repair from 2003 to 2022. Patients that underwent EVAR were included if they were deemed unfit for open repair by the operating surgeon. EVAR patients deemed unfit because of a hostile abdomen were excluded. Patients in both the open and EVAR datasets were excluded if their repair was deemed non-elective or if they had prior aortic surgery. EVAR patients were matched to a cohort of open patients. The primary outcome for this study was 1-year mortality. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality, major adverse cardiac events, pulmonary complications, non-home discharge, reinterventions, and 5-year survival. RESULTS: A total of 5310 EVAR patients were identified who were deemed unfit for open repair. Of those, 3028 EVAR patients (57.0%) were able to be matched 1:1 to a cohort of open patients. Open patients had higher rates of major adverse cardiac events (20.2% vs 4.4%; P < .001), pulmonary complications (12.8% vs 1.6%; P < .001), non-home discharges (28.5% vs 7.9%; P < .001), and 30-day mortality (4.5% vs 1.4%; P < .001). There were no differences in early survival, but open repair had better middle and late survival compared with EVAR over the course of 5 years. A total of 74 EVAR patients (2.4%) had reinterventions during the study period. EVAR patients that required interventions had higher 1-year (40.5% vs 7.3%; P < .001) and 5-year mortality (43.2% vs 14.1%; P < .001) compared with those that did not require reinterventions. EVAR patients who had reinterventions had higher 1-year (40.5% vs 6.3%; P < .001) and 5-year (43.2% vs 20.3%; P = .006) mortality compared with their matched open cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing EVAR for AAAs who are deemed unfit for open repair have better perioperative morbidity and mortality compared with open repair. However, patients who had an open repair had better middle and late survival over the course of 5 years. The categorization of unfitness for open surgery may be inaccurate and re-evaluation of this terminology/concept should be undertaken.

Racial and sex disparities in inpatient outcomes of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a medical emergency that requires immediate surgical intervention. The aim of this analysis was to identify the sex- and race-specific disparities that exist in outcomes of patients hospitalized with this condition in the United States using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to identify targets for improvement and support of specific patient populations. METHODS: In this descriptive, retrospective study, we analyzed the patients admitted with a primary diagnosis of ruptured AAA between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2020, using the NIS database. We compared demographics, comorbidities, and in-hospital outcomes in AAA patients, and compared these results between different racial groups and sexes. RESULTS: A total of 22,395 patients with ruptured AAA were included for analysis. Of these, 16,125 patients (72.0%) were male, and 6270 were female (28.0%). The majority of patients (18,655 [83.3%]) identified as Caucasian, with the remaining patients identifying as African American (1555 [6.9%]), Hispanic (1095 [4.9%]), Asian or Pacific Islander (470 [2.1%]), or Native American (80 [0.5%]). Females had a higher risk of mortality than males (OR, 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.45-1.96; P < .001) and were less likely to undergo endovascular aortic repair (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61-0.81; P < .001) or fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55-0.91; P = .007). Relative to Caucasian race, patients who identified as African American had a lower risk of inpatient mortality (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.37-0.68; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study of the NIS database from 2016 to 2020, females were less likely to undergo endovascular intervention and more likely to die during their initial hospitalization. African American patients had lower rates in-hospital mortality than Caucasian patients, despite a higher burden of comorbidities. Future studies are needed to elucidate the potential factors affecting racial and sex disparities in ruptured AAA outcomes, including screening practices, rupture risk stratification, and more personalized guidelines for both elective and emergent intervention.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on early mortality after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in females in urgent and elective settings.

OBJECTIVE: Females represent a group of patients with higher mortality after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), endovascular (EVAR), or open surgical (OSR), repair. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the 30-day mortality after AAA repair in females, comparing both EVAR and OSR, in elective and urgent settings. METHODS: The protocol of the review was registered to the PROSPERO database (CRD42021242686). A search of the English literature was conducted, using PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases, from inception to March 5, 2021, using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines (PRISMA). Only studies reporting on 30-day mortality of AAA repair, in urgent and elective settings, comparing EVAR and OSR, in the female population were eligible. Patients were stratified according to the need for elective or urgent repair. Symptomatic and ruptured cases were included into the urgent group. Individual studies were assessed for risk of bias using the (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions) ROBINS-I tool. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach was used to evaluate the quality of evidence. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality after AAA repair in the female population, comparing EVAR and OSR. The outcomes were summarized as odds ratio, along with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), through a paired meta-analysis. RESULTS: Eight studies reported data on 30-day mortality following AAA repair. A total of 56,982 females (22,995 EVAR vs 33,987 OSR) were included. A significantly reduced total 30-day mortality rate was recorded among females that underwent EVAR compared with OSR (odds ratio [OR], 0.25; 95% CI, 0.23-0.27; P < .001; Ι2 = 86%). In addition, a reduced 30-day mortality was found in females that underwent elective EVAR compared with OSR (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.33-0.41; P < .001; Ι2 = 48%). Despite the fact that OSR was more frequently offered in the urgent setting (OR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.19-0.23; P < .001; Ι2 = 84%), EVAR was associated with a reduced 30-day mortality (OR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.40-0.57; P < .001; Ι2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: In females, EVAR is associated with lower 30-day mortality in both elective and urgent AAA repair, although it appears as less likely to be offered in the setting of urgent AAA repair.

Compensated Patient Injuries in the Treatment of Abdominal Aortic and Iliac Artery Aneurysms in Finland: A Nationwide Patient Insurance Registry Study.

OBJECTIVES: Patient injury claims data and insurance records provide detailed information on patient injuries. This study aimed to identify the errors and adverse events that led to patient injuries in vascular surgery for the treatments of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) and iliac artery aneurysms (IAA) in Finland. The study also assessed the severity and preventability of the injuries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis of Finnish Patient Insurance Centre's insurance charts of compensated patient injuries in the treatment of AAA and IAA. Records of all compensated patient injury claims involving AAA and IAA between 2004 and 2017 inclusive were reviewed. Contributing factors to injury were identified and classified. The injuries were assessed for their preventability by using the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist correctly. The degree of harm was graded by Clavien-Dindo classification. RESULTS: Twenty-six patient injury incidents were identified in the treatment of 23 patients. Typical injuries involved delays in diagnosis or treatment, errors in surgical technique or injuries to adjacent anatomic organs. Three (13.0%) patients died due to patient injury. Two deaths were caused by delays in diagnosis of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA) and the third death was due to missed diagnosis of post-operative myocardial infarction. Retained foreign material caused injuries to two (8.7%) patients. One (4.3%) patient had a severe postoperative infection. Three (13.0%) patients experienced an injury to an adjacent organ. One patient had a bilateral and another a unilateral above-the-knee amputation due to patient injury. Three injuries were considered preventable. Most harms were grade IIIb Clavien-Dindo classification in which injured patients required a surgical intervention under general anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: Compensated patient injuries involving the treatment of AAA and IAA are rare, but are often serious. Injuries were identified during all stages of care. Most injuries involved open surgical procedures.

Outcomes and Predictors of Mortality in a Belgian Population of Patients Admitted with Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm and Treated by Open Repair in the Contemporary Era.

BACKGROUND: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture is a serious condition that results in extremely high mortality rates. Some improvements in outcome have been reported during the last 2 decades. The objective of the present study was to determine the overall and operative (by open repair) mortality related to ruptured AAA in the contemporary era and to identify preoperative, intraoperative, and early postoperative parameters associated with poor outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of all consecutive patients admitted to our single institution with a diagnosis of ruptured AAA between 2004 and 2013. A total of 103 parameters, including demographic characteristics, medical history, clinical and biological parameters, cardiovascular risk factors, emergency level, diagnostic modalities, time from symptoms to diagnosis and treatment, type of operative procedure and postoperative complications, were analyzed. The primary endpoint considered in this study was the cumulative incidence rate of mortality. The secondary endpoint was the identification, by logistic regression methods, of risk factors for overall mortality as well as for operative, and postoperative mortality. RESULTS: Within our study period, 104 patients were admitted for a ruptured AAA. The majority of patients (84.6%) were male, and the AAA was known in 34.6% of the patients. Rupture occurred for a maximal diameter lower than 55 mm in 25% of the female population, compared to 5.7% of the male population (P = 0.030). The proportions of admitted patients who died before (preoperative mortality), during (intraoperative mortality) or after (postoperative hospital mortality) surgery was 17.3%, 16.3%, and 18.3%, respectively, yielding a cumulative in-hospital mortality of 51.9%. In the multivariate analysis, age ≥ 80 (P = 0.001), myocardial ischemia on the admission ECG (P = 0.046), and management by the physician response unit (P = 0.002) were the only preoperative parameters associated with a higher risk of hospital mortality. Four risk factors were found to be associated with a higher risk of postoperative mortality in the multivariate analysis, and all patients presenting with 3 or more of these risk factors (n = 5) died. CONCLUSIONS: The overall mortality of ruptured AAA in a contemporary cohort of patients who underwent open repair remains high and does not seem to have decreased during recent decades. Ruptures occur at smaller diameters in women than in men, supporting a lower threshold for intervention in women with known AAA. We developed risk scores to predict the mortality of patients with rAAA at different times of their hospital course. The validity of these scores should be assessed in prospective clinical studies.

How Does Female Sex Affect Complex Endovascular Aortic Repair? A Single Centre Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: There is growing evidence of a female patient disadvantage in complex endovascular aortic repair using fenestrated and branched endografts (FB-EVAR) primarily related to peri-procedural events including ischaemic and access vessel complications. This study aimed to determine the impact of sex differences on treatment patterns, and in hospital outcomes in a single centre cohort. METHODS: This was a retrospective cross sectional single centre cohort study of all consecutive FB-EVAR procedures provided to patients with asymptomatic pararenal and thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) between 1 January 2010 and 28 February 2021. Adjusted multivariable logistic regression models were developed using backward (Wald) elimination of variables to determine the independent impact of female sex on short term outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 445 patients (24.3% females, median age 73.0 years, IQR 66, 78) were included. Female patients had a smaller aneurysm diameter, less frequent coronary artery disease (29.6% vs. 44.8%, p = .007) and history of myocardial infarction (2.8% vs. 15.4%, p < .001) when compared with males. Females were more frequently treated for TAAA than males (49.1% vs. 25.2%, p < .001). The median length of post-procedural hospital stay was 10 days in females and 9 in males. In adjusted analyses, female sex was independently associated with higher mortality (odds ratio [OR] 10.135, 95% CI 2.264 - 45.369), post-procedural complications (OR 2.500, 95% CI 1.329 - 4.702), spinal cord ischaemia (OR 4.488, 95% CI 1.610 - 12.509), sepsis (OR 4.940, 95% CI 1.379 - 17.702), and acute respiratory insufficiency (OR 3.283, 95% CI 1.015 - 10.622) after pararenal aortic aneurysm repair during the hospital stay. CONCLUSION: In this analysis of consecutively treated patients, female sex was associated with increased in hospital mortality, peri-procedural complications, and spinal cord ischaemia after elective complex endovascular repair of pararenal aortic aneurysm, while no differences were revealed in the TAAA subgroup. These results suggest that sex related patient selection and peri-procedural management should be studied in future research.

Not all risk scores are created equal: A comparison of risk scores for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in administrative data and quality improvement registries.

OBJECTIVE: Accurate and contemporary prognostic risk prediction is essential to inform clinical decision-making surrounding abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) care. Therefore, we validated and compared three different in-hospital mortality risk scores in one administrative and two quality improvement registries. METHODS: We included patients who had undergone elective AAA repair from 2012 to 2015 in the National Inpatient Sample (NIS), Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI; excluding the New England region), and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) datasets to validate three risk scores: Medicare, the Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE), and Glasgow Aneurysm Score (GAS). The receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) of all risk scores was calculated, and their discrimination was compared within a dataset using the Delong test and between datasets using a Z test. We constructed graphic calibration curves for the Medicare and VSGNE risk scores and compared the calibration using an integrated calibration index, which indicates the weighted average of the absolute difference between the calibration curve and the diagonal line of perfect calibration. RESULTS: We identified a total of 25,461 NIS, 18,588 VQI, and 8051 NSQIP patients who had undergone elective open or endovascular AAA repair. Overall, the Medicare risk score was more likely to overestimate mortality in the quality improvement registries and the VSGNE risk score underestimated mortality in all the databases. After endovascular AAA repair, the Medicare risk score had a higher AUC in the NIS than in the GAS (P < .001) but not compared with the VSGNE risk score (P = .54). The VSGNE risk score was associated with a significantly higher receiver operating characteristic AUC compared with the Medicare (P < .001) and GAS (P < .001) risk scores in the VQI registry. Also, the VSGNE risk score showed improved calibration compared with the Medicare risk score across all three databases (P < .001 for all). After open repair, the Medicare risk score showed improved calibration compared with the VSGNE risk score in the NIS (P < .001). However, in the VQI registry, the VSGNE risk score compared with the Medicare risk score had significantly better discrimination (P = .008) and calibration (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the VSGNE risk score performed best in the quality improvement registries but underestimated mortality. However, the Medicare risk score demonstrated better calibration in the administrative dataset after open repair. Although the VSGNE risk score appeared to perform better in the quality improvement registries, its overly optimistic mortality estimates and its reliance on detailed anatomic and clinical variables reduces its broader applicability to other databases.

Modelling the impact of changes to abdominal aortic aneurysm screening and treatment services in England during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The National Health Service (NHS) abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening programme (NAAASP) in England screens 65-year-old men. The programme monitors those with an aneurysm, and early intervention for large aneurysms reduces ruptures and AAA-related mortality. AAA screening services have been disrupted following COVID-19 but it is not known how this may impact AAA-related mortality, or where efforts should be focussed as services resume. METHODS: We repurposed a previously validated discrete event simulation model to investigate the impact of COVID-19-related service disruption on key outcomes. This model was used to explore the impact of delayed invitation and reduced attendance in men invited to screening. Additionally, we investigated the impact of temporarily suspending scans, increasing the threshold for elective surgery to 7cm and increasing drop-out in the AAA cohort under surveillance, using data from NAAASP to inform the population. FINDINGS: Delaying invitation to primary screening up to two years had little impact on key outcomes whereas a 10% reduction in attendance could lead to a 2% lifetime increase in AAA-related deaths. In surveillance patients, a 1-year suspension of surveillance or increase in the elective threshold resulted in a 0.4% increase in excess AAA-related deaths (8% in those 5-5.4cm at the start). Longer suspensions or a doubling of drop-out from surveillance would have a pronounced impact on outcomes. INTERPRETATION: Efforts should be directed towards encouraging men to attend AAA screening service appointments post-COVID-19. Those with AAAs on surveillance should be prioritised as the screening programme resumes, as changes to these services beyond one year are likely to have a larger impact on surgical burden and AAA-related mortality.

Outcomes after EVAR in females are similar to males.

INTRODUCTION: Women are less likely to develop infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm; however, when they do, it is almost always associated with challenging anatomy, more rapid aneurysmal growth rate and earlier rupture. Women generally have poorer outcomes following open aneurysm repair; and in this respect, the present study aims to evaluate if it is so after endovascular repair. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of our database was performed for patients underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) between January 2013-March 2020. 249 elective EVAR patients were evaluated. Patients were categorized according to gender and 26 patients (10.4%) were female. Demographics and pre-peri-postoperative findings were compared. Propensity score matching (ratio 1:1) was performed to reduce selection bias. RESULTS: In the overall unmatched cohort, female population had more diabetes mellitus (p = 0.016) and hypertension (p = 0.005). However, coronary artery disease (p = 0.005) and coronary artery bypass grafting (p = 0.006) were more in male gender. Non-IFU implantation was higher in female group (38.5% vs. 11.5%, p = 0.025). After propensity matching, even though it was not statistically significant, early mortality for female gender was higher when compared to male gender (7.7% and 0%, respectively, p = 0.490). In the follow-up period, no difference in all-cause mortality, secondary interventions or complications have been observed between the genders. CONCLUSION: Challenging anatomy and subsequently treated patients outside IFU may be the reasons for higher morbidity and mortality in women. However, despite these factors female and male patients revealed equivalent early and late results.

Differences in Comorbidities Between Women and Men Treated with Elective Repair for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair is performed to prevent rupture. For reasons as yet unknown, the 30-day mortality risk after elective AAA repair is higher in women than in men. We hypothesised that this higher risk might be related to differences in comorbidity. METHODS: Systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42019133314) according to PRISMA guidelines. A search in the EMBASE/MEDLINE/CENTRAL databases identified 1870 studies that included patients who underwent elective AAA repair (final search February 17th, 2021). Ultimately, 28 studies were included and all reported comorbidities were categorised into 17 comorbidity groups. Additionally, 15 groups of clearly defined comorbidities were used for sensitivity analysis. For both groups, meta-analyses of each comorbidity were performed to estimate the difference in pooled prevalence between women and men with a random effects model. RESULTS: When analysing data of all reported comorbidities (17 groups), smoking [risk difference (RD) 11%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4-18], diabetes (RD 3%, 95% CI 2-4), ischaemic heart disease (RD 12%, 95% CI 8-16), arrhythmia (RD 3%, 95% CI 0.4-5), liver disease (RD 0.1%, 95% CI 0.01-0.2), and cancer (RD 3%, 95% CI 2-4)) were less prevalent in women, whereas, hypertension (RD 4%, 95% CI 3-6) and pulmonary disease (RD 4%, 95% CI 3-5) were more prevalent in women. At the time of surgery women were significantly older than men (74.9 years versus 72.4; mean difference 2.4 years (95% CI 2.1-2.7)). In the sensitivity analysis of 15 comorbidity groups, the same comorbidities remained significantly different between women and men, except smoking and arrhythmia. Women had a higher mortality risk than men (RD 1%, 95% CI 1-2). CONCLUSIONS: Although women undergoing elective AAA repair have fewer baseline comorbidities than men, their 30-day mortality risk is higher. In-depth studies on the cause of death in women after elective AAA repair are needed to explain this discrepancy in mortality.

A Review of UK-based National and International Scientific Meeting Published Abstracts in Response to the Draft NICE Aortic Aneurysm Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) draft clinical guidelines (CG) (2018) regarding aortic aneurysm repair were disputed internationally. We aim to appraise the academic response to the draft CG in terms of quantity and scientific quality by reviewing published conference abstracts from three major national and international, UK meetings. METHODS: Abstracts related to aortic practice from The Vascular Societies Annual Scientific Meeting, British Society for Endovascular Therapy (BSET) & Charing Cross (CX) meetings from 2019 were reviewed for methodology, sample size, data collection period, scientific quality and conclusions that supported or conflicted the draft guideline. RESULTS: A total of 549 abstracts were identified from VSGBI, BSET and CX abstract books of which, 226 (41.2%) were related to aortic practices. Of these, 115 (50.9%) were related to EVAR. Twenty-two of these abstracts (19.1%) were identified as having findings relevant to the draft guidelines. Eighteen (15.7%) were identified as findings that potentially conflict the draft CG and 4 (3.5%) that could support the initial recommendations. Six abstracts (5.2%) made direct reference to or challenged the draft CG. The median data collection period was 4 years. The median sample size was 102 patients. In general, scientific quality was poor, with 82% of selected abstracts were graded at level 2b. CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated a concerted response to the draft NICE clinical guidelines relating to the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms at three large scientific meetings. As a result of which and other factors, significant changes were made to the finalized NG156. There is still paucity in evidence regarding the long-term safety and cost-effectiveness of EVAR.

Late outcomes after endovascular and open repair of large abdominal aortic aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: The risk of aortic abdominal aneurysm (AAA) rupture increases with an increasing aneurysm diameter. However, the effect of the AAA diameter on late outcomes after aneurysm repair is unclear. Therefore, we assessed the association of a large AAA diameter with late outcomes for patients undergoing open and endovascular AAA repair. METHODS: We identified all patients who had undergone elective open or endovascular infrarenal aneurysm repair from 2003 to 2016 in the Vascular Quality Initiative linked to Medicare claims for long-term outcomes. A large AAA diameter was defined as a diameter >65 mm. We assessed the 5-year reintervention, rupture, mortality, and follow-up rates. We constructed propensity scores and used inverse probability-weighted Kaplan-Meier estimations and Cox proportional hazard models to identify independent associations between large AAA repair and our outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 21,119 aneurysm repairs identified, 15.2% were for large AAAs. Of the 21,119 repairs, 19,017 were endovascular and 2102 were open. The large AAA cohort was less likely to have undergone endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR; 84.9% vs 91%; P < .001), more likely to be older (median age, 76 vs 75 years; P < .001), and were less likely to be women (16.2% vs 21.7%; P < .001). After EVAR, patients with large AAAs had had lower adjusted 5-year freedom from reintervention (73.9% vs 84.6%; P < .001), freedom from rupture (88.5% vs 93.6%; P < .001), survival (58.0% vs 66.4%; P < .001), and freedom from loss to follow-up (77.7% vs 83.3%; P < .001) compared with patients with smaller AAAs. However, after open repair, the adjusted 5-year freedom from reintervention (95.8% vs 93.3%; P = .11), freedom from rupture (97.4% vs 97.8%; P = .32), survival (70.4% vs 74.0%; P = .13), and loss to follow-up (60.5% vs 62.8%; P = .86) were similar to the results for patients with smaller AAAs. For patients with large AAAs, the adjusted 5-year survival was lower after EVAR than that after open repair (55.3% vs 63.7%) but not after smaller AAA repair (67.3% vs 70.6%). CONCLUSIONS: The 5-year adjusted reintervention, ruptures, mortality, and loss to follow-up rates for patients who had undergone large AAA EVAR were higher than those for patients who had undergone small AAA EVAR and large AAA open repair. Therefore, for patients with large AAAs who are medically fit, open repair should be strongly considered. Furthermore, these findings highlight the necessity for rigorous long-term follow-up after EVAR.

The Content of Pre-habilitative Interventions for Patients Undergoing Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms and Their Effect on Post-Operative Outcomes: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Patients requiring abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair are at risk of post-operative complications due to poor pre-operative state. Pre-habilitation describes the enhancement of functional capacity and tolerance to an upcoming physiological stressor, intended to reduce those complications. The ability to provide such an intervention (physical, pharmacological, nutritional, or psychosocial) between diagnosis and surgery is a growing interest, but its role in AAA repair is unclear. This paper aimed to systematically review existing literature to better describe the effect of pre-habilitative interventions on post-operative outcomes of patients undergoing AAA repair. DATA SOURCES: EMBASE and Medline were searched from inception to October 2020. Retrieved papers, systematic reviews, and trial registries were citation tracked. REVIEW METHODS: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing post-operative outcomes for adult patients undergoing a period of pre-habilitation prior to AAA repair (open or endovascular) were eligible for inclusion. Two authors screened titles for inclusion, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. Primary outcomes were post-operative 30 day mortality, composite endpoint of 30 day post-operative complications, hospital length of stay (LOS), and health related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes. The content of interventions was extracted and a narrative analysis of results undertaken. RESULTS: Seven RCTs with 901 patients were included (three exercise based, two pharmacological based, and two nutritional based). Risk of bias was mostly unclear or high and the clinical heterogeneity between the trials precluded data pooling for meta-analyses. The quality of intervention descriptions was highly variable. One exercise based RCT reported significantly reduced hospital LOS and another improved HRQL outcomes. Neither pharmacological nor nutritional based RCTs reported significant differences in primary outcomes. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence to draw clinically robust conclusions about the effect of pre-habilitation on post-operative outcomes following AAA repair. Well designed RCTs, adhering to reporting standards for intervention content and trial methods, are urgently needed to establish the clinical and cost effectiveness of pre-habilitation interventions.

Women have similar mortality but higher morbidity than men after elective endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: Sex disparities regarding outcomes for women after open and endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair have been well-documented. The purpose of this study was to review whether these disparities were also present at our institution for elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and whether specific factors predispose female patients to negative outcomes. METHODS: All elective EVARs were identified from our three sites (Florida, Minnesota, and Arizona) from 2000 to 2018. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and three-year mortality. Secondary outcomes included complications requiring return to the operating room, length of hospitalization (LOH), intensive care unit (ICU) days, and location of discharge after hospitalization. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess for the risk of complications. RESULTS: There were 1986 EVARs; 1754 (88.3%) were performed in male and 232 (11.7%) in female patients. Female patients were older (79 years [interquartile range (IQR), 72-83 years] vs 76 years [IQR, 70-81 years]; P < .001), had a lower body mass index (median, 26.1 kg/m2 [IQR, 22.1-31.0 kg/m2] vs 28.3 kg/m2 [IQR, 25.3-31.6 kg/m2]; P < .001 and hematocrit (median, 37.6% [IQR, 33.4%-40.6%] vs 39.4% [IQR, 35.6%-42.6%]; P < .001) and had higher glomerular filtration rate (median, 84.4 mL/min per 1.73m2 [IQR, 62.3-103 mL/min/1.73 m2] vs 51.1 mL/min/1.73 m2 [IQR, 41.8-60.8 mL/min/1.73 m2]; P < .001. Female patients were also more likely to be active smokers (15.3% vs 13.1%; P < .001) and have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (24.7% vs 15.3%; P = .001). They were less likely to have coronary artery disease (31.6% vs 45.6%; P < .001). Aneurysms in women were slightly smaller in size (median, 54 mm [IQR, 50.0-58.0 mm] vs 55 mm [IQR, 51.0-60.0 mm]; P = .004). In-hospital mortality and mortality at the 3-year follow-up was not significant between female and male patients (0.86% vs 0.17%; P = .11 and 38.4% vs 36.2%; P = .57). However, female patients returned to the operating room with a greater frequency than male patients (3.9% vs 1.4%; P = .011). LOH (mean, 3.4 ± 3.8 days vs 2.5 ± 2.4 days; P < .001) and ICU days (mean, 0.3 ± 2.0 days vs 0.1 ± 0.5 days; P < .001) were longer for female patients. After hospitalization, female patients were discharged to rehabilitation facilities in greater proportion (12.7% vs 3.1%; P < .001) than their male counterparts. On multivariable analysis, female sex was associated with a return to the operating room (odds ratio, 6.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-3.5; P = .02), longer LOH (Coef 4.0; 95% CI, 1.0-2.5; P = .00007), more ICU days (Coef 2.8; 95% CI, 1.1-3.0; P = .005), and a greater likelihood of posthospitalization rehabilitation facility placement (odds ratio, 5.8; 95% CI, 1.5-2.4; P = .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Our three-site, single-institution data support sex disparities to the detriment of female patients regarding return to the operating room after EVAR, LOH, ICU days, and discharge to rehabilitation facility. However, we found no differences for in-hospital or 3-year mortality.

Incidence and natural history of isolated abdominal aortic dissection: A population-based assessment from 1995 to 2015.

BACKGROUND: Isolated abdominal dissection (IAD) is an uncommon clinical problem that is less well-understood than thoracic aortic dissection (AD). We performed a population-based assessment of the incidence, natural history, and treatment outcomes of IAD to better characterize this disease. METHODS: We used the Rochester Epidemiology Project to identify all Olmsted County, MN residents with a diagnosis of AD, intramural hematoma or penetrating ulcer (1995-2015). Diagnostic imaging of all patients was reviewed to confirm the diagnosis of IAD for inclusion. Presentation, treatment, and outcomes were reviewed. Survival of IAD patients was compared to age- and sex-matched population controls 3:1. RESULTS: Of 133 residents with aortic syndrome (AD, intramural hematoma, or penetrating ulcer), 23 were initially diagnosed with IAD. Nine were reclassified as having a penetrating aortic ulcer and were excluded, leaving 14 patients for review (10 male [71%]; mean age, 71 years). Three patients (21%) were symptomatic (abdominal pain, back pain, hypertension) and none had malperfusion or rupture. Prior aortic dilatation was present in eight patients (57%) and Marfan syndrome in one (7%). Two patients (14%) had iatrogenic IAD. Initial management was medical in 13 and endovascular aneurysm repair in one (symptomatic subacute, infrarenal dissection with small aneurysm). The median clinical and imaging follow-up was 6.7 years (range, 0-17 years). An abdominal aortic aneurysm occurred in eight (six at the time of IAD diagnosis, one at 2.9 years, and one at 5.2 years after diagnosis). The average growth in the entire cohort was 0.9 ± 0.4 cm, which translated to an average growth rate of 0.09 cm/year. Subsequent intervention was performed in two patients; for severe aortic stenosis with claudication in one (infrarenal aortic stenting) and increasing aortic size in one (open repair). One patient required reintervention (thrombolysis and stenting for endovascular aneurysm repair limb thrombosis). Survival for IAD at 1, 3, and 5 years was 93%, 85%, and 76%, respectively, compared with population controls at 98%, 85%, and 71%, respectively (long rank P = .38). Mortality was due to cardiovascular causes in three patients (21%) and no deaths were aortic related. Major adverse cardiac events occurred in five patients (36%) owing to heart failure. CONCLUSIONS: IAD is rare. The initial management for asymptomatic patients is medical. The aortic growth rate is slow, with no aortic-related mortality and a low rate of aortic intervention. The overall mortality is similar to population controls. Heart failure and cardiac-related death are prevalent, suggesting that close cardiovascular care is needed in this patient population.

Editor's Choice - A Systemic Evaluation of the Costs of Elective EVAR and Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair Implies Cost Equivalence.

OBJECTIVE: The suggested high costs of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) hamper the choice of insurance companies and financial regulators for EVAR as the primary option for elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. However, arguments used in this debate are impeded by time related aspects such as effect modification and the introduction of confounding by indication, and by asymmetric evaluation of outcomes. Therefore, a re-evaluation minimising the impact of these interferences was considered. METHODS: A comparative analysis was performed evaluating a period of exclusive open repair (OR; 1998-2000) and a period of established EVAR (2010-2012). Data from four hospitals in The Netherlands were collected to estimate resource use. Actual costs were estimated by benchmark cost prices and a literature review. Costs are reported at 2019 prices. A break even approach, defining the costs for an endovascular device at which cost equivalence for EVAR and OR is achieved, was applied to cope with the large variation in endovascular device costs. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-six patients who underwent elective AAA repair between 1998 and 2000 (OR period) and 195 patients between 2010 and 2012 (EVAR period) were compared. Cost equivalence for OR and EVAR was reached at a break even price for an endovascular device of €13 190. The main cost difference reflected the longer duration of hospital stay (ward and Intensive Care Unit) of OR (€11 644). Re-intervention rates were similar for OR (24.2%) and EVAR (24.6%) (p = .92). CONCLUSION: Cost equivalence for EVAR and OR occurs at a device cost of €13 000 for EVAR. Hence, for most routine repairs, EVAR is not costlier than OR until at least the five year follow up.

Surgery for small asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms.

BACKGROUND: An abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is an abnormal ballooning of the major abdominal artery. Some AAAs present as emergencies and require surgery; others remain asymptomatic. Treatment of asymptomatic AAAs depends on many factors, but the size of the aneurysm is important, as risk of rupture increases with aneurysm size. Large asymptomatic AAAs (greater than 5.5 cm in diameter) are usually repaired surgically; very small AAAs (less than 4.0 cm diameter) are monitored with ultrasonography. Debate continues over the roles of early repair versus surveillance with repair on subsequent enlargement in people with asymptomatic AAAs of 4.0 cm to 5.5 cm diameter. This is the fourth update of the review first published in 1999. OBJECTIVES: To compare mortality and costs, as well as quality of life and aneurysm rupture as secondary outcomes, following early surgical repair versus routine ultrasound surveillance in people with asymptomatic AAAs between 4.0 cm and 5.5 cm in diameter. SEARCH METHODS: The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, two other databases, and two trials registers to 10 July 2019. We handsearched conference proceedings and checked reference lists of relevant studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials where people with asymptomatic AAAs of 4.0 cm to 5.5 cm were randomly allocated to early repair or imaging-based surveillance at least every six months. Outcomes had to include mortality or survival. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently extracted data, which were cross-checked by other team members. Outcomes were mortality, costs, quality of life, and aneurysm rupture. For mortality, we estimated risk ratios (RR) (endovascular aneurysm repair only), hazard ratios (HR) (open repair only), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on Mantel-Haenszel Chi2 statistics at one and six years (open repair only) following randomisation. MAIN RESULTS: We found no new studies for this update. Four trials with 3314 participants fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Two trials compared early open repair with surveillance and two trials compared early endovascular repair (EVAR) with surveillance. We used GRADE to access the certainty of the evidence for mortality and cost, which ranged from high to low. We downgraded the certainty in the evidence from high to moderate and low due to risk of bias concerns and imprecision (some outcomes were only reported by one study). All four trials showed an early survival benefit in the surveillance group (due to 30-day operative mortality with repair) but no evidence of differences in long-term survival. One study compared early open repair with surveillance with an adjusted HR of 0.88 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.02, mean follow-up 10 years; HR 1.21, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.54, mean follow-up 4.9 years). Pooled analysis of participant-level data from the two trials comparing early open repair with surveillance (maximum follow-up seven to eight years) showed no evidence of a difference in survival (propensity score-adjusted HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.18; 2226 participants; high-certainty evidence). This lack of treatment effect did not vary to three years by AAA diameter (P = 0.39), participant age (P = 0.61), or for women (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.11). Two studies compared EVAR with surveillance and there was no evidence of a survival benefit for early EVAR at 12 months (RR 1.92, 95% CI 0.73 to 5.06; 846 participants; low-certainty evidence). Two trials reported costs. The mean UK health service costs per participant over the first 18 months after randomisation were higher in the open repair surgery than the surveillance group (GBP 4978 in the repair group versus GBP 3914 in the surveillance group; mean difference (MD) GBP 1064, 95% CI 796 to 1332; 1090 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). There was a similar difference after 12 years. The mean USA hospital costs for participants at six months after randomisation were higher in the EVAR group than in the surveillance group (USD 33,471 with repair versus USD 5520 with surveillance; MD USD 27,951, 95% CI 25,156 to 30,746; 614 participants; low-certainty evidence). After four years, there was no evidence of a difference in total medical costs between groups (USD 48,669 with repair versus USD 46,112 with surveillance; MD USD 2557, 95% CI -8043 to 13,156; 614 participants; low-certainty evidence). All studies reported quality of life but used different assessment measurements and results were conflicting. All four studies reported aneurysm rupture. There were very few ruptures reported in the trials of EVAR versus surveillance up to three years. In the trials of open surgery versus surveillance, there were ruptures to at least six years and there were more ruptures in the surveillance group, but most of these ruptures occurred in aneurysms that had exceeded the threshold for surgical repair. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There was no evidence of an advantage to early repair for small AAA (4.0 cm to 5.5 cm), regardless of whether open repair or EVAR is used and, at least for open repair, regardless of patient age and AAA diameter. Thus, neither early open nor early EVAR of small AAAs is supported by currently available evidence. Long-term data from the two trials investigating EVAR are not available, so, we can only draw firm conclusions regarding outcomes after the first few years for open repair. Research regarding the risks related to and management of small AAAs in ethnic minorities and women is urgently needed, as data regarding these populations are lacking.