RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Sarcopenia, defined as a loss of muscle mass or poor muscle quality, is a syndrome associated with poor surgical outcomes. The prognostic value of sarcopenia in patients with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) is unknown. The present study was designed to define sarcopenia in this patient population and assess its impact on survival among patients who had undergone operative and nonoperative management of TAAAs. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with a diagnosis of a TAAA at an academic hospital between 2009 and 2017 who had been selected for operative and nonoperative management. Sarcopenia was identified by measuring the total muscle area on a single axial computed tomography image at the third lumbar vertebra. The muscle areas were normalized by patient height, and cutoff values for sarcopenia were established at the lowest tertile of the normalized total muscle area. Long-term patient survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression models. RESULTS: A total of 295 patients were identified, of whom 199 had undergone operative management and 96 nonoperative management for TAAAs. The patients selected for nonoperative management were more likely to be women and to have chronic kidney disease, coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease, a higher modified frailty index, and a larger aortic diameter. The Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed significantly lower long-term survival for the patients with and without sarcopenia in the operative and nonoperative groups. In Cox regression analyses, sarcopenia was a significant predictor of shorter survival for both operative (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-0.99; P = .006) and nonoperative (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.00; P = .05) groups after adjusting for age, race, sex, maximum aortic diameter, modified frailty index, chronic kidney disease, and active smoking. Additionally, age was a significant predictor of shorter survival in the operative group, and smoking and aortic diameter were significant in the nonoperative group. CONCLUSIONS: In our cohort of patients who had received operative and nonoperative management of TAAAs, the patients with sarcopenia had had significantly lower long-term survival, regardless of whether surgery had been performed. These data suggest that sarcopenia could be used as a predictor of survival for patients with TAAAs and might be useful for risk stratification and decision making in the management of TAAAs.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Torácica/mortalidad , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Tratamiento Conservador/estadística & datos numéricos , Sarcopenia/epidemiología , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aneurisma de la Aorta Torácica/terapia , Femenino , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Prevalencia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Riesgo , Sarcopenia/diagnóstico , Tasa de Supervivencia , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Female patients are more likely to undergo repair of intact and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) at smaller aortic diameter compared with male patients. By adjusting for inherent anatomic differences between sexes, aortic size index (ASI) and aortic height index (AHI) may provide an additional method for guiding treatment. We therefore analyzed sex-specific criteria for AAA repair using aortic diameter, ASI, and AHI. METHODS: We identified all patients who underwent AAA repair between 2003 and 2019 in the Vascular Quality Initiative database. The Dubois and Dubois formula was used to calculate body surface area; aortic diameter was divided by body surface area to calculate ASI. Aortic diameter was divided by height to calculate AHI. Cumulative distribution curves were used to plot the proportion of patients who underwent repair of ruptured aneurysm according to aortic diameter, ASI, and AHI. Multivariable logistic regression modeling was used to identify the association of female sex with perioperative mortality and any major postoperative complication. RESULTS: We identified 55,647 patients, of whom 12,664 were female (20%). For both intact and rupture repair, female patients were older, less likely to undergo endovascular aneurysm repair, and more likely to have comorbid conditions. Female patients underwent repair at smaller median aortic diameter compared with male patients for intact (5.4 vs 5.5 cm; P < .001) and rupture repair (6.7 vs 7.7 cm; P < .001). However, ASI was higher in female patients for both intact (3.1 vs 2.7 cm/m2; P < .001) and rupture repair (3.8 vs 3.7 cm/m2; P < .001), whereas AHI was higher in female patients for intact repair (3.3 vs 3.1 cm/m; P < .001) but lower for rupture repair (4.1 vs 4.3 cm/m; P < .001). When analyzing the cumulative distribution of rupture repair in male patients, 12% of rupture repairs were performed at an aortic diameter below 5.5 cm. To achieve the same proportion of rupture repair in female patients, the repair diameter was only 4.9 cm. However, when ASI and AHI were used, female and male patients both reached 12% of rupture repair at an ASI of 2.7 cm/m2 and an AHI of 3.0 cm/m. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides data to strongly support the sex-specific 5.0-cm aortic diameter threshold suggested for repair in female patients by the Society for Vascular Surgery. The high percentage of patients undergoing rupture repair below 5.5 cm in male patients and 5.0 cm in female patients highlights the need to better identify patients at risk of rupture at smaller aortic diameters.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Distribución por Sexo , Factores Sexuales , Factores de Tiempo , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Controversy has continued regarding the use of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) vs open aneurysm repair (OAR) for infected abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). In the present study, we investigated the comparative outcomes of EVAR and OAR for the treatment of infected AAAs. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases through May 2021. We included studies that had described both EVAR and OAR for the treatment of infected AAAs. The primary endpoints were the rates of recurrent infection and related rupture and/or death. Perioperative and 1-year mortality and readmissions and reinterventions were also analyzed. RESULTS: Fourteen observational studies describing a total of 1203 patients (EVAR, 359 [29.8%]; OAR, 844 [70.2%]) were eligible for qualitative analysis. The baseline characteristics included diabetes mellitus (33.2%), fever at presentation (71.6%), rupture at diagnosis (26.1%), and positive blood cultures (52.5%). The mean follow-up period ranged from 12 to 40 months. The use of EVAR became more prevalent in recent years (2016-2020, 32.4%) compared with the former period (2010-2015, 13.8%; P < .0001). Fenestrated, branched, or concomitant visceral debranching EVAR was performed in 6.1% of cases. In OAR, surgical debridement was consistently performed, and in situ reconstruction was applied in 82.2% and an omental flap in 51.5%. In nine studies considered for quantitative analysis, the patients' background (EVAR, n = 264; OAR, n = 274) were statistically balanced. The crude rates of recurrent infection and related rupture or death were 13.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.8%-18.5%) and 4.9% (95% CI 1.8%-8.0%), respectively. The pooled analyses depicted significantly higher rates of recurrent infection after EVAR than after OAR (relative risk [RR], 2.42; 95% CI, 1.80-3.27; P < .0001; I2 = 0%). Recurrent infection-related rupture or death (RR, 1.51; 95% CI, 0.70-3.23; P = .29; I2 = 0%), perioperative death (RR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.39-1.65; P = .55; I2 = 35%), 1-year mortality (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.97-1.28; P =.13; I2 = 0%), and readmission or reintervention (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.74-1.82; P =.52; I2 = 0%) were not significantly different statistically between the two groups. Funnel plots showed no evidence of publication bias. Sensitivity analyses of leave-one-out meta-analysis confirmed higher rates of recurrent infection after EVAR. CONCLUSIONS: EVAR has become more prevalent as the initial treatment of infected AAAs. Although operative and 1-year survival were similar between OAR and EVAR groups, recurrent infection was more frequent after EVAR. This limitation should be weighed in selecting patients for EVAR in infected AAAs. Postoperative graft and infection surveillance are critical, especially after EVAR.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Reinfección/epidemiología , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/microbiología , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/mortalidad , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Desbridamiento/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Reinfección/microbiología , Medición de Riesgo/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Riesgo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Sex-based disparities in surgical outcomes have emerged as an important focus in contemporary healthcare delivery. Likewise, the appropriate usage of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) in the United States remains a subject of ongoing controversy, with a significant number of U.S. EVARs failing to adhere to the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) clinical practice guideline (CPG) diameter thresholds. The purpose of the present study was to determine the effect of sex among patients undergoing EVAR that was not compliant with the SVS CPGs. METHODS: All elective EVAR procedures for abdominal aortic aneurysms without a concomitant iliac aneurysm (≥3.0 cm) in the SVS Vascular Quality Initiative were analyzed (2015-2019; n = 25,112). SVS CPG noncompliant repairs were defined as a size of <5.5 cm for men and <5.0 cm for women. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. The secondary endpoints were all-cause mortality, complications, and reintervention. Logistic regression was performed to control for surgeon- and patient-level factors. Freedom from the endpoints was determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Noncompliant EVAR was performed in 9675 patients (38.5%). Although men were significantly more likely to undergo such procedures (90% vs 10%; odds ratio [OR], 3.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.9-3.4; P < .0001), the 30-day mortality was greater for the women than the men (1.8% vs 0.5%; P = .0003). Women also experienced significantly higher rates of multiple complications, including postoperative myocardial infarction (1% vs 0.3%; P = .006), respiratory failure (1.4% vs 0.6%; P = .01), intestinal ischemia (0.7% vs 0.2%; P = .003), access vessel hematoma (3% vs 1.2%; P = .0006), and iliac access vessel injury (2.4% vs 0.8%; P < .0001). Additionally, women experienced increased overall 1-year reintervention rates (11.5% vs 5.8%; P < .0001). In the adjusted analysis, 30-day mortality and any in-hospital complication risk remained significantly greater for the women (30-day death: OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.6-5.8; P = .0005; in-hospital complication: OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.4-2.6; P < .0001). Women also experienced increased reintervention rates over time compared with men (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.2; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Although men were more likely to undergo non-CPG compliant EVAR, women experienced increased short-term morbidity and 30-day mortality and higher rates of reintervention when undergoing non-CPG compliant EVAR. These unanticipated findings necessitate increased scrutiny of current U.S. sex-based EVAR practice and should caution against the use of non-CPG compliant EVAR for women.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Adhesión a Directriz/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/mortalidad , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/normas , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/normas , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Estudios Prospectivos , Sistema de Registros/estadística & datos numéricos , Reoperación/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Riesgo , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Factores Sexuales , Sociedades Médicas/normas , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Contemporary data on the natural history of large abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in patients undergoing delayed or no repair are lacking. In this study, we examine the impact of large AAA size on the incidence of rupture and mortality. METHODS: From a prospectively maintained aneurysm surveillance registry, patients with an unrepaired, large AAA (≥5.5 cm in men and ≥5.0 cm in women) at baseline (ie, index imaging) or who progressed to a large size from 2003 to 2017 were included, with follow-up through March 2020. Outcomes of interest obtained by manual chart review included rupture (confirmed by imaging/autopsy), probable rupture (timing/findings consistent with rupture without more likely cause of death), repair, reasons for either no or delayed (>1 year after diagnosis of large AAA) repair and total mortality. Cumulative incidence of rupture was calculated using a nonparametric cumulative incidence function, accounting for the competing events of death and aneurysm repair and was stratified by patient sex. RESULTS: Of the 3248 eligible patients (mean age, 83.6 ± 9.1 years; 71.2% male; 78.1% white; and 32.0% current smokers), 1423 (43.8%) had large AAAs at index imaging, and 1825 progressed to large AAAs during the follow-up period, with a mean time to qualifying size of 4.3 ± 3.4 years. In total, 2215 (68%) patients underwent repair, of which 332 were delayed >1 year; 1033 (32%) did not undergo repair. The most common reasons for delayed repair were discrepancy in AAA measurement between surgeon and radiologist (34%) and comorbidity (20%), whereas the most common reasons for no repair were patient preference (48%) and comorbidity (30%). Among patients with delayed repair (mean time to repair, 2.6 ± 1.8 years), nine (2.7%) developed symptomatic aneurysms, and an additional 11 (3.3%) ruptured. Of patients with no repair, 94 (9.1%) ruptured. The 3-year cumulative incidence of rupture was 3.4% for initial AAA size 5.0 to 5.4 cm (women only), 2.2% for 5.5 to 6.0 cm, 6.0% for 6.1 to 7.0 cm, and 18.4% for >7.0 cm. Women with AAA size 6.1 to 7.0 cm had a 3-year cumulative incidence of rupture of 12.8% (95% confidence interval, 7.5%-19.6%) compared with 4.5% (95% confidence interval, 3.0%-6.5%) in men (P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of AAA registry patients over 17 years, annual rupture rates for large AAAs were lower than previously reported, with possible increased risk in women. Further analyses are ongoing to identify those at increased risk for aneurysm rupture and may provide targeted surveillance regimens and improve patient counseling.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Rotura de la Aorta/epidemiología , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Tiempo de Tratamiento/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagen , Aorta Abdominal/patología , Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/complicaciones , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico , Rotura de la Aorta/etiología , Rotura de la Aorta/prevención & control , Consejo , Progresión de la Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Estudios Prospectivos , Sistema de Registros/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Riesgo , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Factores Sexuales , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/mortalidad , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria/tendencias , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Países Bajos/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Estudios Prospectivos , Sistema de Registros/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The NHS Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Screening Programme (NAAASP) has been implemented since 2013. Men with a large aneurysm >54 mm, either at first screen or during surveillance, are referred for intervention. The aim of the present study was to explore outcomes in these men and to see whether there was any regional variation in treatment rates and type of repair. METHODS: The study cohort included all men referred to a vascular network with a large abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Basic demographic information, nurse assessment details, as well as outcome data were extracted from the national NAAASP IT system, AAA SMaRT, for analysis. RESULTS: Some 3 026 men were referred for possible intervention (48% first screen, 52% surveillance). Some 448 men (13.3%) either declined (63, 2.1%), or were turned down for early intervention for various reasons (385, 12.7%). Some 8% were declined for medical reasons (true turn down rate). Men referred from surveillance were older, and more likely not to have had elective surgery within three months (16.0 vs. 11.2%; HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.07-1.75, p = .011). Turn down rates did not vary among local programmes, when surveillance men were taken into account. Some 2 624 (87%) men had planned AAA repair, with a peri-operative mortality of 1.3%. Thirty day surgical mortality was lower after EVAR: 0.4% compared with 2.1% after open repair. The method of repair remained consistent year on year, with roughly equal numbers undergoing endovascular (50%) and open surgical repair (48%); 2% unknown. There was regional variation in the proportion treated by endovascular repair: from 20% to 97%. CONCLUSION: The turn down rate after referral for treatment with a screen detected AAA was low, but there remains considerable regional variation in the proportion undergoing endovascular repair. Procedures were undertaken with low peri-operative mortality.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular , Procedimientos Endovasculares , Tamizaje Masivo , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/mortalidad , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/métodos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/mortalidad , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/mortalidad , Procedimientos Endovasculares/estadística & datos numéricos , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Selección de Paciente , Derivación y Consulta/estadística & datos numéricos , Medicina Estatal , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the use of cryopreserved arterial allografts (CAA) as a substitute for infected infrarenal aortic prostheses, and its outcomes. METHODS: A single centre retrospective study of consecutive patients receiving an abdominal aortic CAA after removal of an infected graft was conducted between January 1997 and December 2013. The primary outcome was the rate of allograft related revision surgery. Secondary outcomes were the 30 day mortality rate, survival, primary patency, limb salvage, and infection recurrence. Allograft ruptures secondary to infection and risk factors for allograft failure were also investigated. RESULTS: Two hundred patients (mean age 64.2 ± 9.4 years) were included. In 56 (28%) cases, infection was related to an enteric fistula. The mean follow up duration was 4.1 years. The 30 day mortality rate was 11%. Early revision surgery was needed in 59 patients (29.5%). Among them, 15 (7.5%) were allograft related and led to the death of three patients (1.5%), corresponding to a 7.5% 30 day allograft related revision surgery rate. During the first six months, 17 (8.5%) patients experienced 21 events with complete or partial rupture (pseudo-aneurysm) of the allograft responsible for five (2.5%) deaths, corresponding to a re-infection rate of 8.5%. The multivariable analysis showed that diabetes and pseudo-aneurysm of the native aorta on presentation were predictive factors for short term allograft rupture. After six months, 25 (12.5%) patients experienced long term allograft complications (rupture, n = 2, 1%; pseudo-aneurysm, n = 6, 3%; aneurysm, n = 2, 1%; thrombosis, n = 11, 5.5%; stenosis, n = 4, 2%;) requiring revision surgery resulting in one death. The five year rates of survival, allograft related revision surgery, limb salvage, primary patency, and infection recurrence were 56%, 30%, 89%, 80%, and 12%, respectively. CONCLUSION: CAAs provide acceptable results to treat aortic graft infection with few early graft related fatal complications. Long term allograft related complications are quite common but are associated with low mortality and amputation rates.
Asunto(s)
Aorta Abdominal/trasplante , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Criopreservación , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/cirugía , Reoperación/estadística & datos numéricos , Anciano , Amputación Quirúrgica/estadística & datos numéricos , Aneurisma Falso/diagnóstico , Aneurisma Falso/epidemiología , Aneurisma Falso/etiología , Rotura de la Aorta/diagnóstico , Rotura de la Aorta/epidemiología , Rotura de la Aorta/etiología , Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Angiografía por Tomografía Computarizada , Estudios de Seguimiento , Rechazo de Injerto/diagnóstico , Rechazo de Injerto/epidemiología , Rechazo de Injerto/etiología , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/diagnóstico , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/mortalidad , Recurrencia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Trasplante Homólogo/métodos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Ultrasonografía Doppler DúplexRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal , Rotura de la Aorta , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular , Procedimientos Endovasculares , Complicaciones Posoperatorias , Factores de Edad , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/complicaciones , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/epidemiología , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Rotura de la Aorta/diagnóstico , Rotura de la Aorta/etiología , Rotura de la Aorta/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/métodos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Comorbilidad , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/métodos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Mortalidad , Países Bajos/epidemiología , Selección de Paciente , Periodo Perioperatorio/mortalidad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/diagnóstico , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/mortalidad , Sistema de Registros/estadística & datos numéricos , Ajuste de Riesgo/métodos , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Three procedures are currently available to treat atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis: carotid endarterectomy (CEA), transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TF-CAS), and transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR). Although there is considerable debate evaluating each of these in a head-to-head comparison to determine superiority, little has been mentioned concerning the specific anatomic criteria that make one more appropriate. We conducted a study to define anatomic criteria in relation to inclusion and exclusion criteria and relative contraindications. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of 448 carotid arteries from 224 consecutive patients who underwent a neck and head computed tomography arteriography (CTA) scan before carotid intervention for significant carotid artery stenosis. Occlusion of the internal carotid artery (ICA) occurred in 15, yielding 433 arteries for analysis. Anatomic data were collected from CTA images and demographic and comorbidities from chart review. Eligibility for CEA, TF-CAS, and TCAR was defined on the basis of anatomy, not by comorbidity. RESULTS: CTA analysis revealed that 92 of 433 arteries (21%) were ineligible for CEA because of carotid lesions extending cephalad to the second cervical vertebra. Overall, 26 arteries (6.0%) were not eligible for any type of carotid artery stent because of small ICA diameter (n = 11), heavy circumferential calcium (n = 14), or combination (n = 1). An additional 126 arteries were ineligible for TF-CAS on the basis of a hostile aortic arch (n = 115) or severe distal ICA tortuosity (n = 11), yielding 281 arteries (64.9%) that were eligible. In addition to the 26 arteries ineligible for any carotid stent, TCAR was contraindicated in 39 because of a clavicle to bifurcation distance <5 cm (n = 17), common carotid artery diameter <6 mm (n = 3), or significant plaque at the TCAR sheath access site (n = 20), yielding 368 arteries (85.0%) that were eligible for TCAR. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of patients who present with carotid artery stenosis have anatomy that makes one or more carotid interventions contraindicated or less desirable. Anatomic factors should play a key role in selecting the most appropriate procedure to treat carotid artery stenosis. Determination of superiority for one procedure over another should be tempered until anatomic criteria have been assessed to select the best procedural options for each patient.
Asunto(s)
Arterias Carótidas/anatomía & histología , Estenosis Carotídea/cirugía , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Placa Aterosclerótica/cirugía , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/instrumentación , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/normas , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Arterias Carótidas/diagnóstico por imagen , Arterias Carótidas/cirugía , Estenosis Carotídea/etiología , Angiografía por Tomografía Computarizada , Endarterectomía Carotidea/instrumentación , Endarterectomía Carotidea/normas , Endarterectomía Carotidea/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/instrumentación , Procedimientos Endovasculares/normas , Procedimientos Endovasculares/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Placa Aterosclerótica/complicaciones , Estudios Retrospectivos , StentsRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The characteristics of and indications for open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair have evolved over time. We evaluated these trends through the experience at a tertiary care academic center. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted for patients undergoing open AAA repair (inclusive of type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms) from 2005 to 2018 at an academic institution. Trends over time were evaluated using the Spearman test; Cox regression was used to determine predictors of mortality and to generate adjusted survival curves. RESULTS: There were 628 patients (71.5% male; 88.2% white) with a mean age of 70.5 ± 9.4 years who underwent open AAA repair with a mean aneurysm diameter of 6.2 ± 1.5 cm. The median length of stay was 10 days, and the median intensive care unit length of stay was 3 days. Urgent repair was undertaken in 21.1%; 22.3% were type IV thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repairs, and 9.9% were performed for explantation. Our series favored a retroperitoneal approach in the majority of cases (82.5%). The proximal clamp sites were supraceliac (46.1%), suprarenal (29.1%), and infrarenal (24.8%), with approximately a third requiring renal artery reimplantation. The average cross-clamp time was 25.5 ± 14.9 minutes; the mean renal ischemia time for supraceliac and suprarenal clamp sites was 28.4 ± 12.3 minutes and 23.5 ± 12.7 minutes, respectively. Postoperative renal dysfunction occurred in 19.6% of the overall cohort, with 6.2% requiring hemodialysis. Of those requiring postoperative hemodialysis, the majority (75%) received an urgent repair. The in-hospital mortality was 2.3% for elective cases vs 20.9% for urgent repair, and 29.8% of patients were discharged to rehabilitation, with an overall 30-day readmission rate of 7.9%. Over time, there were trends of increased aneurysm repair complexity, with decreasing infrarenal clamp sites, increasing supraceliac clamp sites, increasing proportion of explantations, and increasing need for bifurcated grafts. The acuity of aneurysm repair likewise changed, with the proportion of urgent repairs increasing over time, largely attributable to the rise in explantations. Clamp site influenced the frequency of perioperative complications. Urgent repairs and age at operation were associated with mortality, whereas mortality was not associated with need for explantation and clamp location. CONCLUSIONS: Aneurysm repair reflected increasing complexity over time, with the need for explantation among urgent repairs significantly on the rise. Urgency and clamp location independently predicted long-term mortality, even after adjustment for age. These findings underscore the changing landscape of open AAA repair in the current era.
Asunto(s)
Lesión Renal Aguda/epidemiología , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Centros de Atención Terciaria/tendencias , Lesión Renal Aguda/etiología , Lesión Renal Aguda/terapia , Anciano , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/mortalidad , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/métodos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/tendencias , Remoción de Dispositivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Remoción de Dispositivos/tendencias , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos , Femenino , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/tendencias , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Tiempo de Internación/tendencias , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/terapia , Diálisis Renal/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Stents/efectos adversos , Centros de Atención Terciaria/estadística & datos numéricos , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This study reports the clinical impact of iliac artery aneurysms (IAAs) in a population of patients with juxtarenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms being treated with fenestrated or branched aortic endografts. METHODS: Data from 364 patients with IAA (33%) were extracted from the 1118 patients treated for juxtarenal or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms with a fenestrated or branched aortic endograft in a physician-sponsored investigational device exemption trial (2001-2016). IAAs were defined as ≥21 mm in diameter, as measured by an imaging core laboratory. Outcomes were assessed by univariate and multivariable analysis. RESULTS: IAAs were unilateral in 219 (60%) and bilateral in 145 (40%) of the 364 patients. Treatment was iliac leg endoprosthesis without coverage of the hypogastric artery (seal distal to the IAA in the common iliac artery), placement of a hypogastric branched endograft in 105 (21%), and hypogastric artery coverage with extension into the external iliac artery in 103 (20%); 67 (13%) were untreated. Procedure duration was longer for those with IAA (5.3 ± 1.79 hours vs 4.6 ± 1.74 hours; P < .001), although hospital stay was not. There was no difference in aneurysm-related mortality and all-cause mortality for patients with unilateral and bilateral IAAs compared with those without an IAA. Treatment of patients with a hypogastric branched endograft had similar all-cause mortality compared with treatment of patients without a hypogastric branched endograft but also with an IAA. Reintervention rates were significantly higher in those with bilateral IAAs compared with no IAA (hazard ratio, 1.886; P < .001). Spinal cord ischemia trended higher in patients with bilateral IAA. CONCLUSIONS: IAA management at the time of fenestrated or branched endovascular aneurysm repair increases procedure time without increasing hospitalization. The reintervention rate and spinal cord ischemia rate are higher in patients with bilateral IAA compared with those with no IAA.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Aneurisma de la Aorta Torácica/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Aneurisma Ilíaco/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Isquemia de la Médula Espinal/epidemiología , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/complicaciones , Aneurisma de la Aorta Torácica/complicaciones , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/instrumentación , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/instrumentación , Procedimientos Endovasculares/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Humanos , Aneurisma Ilíaco/etiología , Aneurisma Ilíaco/cirugía , Arteria Ilíaca/cirugía , Incidencia , Masculino , Tempo Operativo , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Reoperación/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Isquemia de la Médula Espinal/etiología , Stents/efectos adversos , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines recommend repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) when ≥5.5 cm. This study sought to evaluate the incidence of male patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for AAAs of various diameters (small <4 cm; intermediate 4-5.4 cm; standard ≥5.5 cm). We analyzed predictors of mortality, hypothesizing that smaller AAAs (<5.5 cm) have no differences in associated risk of mortality compared to standard AAAs (≥5.5 cm). METHODS: The 2011-2017 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Procedure-Targeted Vascular database was queried for male patients undergoing elective EVAR. Patients were stratified by aneurysm diameter. A multivariable logistic regression analysis for clinical outcomes, adjusting for age, clinical characteristics, and comorbidities, was performed. RESULTS: A total of 8037 male patients underwent EVAR with 3926 (48.9%) performed for AAAs <5.5 cm. There was no difference in mortality, readmission, major complications, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemic complications among the 3 groups (P > 0.05). In AAAs <5.5 cm, predictors of mortality included prior abdominal surgery (odds ratio [OR], 5.77; confidence interval [CI], 1.38-24.13; P = 0.016), weight loss (OR, 43.4; CI, 3.78-498.7; P = 0.002), disseminated cancer (OR, 17.9; CI, 1.30-245.97; P = 0.031), and diabetes (OR, 6.09; CI, 1.52-24.36; P = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly 50% of male patients undergoing elective EVAR were treated for AAAs <5.5 cm. There was no difference in associated risk of mortality for smaller AAAs compared to standard AAAs. The strongest predictors of mortality for patients with smaller AAAs were prior abdominal surgery, weight loss, disseminated cancer, and diabetes.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/diagnóstico , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/mortalidad , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Comorbilidad , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Oportunidad Relativa , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Aims: Bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) provide short-term coronary artery scaffolding and drug delivery. Although prior trials showed a higher rate of device failure compared with conventional drug-eluting stents (DES), only a single trial investigated patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (MI). We aimed to compare outcomes with BRS vs. DES in patients undergoing PCI for MI. Methods and results: We did a prospective, randomized, multicentre, non-inferiority, clinical trial of everolimus-eluting BRS vs. durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in patients with acute MI. Patients were eligible for enrolment if they presented with ST-elevation MI, or non-ST-elevation MI with thrombosis visual at angiography and were randomly allocated to treatment with BRS or EES in 2:1 proportion. Angiographic follow-up was scheduled at 6-8 months and clinical follow-up was done at 12 months. The primary endpoint was percentage diameter stenosis in-segment at follow-up. A total of 262 patients were enrolled and were allocated to BRS (n = 173) or EES (n = 89). Angiographic follow-up was available for 213 (81.3%) patients. Mean diameter stenosis was 24.6 ± 12.2% with BRS vs. 27.3 ± 11.7% with EES (mean difference -2.7%, upper limit of one-sided 97.5% confidence limit 0.7%, pre-specified margin of non-inferiority 5%, Pnon-inferiority <0.001). The rate of the device-oriented composite of cardiac death/target vessel MI/target lesion revascularization [BRS: 12 (7.0%) vs. EES: 6 (6.7%), hazard ratio (HR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39-2.78] and definite/probable stent thrombosis [3 (1.7%) vs. 2 (2.3%), HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.13-4.56] were comparable in both groups. Conclusion: In patients undergoing PCI for acute MI BRS were non-inferior to EES for percentage diameter stenosis at angiographic follow-up. Rates of clinical events were comparable between the treatment groups, although the study was not powered to detect differences in clinical outcomes. Clinical trial registration: The trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01942070).
Asunto(s)
Implantación de Prótesis Vascular , Vasos Coronarios , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Everolimus , Infarto del Miocardio , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/instrumentación , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/métodos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Angiografía Coronaria , Vasos Coronarios/diagnóstico por imagen , Vasos Coronarios/cirugía , Everolimus/administración & dosificación , Everolimus/uso terapéutico , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , StentsRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to assess the short-term impact of centralization on the outcomes of patients undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in a vascular network in the South West of England. BACKGROUND: The centralization of vascular services has been implemented nationally across the National Health Service to improve patient outcomes. The full impact of these major changes has not yet been fully analyzed. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study examining outcomes of patients undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, based on prospectively entered National Vascular Registry data, pre and post centralization in the South West of England. The primary outcome was mortality at 30 days. Secondary measures included 30-day morbidity, length of hospital stay, and length of intensive care unit stay. RESULTS: The 30-day mortality was unchanged pre and post-centralization (11% vs 12%, P = 0.84). The 30-day morbidity rate was also unchanged (24% vs 25%, P = 0.83), as was length of intensive care unit stay (3 vs 3 days, P = 0.74). Overall length of stay was not significantly different (8 vs 6 days, P = 0.76). Subgroup analysis of patients with elective, ruptured, and symptomatic aneurysm repair demonstrated no differences in 30-day mortality. There was a significantly shorter stay post-centralization for patients with symptomatic aneurysms (6 vs 12 days pre-centralization, P = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: The process of centralization of abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in a vascular network was safe for patients and had no immediate impact on outcomes. Longer-term outcome measures and financial data will be required to further assess the benefit of centralization.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Rotura de la Aorta/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Sistema de Registros/estadística & datos numéricos , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Incidencia , Tiempo de Internación/tendencias , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Tasa de Supervivencia/tendencias , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Much of the literature describing treatment for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) consists of operative series reported by centers of excellence. These studies are limited by referral and selection bias and exclude patients who are not candidates for the reported modality of repair. Little is known about the patients who are not referred or selected for repair. For those undergoing intervention, outcomes such as functional status after surgery are rarely reported. In this study, we address these gaps by reporting two primary end points: 1-year survival and a "good" outcome (defined as successful aneurysm exclusion, freedom from permanent loss of organ system function, and return to preoperative functional status after surgery) in a cohort of TAAA patients, including all nonoperative and operative patients, irrespective of treatment modality. METHODS: A single-institution database was screened by diagnosis codes for TAAA from 2009 to 2017 using the International Classification of Diseases versions 9 and 10. Diagnosis was confirmed by retrospective chart review and computed tomography findings of aneurysmal degeneration ≥3.2 cm of the paravisceral aorta in continuity with aneurysmal aorta meeting standard criteria for repair. Patients <18 years of age and those with mycotic aneurysm were excluded. Patients were either managed nonoperatively or by one of four operative strategies: (i) open; (ii) endovascular with branched endografts; (iii) hybrid, defined as iliovisceral debranching followed by endograft placement; or (iv) partial repair in which the paravisceral segment was intentionally left unaddressed. RESULTS: Among the entire cohort of 432 patients with TAAA, significant comorbidities were seen in 143 (33%). Forty-seven percent of the patients were managed nonoperatively. Of these, 65% survived to 1 year. A survival benefit was seen in the open, endovascular, and partial, but not hybrid, operative groups compared with the nonoperative group during a 3-year period. Overall 1-year survival was 81%, but only 65% had a good outcome (P = .0016). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of the patients in this inclusive cohort study did not undergo repair despite access to a variety of operative techniques. Many of these patients die in the short term due to high burden of comorbid disease rather than aneurysm rupture. Among those undergoing operation, a notable difference between survival and good outcome was observed. Operation appears to confer a survival advantage among appropriately selected patients with TAAA, but a large proportion are high risk and may not benefit from operative repair due to limited baseline survival and lower probability of good outcome.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Torácica/terapia , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Tratamiento Conservador/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/estadística & datos numéricos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Adulto , Anciano , Aorta Torácica/diagnóstico por imagen , Aorta Torácica/cirugía , Aneurisma de la Aorta Torácica/mortalidad , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/instrumentación , Comorbilidad , Tratamiento Conservador/efectos adversos , Tratamiento Conservador/métodos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/instrumentación , Femenino , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Selección de Paciente , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/diagnóstico , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Stents/efectos adversos , Factores de Tiempo , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: Operative caseload is thought to be associated with peri-operative mortality following intact aortic aneurysm repair. The aim was to study that association in the Australian setting, which has a unique healthcare provision system and geographical population distribution. METHODS: The Australasian Vascular Audit database was used to capture volume measurements for both individual surgeon and hospital and to separate it into quintiles (1, lowest, to 5, highest) for endovascular (EVAR), open surgical repair (OSR), and subgroups of repair types between 2010 and 2016. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to assess the impact of caseload volumes on in hospital mortality after adjustment for confounders. RESULTS: Volume counts were determined from 14,262 aneurysm repair procedures (4121 OSR, 10,106 EVAR). After exclusions, 2181 OSR (161 complex, 2020 standard) and 7547 EVAR (6198 standard, 1135 complex, 214 thoracic (TEVAR)) elective cases were available for volume analysis. Unadjusted mortality after EVAR was unaffected by either surgeon (Quintile 1, 1.0%; Quintile 5, 0.9%; p = .28) or hospital volume (Quintile 1, 0.8%; Quintile 5, 1.3%; p = .47). However, univariable analysis of the TEVAR subgroup revealed a significant correlation with hospital volume (Quintiles 1-2 vs. Quintiles 3-5; p = .02). Univariable analysis for OSR demonstrated a marginal, non-significant value for surgeon (Quintile 1, 4.0%; Quintile 5, 3.6%; p = .06), but not hospital volume (Quintile 1, 4.7%; Quintile 5, 4.0%; p = .67). After adjustment for confounders hospital volume remained a significant predictor of peri-operative TEVAR mortality (Quintile 1-2 vs. 3-5; OR 5.62, 95% CI 1.27-24.83; p = .02) and surgeon volume a predictor following standard OSR (Quintile 1-2 vs. Quintile 3-5; OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.21-3.83; p = .01). CONCLUSIONS: There is an inverse correlation between both surgeon volume of open aortic aneurysm repair, hospital volume of thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair and in hospital mortality. These findings suggest that in Australia TEVAR should be performed by high volume hospitals and OSR by high volume surgeons.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Auditoría Médica/estadística & datos numéricos , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Aneurisma de la Aorta/mortalidad , Australia/epidemiología , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Bases de Datos Factuales/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Hospitales de Alto Volumen/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis Multivariante , Periodo Perioperatorio/estadística & datos numéricos , Medición de Riesgo , Cirujanos/estadística & datos numéricos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Carga de Trabajo/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: The aim was to study outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in four geographically adjacent populations with identical demographics and variable EVAR rates. METHODS: This was a multicentre cohort study based on local and national registry data from an area of 815 000 inhabitants. The study involved 527 consecutive patients with an intact AAA treated with EVAR (n = 327) or OSR (n = 200) between 2010 and 2016. The catchment area was divided into four health care districts (populations A, B, C, and D) with one central hospital in each district. Each hospital decided independently between OSR and EVAR for patients within their population; OSR was performed in all hospitals while EVAR was centralised in one of them. Patient demographics and treatment outcomes were extracted from local registries. Population demographics, overall AAA incidence, and mortality data were retrieved from a national database. RESULTS: The rate of new intact AAA diagnosis varied between 20 and 29 per 100 000 inhabitants/year with the highest incidence in population D (p < .001). The intact AAA repair rates were 9.8, 8.9, 9.9, and 8.7 per 100 000 inhabitants/year for populations A, B, C, and D, respectively (p = .64). There were no significant differences in mean age (73.6 ± 8.0 years) or mean aortic diameter (62 ± 13 mm) between the treated patient populations. Groups A and B had high EVAR rates (74% and 72%, respectively) whereas the EVAR rates were lower in groups C and D (50% and 38%, respectively) (p < .001). The 30 day mortality rates were 2%, 2%, 4%, and 1% (p = .55), and complication rates were 17%, 12%, 15%, and 11% (p = .39) for A, B, C and D, respectively. There were no significant differences in mortality, complication or re-intervention rates between the groups during the mean follow up of 3.3 ± 2.0 years. CONCLUSIONS: At population level, high EVAR rates had no measurable effect compared with lower EVAR rates on the outcomes in patients with intact AAA.
Asunto(s)
Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/cirugía , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular , Procedimientos Endovasculares , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/mortalidad , Anciano , Aneurisma de la Aorta Abdominal/epidemiología , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/métodos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios de Cohortes , Procedimientos Endovasculares/efectos adversos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/métodos , Procedimientos Endovasculares/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Finlandia/epidemiología , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud , Utilización de Procedimientos y Técnicas/estadística & datos numéricos , Sistema de Registros/estadística & datos numéricos , Análisis de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This study examines the utilization and outcomes of vascular access for long-term hemodialysis in the United States and describes the impact of temporizing catheter use on outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the prevalence, patency, and associated patient survival for pre-emptively placed autogenous fistulas and prosthetic grafts; for autogenous fistulas and prosthetic grafts placed after a temporizing catheter; and for hemodialysis catheters that remained in use. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of all patients who initiated hemodialysis in the United States during a 5-year period (2007-2011). The United States Renal Data System-Medicare matched national database was used to compare outcomes after pre-emptive autogenous fistulas, preemptive prosthetic grafts, autogenous fistula after temporizing catheter, prosthetic graft after temporizing catheter, and persistent catheter use. Outcomes were primary patency, primary assisted patency, secondary patency, maturation, catheter-free dialysis, severe access infection, and mortality. RESULTS: There were 73,884 (16%) patients who initiated hemodialysis with autogenous fistula, 16,533 (3%) who initiated hemodialysis with prosthetic grafts, 106,797 (22%) who temporized with hemodialysis catheter prior to autogenous fistula use, 32,890 (7%) who temporized with catheter prior to prosthetic graft use, and 246,822 (52%) patients who remained on the catheter. Maturation rate and median time to maturation were 79% vs 84% and 47 days vs 29 days for pre-emptively placed autogenous fistulas vs prosthetic grafts. Primary patency (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-1.28; P < .001) and primary assisted patency (aHR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.35-1.38; P < .001) were significantly higher for autogenous fistula compared with prosthetic grafts. Secondary patency was higher for autogenous fistulas beyond 2 months (aHR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.32-1.40; P < .001). Severe infection (aHR, 9.6; 95% CI, 8.86-10.36; P < .001) and mortality (aHR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.27-1.31; P < .001) were higher for prosthetic grafts compared with autogenous fistulas. Temporizing with a catheter was associated with a 51% increase in mortality (aHR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.48-1.53; P < .001), 69% decrease in primary patency (aHR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.31-0.32; P < .001), and 130% increase in severe infection (aHR, 2.3; 95% CI, 2.2-2.5; P < .001) compared to initiation with autogenous fistulas or prosthetic grafts. Mortality was 2.2 times higher for patients who remained on catheters compared to those who initiated hemodialysis with autogenous fistulas (aHR, 2.25; 95% CI, 2.21-2.28; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Temporizing catheter use was associated with higher mortality, higher infection, and lower patency, thus undermining the highly prevalent approach of electively using catheters as a bridge to permanent access. Autogenous fistulas are associated with longer time to catheter-free dialysis but better patency, lower infection risk, and lower mortality compared with prosthetic grafts in the general population.
Asunto(s)
Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica/tendencias , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/tendencias , Cateterismo Venoso Central/tendencias , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/tendencias , Diálisis Renal/tendencias , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica/efectos adversos , Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica/mortalidad , Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica/estadística & datos numéricos , Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Prótesis Vascular/tendencias , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/mortalidad , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/estadística & datos numéricos , Infecciones Relacionadas con Catéteres/etiología , Cateterismo Venoso Central/efectos adversos , Cateterismo Venoso Central/mortalidad , Cateterismo Venoso Central/estadística & datos numéricos , Catéteres Venosos Centrales/efectos adversos , Catéteres Venosos Centrales/estadística & datos numéricos , Catéteres Venosos Centrales/tendencias , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular/etiología , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular/fisiopatología , Humanos , Masculino , Auditoría Médica , Medicare , Persona de Mediana Edad , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/etiología , Diálisis Renal/efectos adversos , Diálisis Renal/mortalidad , Diálisis Renal/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) has emerged as standard of care for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Real-world evidence is limited to compare this technology to open repair (OAR). Major gaps exist related to short-term and long-term outcomes, particularly in respect of gender differences. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Health insurance claims data from Germany's third largest insurance provider, DAK-Gesundheit, was used to investigate invasive in-hospital treatment of intact (iAAA) and ruptured AAA (rAAA). Patients operated between October 2008 and April 2015 were included in the study. RESULTS: A total of 5,509 patients (4,966 iAAA and 543 rAAA) underwent EVAR or OAR with a median follow-up of 2.44 years. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, and clinical characteristics of DAK-G patients were assessed. In total, 84.6 % of the iAAA and 79.9 % of the rAAA were male. Concerning iAAA repair, the median age (74 vs. 73 years, p < .001) compared to men was higher in females, but their EVAR-rate (66.8 % vs. 71.1 %, p = .018) was lower. Besides higher age of female patients (80 vs. 75 years, p < .001), no further statistically significant differences were seen following rAAA repair. In-hospital mortality was slightly lower in males compared to females following iAAA (2.3 % vs. 3.1 %, p = .159) and rAAA (37.3 % vs. 43.1 %, p = .273) repair. Concerning iAAA repair, a higher rate of female patients was transferred to another hospital (3.7 % vs. 2.0 %, p = 0.008) or discharged to rehabilitation (6.0 % vs. 2.7 %, p < .001) compared to male patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this large German claims data cohort, women are generally older and more often transferred to another hospital or discharged to rehab following iAAA repair. Nonetheless, no significantly increased risk of in-hospital or late death appeared for women in multivariate analyses. Further studies are necessary to evaluate the impact of recent gender-specific treatment strategies on overall outcome under real-world settings.