Cardiac risk after elective endovascular repair for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm: Results from the Italian Collaborators for EVAR multicenter registry.

OBJECTIVE: Major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) were common complications after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) causing significant postoperative morbidity and mortality. The aim of the study was to evaluate the cardiac risk after elective EVAR for uncomplicated noninfected infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm in a large multicenter cohort. METHODS: This is a multicenter, retrospective, financially unsupported physician-initiated observational cohort study conducted by four academic tertiary referral hospitals from January 2018 to March 2021. Baseline, perioperative, and postoperative information of elective EVARs was evaluated. The primary outcome was the incidence of MACEs after EVAR, which was defined as acute coronary syndrome, non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, unstable angina pectoris, de novo atrial fibrillation, hospitalization for heart failure, and revascularization as well as cardiovascular death. Secondary outcomes were 1-year overall survival (all-cause mortality) and freedom from aorta-related mortality. Comparative analysis was conducted between MACE and overall population, and univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to analyze factors associated with the risk of the MACE occurrence and early 1-year mortality. RESULTS: The study has enrolled 497 patients (35 females, 7%) with a mean age of 75.3 ± 7.8 years. The MACE rate was 6.4% (32/497, events/patients), and the majority of the events were recorded in the postoperative period (24/32, 75%; overall 24/497, 4.8%). One-year survival from all-cause mortality was 94% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 91-96), and the MACE population showed a significantly lower survival estimation rate (Overall - MACEs, 95.8% [95% CI: 93-97] - 67.9% [95% CI: 47-82], log-rank 41.950, P = .0001). Freedom from aorta-related mortality was 99.3% (95% CI: 98-100). The perioperative need for red blood cell transfusions was strongly related to the MACE occurrence (odds ratio: 2.67, 95% CI: 1.52-4.68, P = .001) and 1-year mortality (hazard ratio: 2.14, 95% CI: 1.48-3.09, P = .0001). CONCLUSIONS: MACEs represent a common complication in the postoperative and early period after elective EVAR. Blood loss requiring red blood cell transfusions is associated with increased postoperative MACEs and early mortality, suggesting that all the efforts should be carried out to reduce the bleeding during and after elective interventions.

Current Medicare reimbursement for complex endovascular aortic repair is inadequate based on results from a multi-institutional cost analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Complex endovascular juxta-, para- and suprarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (comEVAR) is frequently accomplished with commercially available fenestrated (FEVAR) devices or off-label use of aortoiliac devices with parallel branch stents (chEVAR). We sought to evaluate the implantable vascular device costs incurred with these procedures as compared with standard Medicare reimbursement to determine the financial viability of comEVAR in the modern era. METHODS: Five geographically distinct institutions with high-volume, complex aortic centers were included. Implantable aortoiliac and branch stent device cost data from 25 consecutive, recent, comEVAR in the treatment of juxta-, para-, and suprarenal aortic aneurysms at each center were analyzed. Cases of rupture, thoracic aneurysms, reinterventions, and physician-modified EVAR were excluded, as were ancillary costs from nonimplantable equipment. Data from all institutions were combined and stratified into an overall cost group and two, individual cost groups: FEVAR or chEVAR. These groups were compared, and each respective group was then compared with weighted Medicare reimbursement for Diagnosis-Related Group codes 268/269. Median device costs were obtained from an independent purchasing consortium of >3000 medical centers, yielding true median cost-to-institution data rather than speculative, administrative projections or estimates. RESULTS: A total of 125 cases were analyzed: 70 FEVAR and 53 chEVAR. Two cases of combined FEVAR/chEVAR were included in total cost analysis, but excluded from direct FEVAR vs chEVAR comparison. Median Medicare reimbursement was calculated as $35,755 per case. Combined average implantable device cost for all analyzed cases was $28,470 per case, or 80% of the median reimbursement ($28,470/$35,755). Average FEVAR device cost per case ($26,499) was significantly lower than average chEVAR cost per case ($32,122; P < .002). Device cost was 74% ($26,499/$35,755) of total reimbursement for FEVAR and 90% ($32,122/$35,755) for chEVAR. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this multi-institutional analysis show that implantable device cost alone represents the vast majority of weighted total Medicare reimbursement per case with comEVAR, and that chEVAR is significantly more costly than FEVAR. Inadequate Medicare reimbursement for these cases puts high-volume, high-complexity aortic centers at a distinct financial disadvantage. In the interest of optimizing patient care, these data suggest a reconsideration of previously established, outdated, Diagnosis-Related Group coding and Medicare reimbursement for comEVAR.

The association of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter with mortality in the International Consortium of Vascular Registries.

BACKGROUND: The mortality after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair is high, despite improvements in perioperative care, centralization of emergency vascular surgical services, and the introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). The diameter of intact AAA has been shown to be a predictor of short- and long-term survival. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of AAA diameter on mortality for rAAA repair using contemporary data collected from the International Consortium of Vascular Registries and compare outcomes by sex and the type of repair patients received. METHODS: Prospective registry data on repair of rAAA from seven countries were collected from 2010 to 2016. The primary outcome was perioperative mortality after EVAR and open surgical repair (OSR). Data were stratified by type of repair and sex. Logistic regression models were used to estimate odds ratio (OR) for the association between AAA diameter and perioperative mortality and the association between type of repair and mortality. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to adjust for differences in patient characteristics. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 6428 patients with a mean age ranging from 70.2 to 75.4 years; the mean AAA diameter was 7.7 ± 1.8 cm. Females had a significantly smaller AAA diameter at presentation compared with males (6.9 ± 1.6 cm vs 7.9 ± 1.8 cm; P < .001). who underwent OSR had larger AAA diameters compared with those who underwent EVAR (P < .001). Females who underwent repair were significantly older (P < .001). Males were more likely to have cardiac disease, diabetes mellitus, and renal impairment. Overall, AAA diameter was a predictor of mortality in univariate and multivariate analysis. When analyzing EVAR and OSR separately, the impact of AAA diameter per cm increase on mortality was apparent in both males and females undergoing EVAR, but not OSR (EVAR: male OR, 1.09 [95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.16] and EVAR: female OR, 1.17 [95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.35]). The early mortality rate for males and females who underwent EVAR was 18.9% and 25.9% (P < .001), respectively. The corresponding mortality for males and females who underwent OSR was 30.2% and 38.6% (P < .001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In these real-world international data, there is a significant association between rAAA diameters and early mortality in males and females. This association was more evident in patients undergoing EVAR, but not shown in OSR. Despite improvements in overall AAA repair outcomes, the risk of mortality after rAAA repair is consistently higher for females.

Systematic review of risk factors and outcomes of post-implantation syndrome following endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Post implantation syndrome (PIS) is an early systemic inflammatory response following endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). The response is variable in patients and the clinical significance of PIS upon outcomes is unknown. This study aims to evaluate the incidence, risk factors, and prognostic implication of PIS. METHODS: Systematic literature review and analysis was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Cochrane guidelines of PubMed, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Eligible English-language studies regarding PIS after infrarenal EVAR were included, after removing duplicates. RESULTS: After screening, 31 studies were included. A total of 2847 patients were reviewed, with mean age of 70.7 years, of which 2012 (90.4%) were male, with a pooled mean follow-up of 26.1 months. PIS was reported in 25.3% of cases, with mean aneurysm diameter of 56.4 cm. Polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) grafts were utilized in 794 patients (27.9%) with polyester in 1839 (64.6%). White blood cell count, C-reactive protein, interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, and IL-10 levels were all significantly elevated postoperatively. Thirty-day outcomes included type I endoleak rate of 0.8%, type II endoleak rate of 1.7%, reintervention rate of 0.35%, and mortality rate of 0.25%. Subgroup pooled analysis of patients with PIS (n = 309) vs No-PIS (n = 691) revealed that polyester (n = 642), rather than PTFE (n = 234) grafts, were associated with a higher rate of PIS (94.8% vs 3.7%; P = .0001), White blood cell count was higher in the PIS group both preoperatively (7.61 vs 6.76 × 109/L; P = .04) and postoperatively (15.0 vs 9.8 × 109/L; P = .0007) and IL-6 levels were higher in the PIS group postoperatively (98.6 vs 25.2 pg/mL; P = .02). Aneurysm diameter and amount of chronic or new thrombus within the aneurysm sac was not identified as a risk factor for PIS. Pooled outcomes of patients with PIS vs No-PIS demonstrated a significantly higher rate of 30-day mortality (0.6% vs 0%; P = .03) and major adverse cardiac events (5.8% vs 0.43%; P < .0001) without any differences seen in reintervention or 30-day type I or type II endoleaks. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review suggests that polyester grafts are strongly associated with PIS compared with PTFE. Interestingly, this report is suggestive of an association between 30-day mortality and major adverse cardiac events and PIS. Given these clinical sequelae, consideration for use of PTFE over polyester grafts to reduce the incidence of PIS may be a simple step to improve overall outcome. Further, exploration of the relationship between inflammatory mediators associated with PIS and mortality and cardiac complications may engender deeper understanding of risks, leading to eventual mitigation of harm for patients experiencing PIS.

Size thresholds for repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms warrant reconsideration.

BACKGROUND: The historical size threshold for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair is widely accepted to be 5.5 cm for men and 5.0 cm for women. However, contemporary AAA rupture risks may be lower than historical benchmarks, which has implications for when AAAs should be repaired. Our objective was to use contemporary AAA rupture rates to inform optimal size thresholds for AAA repair. METHODS: We used a Markov chain analysis to estimate life expectancy for patients with AAA. The primary outcome was AAA-related mortality. We estimated survival using Social Security Administration life tables and published contemporary AAA rupture estimates. For those undergoing repair, we modified survival estimates using data from the Vascular Quality Initiative and Medicare on complications, late rupture, and open conversion. We used this model to estimate the AAA repair size threshold that minimizes AAA-related mortality for 60-year-old average-health men and women. We performed a sensitivity analysis of poor-health patients and 70- and 80-year-old base cases. RESULTS: The annual risk of all-cause mortality under surveillance for a 60-year-old woman presenting with a 5.0 cm AAA using repair thresholds of 5.5 cm, 6.0 cm, 6.5 cm, and 7.0 cm was 1.7%, 2.3%, 2.7%, and 2.8%, respectively. The corresponding risk for a man was 2.3%, 2.9%, 3.3%, and 3.4% for the same repair thresholds, respectively. For a 60-year-old average-health woman, an AAA repair size of 6.1 cm was the optimal threshold to minimize AAA-related mortality. Life expectancy varied by <2 months for repair at sizes from 5.7 cm to 7.1 cm. For a 60-year-old average-health man, an AAA repair size of 6.9 cm was the optimal threshold to minimize AAA-related mortality. Life expectancy varied by <2 months for repair at sizes from 6.0 cm to 7.4 cm. Women in poor health, at various age strata, had optimal AAA repair size thresholds that were >6.5 cm, whereas men in poor health, at all ages, had optimal repair size thresholds that were >8.0 cm. CONCLUSIONS: The optimal threshold for AAA repair is more nuanced than a discrete size. Specifically, there appears to be a range of AAA sizes for which repair is reasonable to minmized AAA-related mortality. Notably, they all are greater than current guideline recommendations. These findings would suggest that contemporary AAA size thresholds for repair should be reconsidered.

Reinterventions and sac dynamics after fenestrated endovascular aortic repair with physician-modified endografts for index aneurysm repair and following proximal failure of prior endovascular aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: The high frequency of reinterventions after fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) with physician-modified endografts (PMEGs) has been well-studied. However, the impact of prior EVAR on reinterventions and sac behavior following these procedures remains unknown. We analyzed 3-year rates of reinterventions and sac dynamics following PMEG for index aneurysm repair compared with PMEG for prior EVAR with loss of proximal seal. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 122 consecutive FEVARs with PMEGs at a tertiary care center submitted to the United States Food and Drug Administration in support of an investigational device exemption trial. We excluded patients with aortic dissection (n = 5), type I to III thoracoabdominal aneurysms (n = 13), non-elective procedures (n = 4), and prior aortic surgery other than EVAR (n = 8), for a final cohort of 92 patients. Patients were divided into those who underwent PMEG for index aneurysm repair (primary FEVAR) and those who underwent PMEG for rescue of prior EVAR with loss of proximal seal (secondary FEVAR). The primary outcomes were freedom from reintervention and sac dynamics (regression as ≥5 mm decrease, expansion as ≥5 mm increase, and stability as <5 mm increase or decrease) at 3 years. Secondary outcomes were perioperative mortality and 3-year survival. RESULTS: Of the 92 patients included, 56 (61%) underwent primary FEVAR and 36 (39%) underwent secondary FEVAR. Secondary FEVAR patients were older (78 years [interquartile range (IQR), 74.5-83.5 years] vs 73 years [IQR, 69-78.5 years]; P < .001), more frequently male (86% vs 68%; P = .048), and had larger aneurysms (72.5 mm [IQR, 65.5-81 mm] vs 59 mm [IQR, 55-65 mm]; P < .001). Perioperative mortality was 1.8% for primary FEVAR and 2.7% for secondary FEVAR (P = .75). At 3 years, overall survival was 84% for primary FEVAR and 71% for secondary FEVAR (P = .086). Freedom-from reintervention was significantly higher for primary FEVAR than secondary FEVAR, specifically 82% vs 38% at 3 years (P < .001). Primary FEVAR also had more desirable sac dynamics relative to secondary FEVAR at 3 years (primary: 54% stable, 46% regressed, 0% expanded vs secondary: 33% stable, 28% regressed, and 39% expanded; P = .038). CONCLUSIONS: FEVAR for primary aortic repair and FEVAR for rescue of prior EVAR with loss of proximal seal are two distinct entities. Following primary FEVAR, less than a quarter of patients have undergone reintervention at 3 years, and sac expansion was not seen in our cohort. Comparatively, 3 years after secondary FEVAR, over one-half of patients have undergone reintervention and over one-third have had ongoing sac expansion. Vigilant surveillance and a low threshold for further interventions are crucial following secondary FEVAR.

The sac evolution imaging follow-up after endovascular aortic repair: An international expert opinion-based Delphi consensus study.

OBJECTIVE: Management of follow-up protocols after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) varies significantly between centers and is not standardized according to sac regression. By designing an international expert-based Delphi consensus, the study aimed to create recommendations on follow-up after EVAR according to sac evolution. METHODS: Eight facilitators created appropriate statements regarding the study topic that were voted, using a 4-point Likert scale, by a selected panel of international experts using a three-round modified Delphi consensus process. Based on the experts' responses, only those statements reaching a grade A (full agreement ≥75%) or B (overall agreement ≥80% and full disagreement <5%) were included in the final document. RESULTS: One-hundred and seventy-four participants were included in the final analysis, and each voted the initial 29 statements related to the definition of sac regression (Q1-Q9), EVAR follow-up (Q10-Q14), and the assessment and role of sac regression during follow-up (Q15-Q29). At the end of the process, 2 statements (6.9%) were rejected, 9 statements (31%) received a grade B consensus strength, and 18 (62.1%) reached a grade A consensus strength. Of 27 final statements, 15 (55.6%) were classified as grade I, whereas 12 (44.4%) were classified as grade II. Experts agreed that sac regression should be considered an important indicator of EVAR success and always be assessed during follow-up after EVAR. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the elevated strength and high consistency of this international expert-based Delphi consensus, most of the statements might guide the current clinical management of follow-up after EVAR according to the sac regression. Future studies are needed to clarify debated issues.

The association between sex and outcomes after thoracic endovascular repair for acute type B aortic dissection.

OBJECTIVE: Prior literature has found worse outcomes for female patients after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm and mixed findings after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for thoracic aortic aneurysm. However, the influence of sex on outcomes after TEVAR for acute type B aortic dissection (aTBAD) is not fully elucidated. METHODS: We identified patients who underwent TEVAR for aTBAD (<30 days) in the Vascular Quality Initiative from 2014 to 2022. We excluded patients with an entry tear or stent seal within the ascending aorta or aortic arch and patients with an unknown proximal tear location. Included patients were stratified by biological sex, and we analyzed perioperative outcomes and 5-year mortality with multivariable logistic regression and Cox regression analysis, respectively. Furthermore, we analyzed adjusted variables for interaction with female sex. RESULTS: We included 1626 patients, 33% of whom were female. At presentation, female patients were significantly older (65 [interquartile range: 54, 75] years vs 56 [interquartile range: 49, 68] years; P = .01). Regarding indications for repair, female patients had higher rates of pain (85% vs 80%; P = .02) and lower rates of malperfusion (23% vs 35%; P < .001), specifically mesenteric, renal, and lower limb malperfusion. Female patients had a lower proportion of proximal repairs in zone 2 (39% vs 48%; P < .01). After TEVAR for aTBAD, female sex was associated with comparable odds of perioperative mortality to males (8.1 vs 9.2%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.79 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.51-1.20]). Regarding perioperative complications, female sex was associated with lower odds for cardiac complications (2.3% vs 4.7%; aOR: 0.52 [95% CI: 0.26-0.97]), but all other complications were comparable between sexes. Compared with male sex, female sex was associated with similar risk for 5-year mortality (26% vs 23%; adjusted hazard ratio: 1.01 [95% CI: 0.77-1.32]). On testing variables for interaction with sex, female sex was associated with lower perioperative and 5-year mortality at older ages relative to males (aOR: 0.96 [0.93-0.99] | adjusted hazard ratio: 0.97 [0.95-0.99]) and higher odds of perioperative mortality when mesenteric malperfusion was present (OR: 2.71 [1.04-6.96]). CONCLUSIONS: Female patients were older, less likely to have complicated dissection, and had more distal proximal landing zones. After TEVAR for aTBAD, female sex was associated with similar perioperative and 5-year mortality to male sex, but lower odds of in-hospital cardiac complications. Interaction analysis showed that females were at additional risk for perioperative mortality when mesenteric ischemia was present. These data suggest that TEVAR for aTBAD overall has a similar safety profile in females as it does for males.

Decreasing prevalence of centers meeting the Society for Vascular Surgery abdominal aortic aneurysm guidelines in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: Based on data supporting a volume-outcome relationship in elective aortic aneurysm repair, the Society of Vascular Surgery (SVS) guidelines recommend that endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) be localized to centers that perform ≥10 operations annually and have a perioperative mortality and conversion-to-open rate of ≤2% and that open aortic repair (OAR) be localized to centers that perform ≥10 open aortic operations annually and have a perioperative mortality ≤5%. However, the number and distribution of centers meeting the SVS criteria remains unclear. This study aimed to estimate the temporal trends and geographic distribution of Centers Meeting the SVS Aortic Guidelines (CMAG) in the United States. METHODS: The SVS Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for all OAR, aortic bypasses, and EVAR from 2011 to 2019. Annual OAR and EVAR volume, 30-day elective operative mortality for OAR or EVAR, and EVAR conversion-to-open rate for all centers were calculated. The SVS guidelines for OAR and EVAR, individually and combined, were applied to each institution leading to a CMAG designation. The proportion of CMAGs by region (West, Midwest, South, and Northeast) were compared by year using a χ2 test. Temporal trends were estimated using a multivariable logistic regression for CMAG, adjusting by region. RESULTS: Overall, 67,865 patients (49,264 EVAR; 11,010 OAR; 7591 aortic bypasses) at 336 institutions were examined. The proportion of EVAR CMAGs increased nationally by 1.7% annually from 51.6% (n = 33/64) in 2011 to 67.1% (n = 190/283) in 2019 (ß = .05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.09; P = .02). The proportion of EVAR CMAGs across regions ranged from 27.3% to 66.7% in 2011 to 63.9% to 72.9% in 2019. In contrast, the proportion of OAR CMAGs has decreased nationally by 1.8% annually from 32.8% (n = 21/64) in 2011 to 16.3% (n = 46/283) in 2019 (ß = -.14; 95% CI, -0.19 to -0.10; P < .01). Combined EVAR and OAR CMAGs were even less frequent and decreased by 1.5% annually from 26.6% (n = 17/64) in 2011 to 13.1% (n = 37/283) in 2019 (ß = -.12; 95% CI, -0.17 to -0.07; P < .01). In 2019, there was no significant difference in regional variation of the proportion of combined EVAR and OAR CMAGs (P = .82). CONCLUSIONS: Although an increasing proportion of institutions nationally meet the SVS guidelines for EVAR, a smaller proportion meet them for OAR, with a concerning downward trend. These data question whether we can safely offer OAR at most institutions, have important implications about sufficient OAR exposure for trainees, and support regionalization of OAR.

Prevalence of type II endoleak after elective endovascular aneurysm repair with polytetrafluoroethylene- or polyester-based endografts.

OBJECTIVE: Type II endoleak is the most frequent complication after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair. Polytetrafluoroethylene and polyester (PE) are the two most commonly used graft materials in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) devices. Biological properties of the material might influence the appearance and persistence of type II endoleak (T2EL). Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate potential differences in the prevalence of T2EL after EVAR between polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and PE endografts in patients electively treated for an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm. METHODS: A single-center, retrospective, observational study was conducted between January 2011 and January 2022. Preoperative, procedural, and follow-up data were derived from electronic health records. Imaging included computed tomography scans, and/or duplex ultrasound examination. The primary end point was the prevalence of T2EL diagnosed within 1 year after EVAR. Secondary end points included the prevalence of T2EL throughout follow-up, early (≤30 days) and late (>30 days) T2EL, the rate of T2EL disappearance during the follow-up period, the prevalence of type I and III endoleak, and T2EL-related reinterventions. RESULTS: Follow-up was available for 394 patients, 245 in the PE and 149 in the PTFE group. The prevalence of T2EL diagnosed within 1 year after endovascular repair was 11.8% in the PE group and 21.5% in the PTFE group (P = .010). There was no significant difference in early (≤30 days) and late (>30 days) T2EL between groups (P = .270 and P = .311). There was no difference in the freedom from endoleak type II reinterventions between groups (P = .877). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of T2EL after elective EVAR is significantly higher with the use of PTFE-based endografts compared with PE-based endografts. This difference is mostly based on T2EL diagnosed after 30 days of follow-up.

Outcomes of octogenarians receiving aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair is recommended for aneurysms greater than 5.5 cm in men and 5 cm in women. Because AAA is more common among the elderly, we sought to evaluate contemporary practices of elective AAA repair and 2-year postoperative outcomes in octogenarians. METHODS: We identified octogenarians undergoing elective AAA repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative from 2012 to 2019. We included patients undergoing endovascular (EVAR) and open (OAR) aortic repair. Demographics and comorbid conditions were compared between patient groups. Frailty was calculated using previously published methods. Patients with frailty scores above the 75th percentile of the operative cohort were considered high frailty. The primary outcome was 1- and 2-year mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications. Standard statistical methods were utilized. Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify factors that affect mortality. RESULTS: The frequency of AAA repair in octogenarians has remained stable. Of all aortic operations, 21.4% were performed on octogenarians; 9735 (23.3% of 41,712) EVAR and 755 (10.3% of 7325) OARs. Among octogenarian patients, 42.0% of EVARs were under size thresholds: 48.3% males ≤5.5 cm diameter and 21.5% females ≤5.0 cm diameter compared with 18.8% OARs: 23.4% males and 10.7% females. Additionally, 25.6% had high frailty scores. Among octogenarians, 1- and 2-year mortality was 9.3% ± 0.3% and 14.8% ± 0.4% for EVAR and 15.2% ± 1.3% and 18.9% ± 1.5% for OAR patients, respectively (P < .01). In-hospital mortality rate was higher after OAR (0.87% EVAR vs 7.55% OAR; P < .01) and differed with frailty (EVAR, low frailty 0.2% vs high frailty 1.7%; OAR, low frailty 2.3% vs high frailty 15.6%). For EVAR, patient factors associated with mortality included heart failure (hazard ratio [HR], 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-1.25; P = .001) and dialysis (HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.13-2.59; P = .012). For OAR, coronary artery disease (HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 0.98-2.44; P = .062) was associated with mortality. Statin use was protective of mortality for all patients (EVAR: HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.60-0.78; P < .01): OAR: HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.37-0.92; P = .020). Among octogenarians, high frailty was independently associated with 2-year mortality (EVAR: HR, 3.36; 95% CI, 2.62-4.31; P < .01 and OAR: HR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.09-5.10; P = .030). CONCLUSIONS: Nationally, a large portion of elective AAA repair in octogenarians is performed below recommended size thresholds, one-quarter of whom are frail with poor long-term 2-year mortality rates. High 2-year mortality following AAA repair in this age group exceeds the published risk of rupture for 5- to 5.5-cm AAA, suggesting that increase in the size threshold of elective repair among octogenarians should be explored.

Reducing aneurysm sac growth and secondary interventions following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair by preemptive coil embolization of the inferior mesenteric artery and lumbar arteries.

OBJECTIVE: Type II endoleak (EL-2) is the most common complication following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), leading to continued sac growth and potential rupture. In this study, we examined the association between patency of the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) and lumbar arteries (LAs) with respect to sac growth. The effect of preemptive embolization of the IMA and/or LAs on the need for secondary interventions for sac growth post-EVAR was also evaluated. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed on consecutive patients who underwent EVAR for non-ruptured, infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) from January 2012 to December 2020. A select group of patients underwent preemptive embolization of the IMA and/or LA. Patients with any types I, III, or IV endoleaks were excluded. Patency of the IMA and LA on preoperative computed tomography angiogram (CTA) was evaluated on TeraRecon workstation. All secondary interventions to treat EL-2 were recorded. Sac growth was defined as centerline axial diameter increase of ≥5 mm on follow-up CTA. RESULTS: A total of 300 patients (mean age, 74 ± 8.5 years; 83.7% male) underwent EVAR. Ninety-nine patients had preemptive embolization of the IMA and/or LA. Mean follow-up of the cohort was 59.3 ± 30.5 months. Thirty-six patients (12%) demonstrated sac growth on follow-up; 12 of these (33.3%) had preemptive embolization. The median time until detection of sac growth was 28.8 months (interquartile range, 15.2-46.5 months), with a mean growth of 10.1 ± 6.4 mm. Sac growth was significantly associated with presence of EL-2: 27 of 36 (75%) with EL-2 vs 9 of 36 (25%) without EL-2 (P < .001). Patients with sac growth had a higher mean total number (2.6 ± 1.5) of patent lower LAs (L3, L4) compared with those without (2.0 ± 1.4; P = .03). Patency of L1, L2, and L3 LAs were not associated with sac growth. However, patency of at least one L4 LA was significantly associated with sac growth (14.8% vs 7.7%; P = .04). The highest incidence of sac growth (17.6%) was seen when both IMA and L4 LA were patent; significantly different from the lowest incidence (5.3%) when both were occluded preoperatively (P = .018). Preemptive coiling of the IMA and/or LA significantly reduced the need for post-EVAR secondary intervention for sac growth. Freedom from post-EVAR secondary intervention was achieved in 92 of 99 (92.9%) pre-EVAR coiled patients vs 163 of 201 (81.5%) patients who did not undergo pre-EVAR coiling (P = .009). CONCLUSIONS: Preemptive coil embolization of the IMA and LAs, especially L4 LA, reduces the need for secondary interventions for sac growth, potentially improving the long-term durability of EVAR.

Octogenarians fare better under local anesthesia for elective endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVE: With an aging patient population, an increasing number of octogenarians are undergoing elective endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) in the United States. Multiple studies have shown that, for the general population, use of local anesthetic (LA) for EVAR is associated with improved short-term and long-term outcomes as compared with performing these operations under general anesthesia (GA). Therefore, this study aimed to study the association of LA for elective EVARs with perioperative outcomes, among octogenarians. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative database (2003-2021) was used to conduct this study. Octogenarians (Aged ≥80 years) were selected and sorted into two study groups: LA (Group I) and GA (Group II). Our primary outcomes were length of stay and mortality. Secondary outcomes included operative time, estimated blood loss, return to operating room, cardiopulmonary complications, and discharge location. RESULTS: Of the 16,398 selected patients, 1197 patients (7.3%) were included in Group I, and 15,201 patients (92.7%) were in Group II. Procedural time was significantly shorter for the LA group (114.6 vs 134.6; P < .001), as was estimated blood loss (152 vs 222 cc; P < .001). Length of stay was significantly shorter (1.8 vs 2.6 days; P < .001), and patients were more likely to be discharged home (LA 88.8% vs GA 86.9%; P = .036) in the LA group. Group I also experienced fewer pulmonary complications; only 0.17% experienced pneumonia and 0.42% required ventilator support compared with 0.64% and 1.02% in Group II, respectively. This finding corresponded to fewer days in the intensive care unit for Group I (0.41 vs 0.69 days; P < .001). No significant difference was seen in 30-day mortality cardiac, renal, or access site-related complications. Return to operating room was also equivocal between the two groups. Multivariate regression analysis confirmed GA was associated with a significantly longer length of stay and significantly higher rates of non-home discharge (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.59; P < .001 and AOR, 1.40; P = .025, respectively). When stratified by the New York Heart Association classification system, classes I, II, III, and IV (1.55; P < .001; 1.26; P = .029; 2.03; P < .001; 4.07; P < .001, respectively) were associated with significantly longer hospital stays. CONCLUSIONS: The use of LA for EVARs in octogenarians is associated with shorter lengths of stay, fewer respiratory complications, and home discharge. These patients also experienced shorter procedure times and less blood loss. There was no statistically significant difference in 30-day mortality, return to operating room, or access-related complications. LA for octogenarians undergoing EVAR should be considered more frequently to shorten hospital stays and decrease complication rates.

National trends in utilization of surgeon-modified grafts for complex and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

INTRODUCTION: Custom-branched/fenestrated grafts are widely available in other countries, but in the United States, they are limited to a handful of centers, with the exception of a 3-vessel juxtarenal device (ZFEN). Consequently, many surgeons have turned to alternative strategies such as physician-modified endografts (PMEGs). We therefore sought to determine how widespread the use of these grafts is. METHODS: We studied all complex endovascular repairs of complex and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms in the Vascular Quality Initiative from 2014 to 2022 to examine temporal trends. RESULTS: A total of 5826 repairs were performed during the study period: 1895 ZFEN, 3241 PMEG, 595 parallel grafting, and 95 where parallel grafting was used in addition to ZFEN, with a mean of 2.7 ± 0.98 vessels incorporated. Over time, the number of PMEGs steadily increased, both overall and for juxtarenal aneurysms, whereas the number of ZFENs essentially leveled off by 2017 and has remained steady ever since. In the most recent complete year (2021), PMEGs outnumbered ZFENs by over 2:1 overall (567 to 256) and nearly twofold for juxtarenal repairs. In three-vessel cases involving juxtarenal aneurysms, PMEGs were used as frequently as ZFENs (43% vs 43%), whereas the proportion of juxtarenal aneurysms repaired using a four-vessel graft configuration increased from 20% in 2014 to 29% in 2021 (P < .001). The differences in PMEG use were more pronounced as surgeon volume increased. Surgeons in the lowest quartile of volume performed <2 complex repairs annually, evenly split between PMEGs and ZFENs. However, surgeons in the highest quartile of volume performed a median of 18 (interquartile range: 10-21) PMEGs/y, but only 1.6 (interquartile range: 0.8-3.4) ZFENs/y. The number of physician-sponsored investigational device exemption trials of PMEGs has expanded from 1 in 2012 to 8 currently enrolling. As those data are not included in the Vascular Quality Initiative, the true number of PMEGs is likely substantially higher. CONCLUSIONS: PMEGs have become the dominant endovascular repair modality of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms outside of investigational device exemptions. The field of endovascular aortic surgery and patients with complex aneurysms would benefit from broader publication of PMEG techniques, outcomes, and comparisons to custom-manufactured grafts.

Follow-up compliance in patients undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm repair at Veterans Affairs hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: The Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines recommend annual imaging surveillance following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and every 5 years following open surgical repairs (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Adherence to these guidelines is low outside of clinical trials, and compliance at Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals is not yet well-established. We examined imaging follow-up compliance and mortality rates after AAA repair at VA hospitals. METHODS: We queried the VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program database for elective infrarenal AAA repairs, EVAR and OSR, then merged in follow-up imaging and mortality information. Mortality rate over time was derived using Kaplan-Meier estimation. Generalized estimating equation with a logit link and a sandwich standard error estimate was performed to compare the probability of having annual follow-up imaging over time between procedure types and to identify variables associated with follow-up imaging for EVAR patients. RESULTS: Our analysis included 11,668 patients who underwent EVAR and 4507 patients who underwent OSR at VA hospitals between the years 2000 and 2019. The 30-day mortality rate for EVAR and OSR was 0.37% and 0.82%, respectively. OSR was associated with lower long-term mortality after adjusting age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification and preoperative renal failure with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.88 (95% confidence interval, 0.84-0.92; P < .01). Of surviving patients, the follow-up imaging rate was 69.1% by 1 year post-EVAR. The follow-up rate after 5 years was 45.6% post-EVAR compared with 63.6% post-OSR of surviving patients. A history of smoking or drinking, baseline hypertension, and known cardiac disease were independently associated with poor follow-up after EVAR. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing elective open AAA repair in the VA hospital system had lower long-term mortality compared with patients who underwent endovascular repair. Compliance with post-EVAR imaging is low. Patient factors associated with poor post-EVAR imaging surveillance were smoking within the last year, excess alcohol consumption, and cardiac risk factors including hypertension, prior myocardial infarction, and congestive heart failure.

Earned outcomes correlate with reliability-adjusted surgical mortality after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair and predict future performance.

OBJECTIVE: Cumulative, probability-based metrics are regularly used to measure quality in professional sports, but these methods have not been applied to health care delivery. These techniques have the potential to be particularly useful in describing surgical quality, where case volume is variable and outcomes tend to be dominated by statistical "noise." The established statistical technique used to adjust for differences in case volume is reliability-adjustment, which emphasizes statistical "signal" but has several limitations. We sought to validate a novel measure of surgical quality based on earned outcomes methods (deaths above average [DAA]) against reliability-adjusted mortality rates, using abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair outcomes to illustrate the measure's performance. METHODS: Earned outcomes methods were used to calculate the outcome of interest for each patient: DAA. Hospital-level DAA was calculated for non-ruptured open AAA repair and endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in the Vascular Quality Initiative database from 2016 to 2019. DAA for each center is the sum of observed - predicted risk of death for each patient; predicted risk of death was calculated using established multivariable logistic regression modeling. Correlations of DAA with reliability-adjusted mortality rates and procedure volume were determined. Because an accurate quality metric should correlate with future results, outcomes from 2016 to 2017 were used to categorize hospital quality based on: (1) risk-adjusted mortality; (2) risk- and reliability-adjusted mortality; and (3) DAA. The best performing quality metric was determined by comparing the ability of these categories to predict 2018 to 2019 risk-adjusted outcomes. RESULTS: During the study period, 3734 patients underwent open repair (106 hospitals), and 20,680 patients underwent EVAR (183 hospitals). DAA was closely correlated with reliability-adjusted mortality rates for open repair (r = 0.94; P < .001) and EVAR (r = 0.99; P < .001). DAA also correlated with hospital case volume for open repair (r = -.54; P < .001), but not EVAR (r = 0.07; P = .3). In 2016 to 2017, most hospitals had 0% mortality (55% open repair, 57% EVAR), making it impossible to evaluate these hospitals using traditional risk-adjusted mortality rates alone. Further, zero mortality hospitals in 2016 to 2017 did not demonstrate improved outcomes in 2018 to 2019 for open repair (3.8% vs 4.6%; P = .5) or EVAR (0.8% vs 1.0%; P = .2) compared with all other hospitals. In contrast to traditional risk-adjustment, 2016 to 2017 DAA evenly divided centers into quality quartiles that predicted 2018 to 2019 performance with increased mortality rate associated with each decrement in quality quartile (Q1, 3.2%; Q2, 4.0%; Q3, 5.1%; Q4, 6.0%). There was a significantly higher risk of mortality at worst quartile open repair hospitals compared with best quartile hospitals (odds ratio, 2.01; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-3.76; P = .03). Using 2016 to 2019 DAA to define quality, highest quality quartile open repair hospitals had lower median DAA compared with lowest quality quartile hospitals (-1.18 DAA vs +1.32 DAA; P < .001), correlating with lower median reliability-adjusted mortality rates (3.6% vs 5.1%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Adjustment for differences in hospital volume is essential when measuring hospital-level outcomes. Earned outcomes accurately categorize hospital quality and correlate with reliability-adjustment but are easier to calculate and interpret. From 2016 to 2019, highest quality open AAA repair hospitals prevented >40 perioperative deaths compared with the average hospital, and >80 perioperative deaths compared with lowest quality hospitals.

An International, Expert-based, Delphi Consensus Document on Controversial Issues in the Management of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

OBJECTIVE: As a result of conflicting, inadequate or controversial data in the literature, several issues concerning the management of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) remain unanswered. The aim of this international, expert-based Delphi Consensus document was to provide some guidance for clinicians on these controversial topics. METHODS: A 3-Round Delphi Consensus document was produced with 44 experts on 6 pre-specified topics regarding the management of AAAs. All answers were provided anonymously. The response rate for each round was 100%. RESULTS: Most participants (42 of 44; 95.4%) agreed that a minimum case volume/year is essential (or probably essential) for a center to offer open/endovascular AAA repair (EVAR). Furthermore, 33 of 44 (75.0%) believed that AAA screening programs are (probably) still clinically effective and cost-effective. Additionally, most panelists (36 of 44; 81.9%) voted that surveillance after EVAR should be (or should probably be) lifelong. Finally, 35 of 44 (79.7%) participants thought that women smokers should (or should probably/possibly) be considered for screening at 65 years of age similar to men. No consensus was achieved regarding lowering the threshold for AAA repair and the need for deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis in patients undergoing EVAR. CONCLUSIONS: This expert-based Delphi Consensus document provides guidance for clinicians regarding specific unresolved issues. Consensus could not be achieved in some topics, highlighting the need for further research in those areas.

Use of physician-modified inverted limb in conjunction with Zenith fenestrated stent graft to rescue failed previous endovascular and open repair.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate outcomes and performance of inverted limbs (ILs) when used in conjunction with Zenith fenestrated stent grafts (Zfens) to treat patients with short distance between the lowest renal artery (RA) and aortic or graft bifurcation (A/GB). METHODS: This study was a multicenter, retrospective review of prospectively maintained database of patients with complex aortic aneurysms, failed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), or open surgical repair (OSR) with short distance between LRA and A/GB treated using a combination of Zfen and an IL between 2013 and 2023. Endpoints included technical success, aneurysm sac regression, long-term device integrity, and target vessel patency. We defined technical success as implantation of the device with no endoleak, conversion to an aorto-uni-iliac or OSR. RESULTS: During this time, 52 patients underwent endovascular rescue of failed repair. Twenty (38.5%) of them required relining of the failed repairs using IL due to lowest RA to A/GB length restrictions. Two patients had undergone rescue with a fenestrated cuff alone but developed type III endoleaks. One patient with no previous implant had a short distance between the lowest RA and aortic bifurcation to accommodate the bifurcated distal device, and two patients had failed OSR or anastomotic pseudoaneurysms. The majority (94%) were men with a mean age of 76.8 ± 6.1 years. The mean aortic neck diameter and aneurysm size were 32 ± 4 cm and 7.2 ± 1.3 cm, respectively. The median time laps between initial repair and failure was 36 months (interquartile range [IQR], 24-54 months). Sixteen patients (80%) were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists class III, whereas four were class IV. Seventy-eight vessels were targeted and successfully incorporated. Technical success was 100%, and median estimated blood loss was 100 mL (IQR, 100-200 mL). Mean fluoroscopy time and dose were 61 ± 18 minutes and 2754 ± 1062 mGy, respectively. Average hospital length of stay was 2.75 ± 2.15 days. Postoperative complication occurred in one patient who required lower extremity fasciotomy for compartment syndrome. At a median follow-up of 50 months (IQR, 18-58 months), there were no device migration, components separation, aneurysmal related mortality, and type I or type III endoleak. Aneurysm sac regression (95%) or stabilization (5%) was observed in all patients, including in four patients (25%) with type II endoleak. CONCLUSIONS: The use of IL in conjunction with Zfen to treat patients with short distance between the lowest RA and A/GB is safe, effective, and has excellent long-term results. The technique expands the indication of Zfen, especially in patients with failed previous EVAR.

Postdissection aortic aneurysm sac enlargement after fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

OBJECTIVES: Aneurysm sac changes after fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (FBEVAR) for postdissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (PD-TAAs) are poorly understood. Partial thrombosis of the false lumen and endoleaks may impair sac regression. To characterize sac changes after FBEVAR for PD-TAAs, this study examined midterm results and predictors for sac enlargement. METHODS: FBEVARs performed for PD-TAAs in 10 physician-sponsored investigational device exemption studies from 2008 to 2023 were analyzed. The maximum aortic aneurysm diameter was compared between the 30-day computed tomography angiogram and follow-up imaging studies. Aneurysm sac enlargement was defined as an increase in diameter of ≥5 mm. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression were used to evaluate sac enlargement and midterm FBEVAR outcomes. RESULTS: Among 3296 FBEVARs, 290 patients (72.4% male; median age, 68.4 years) were treated for PD-TAAs. Most aneurysms treated were extent II (72%) and III (12%). Mean aneurysm diameter was 66.5 ± 11.2 mm. Mortality at 30 days was 1.4%. At a mean follow-up of 2.9 ± 1.9 years, at least one follow-up imaging study revealed sac enlargement in 43 patients (15%), sac regression in 115 patients (40%), and neither enlargement nor regression in 137 (47%); 5 (2%) demonstrated both expansion and regression during follow-up. Freedom from aneurysm sac enlargement was 93%, 82%, and 80% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Overall, endoleaks were detected in 27 patients (63%) with sac enlargement and 143 patients (58%) without enlargement (P = .54). Sac enlargement was significantly more frequent among older patients (mean age at the index procedure, 70.2 ± 8.9 years vs 66.5 ± 11 years; P = .04) and those with type II endoleaks at 1 year (74% vs 52%; P = .031). Cox regression revealed age >70 years at baseline (hazard ratio [HR], 2.146; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.167-3.944; P = .010) and presence of type II endoleak at 1 year (HR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.07-4.79; P = .032) were independent predictors of sac enlargement. Patient survival was 92%, 81%, and 68% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. Cumulative target vessel instability was 7%, and aneurysm-related mortality was 2% at 5 years. At least 42% of patients required secondary interventions. Sac enlargement did not affect patient survival. CONCLUSIONS: Aneurysm sac enlargement occurs in 15% of patients after FBEVAR for PD-TAAs. Elderly patients (>70 years at baseline) and those with type II endoleaks at 1 year may need closer monitoring and secondary interventions to prevent sac enlargement. Despite sac enlargement in some patients, aneurysm-related mortality at 5 years remains low and overall survival was not associated with sac enlargement.

Midterm Outcomes for Funnel-EVAR.

Background: The funnel technique, the hybrid assembly of a thoracic and abdominal aortic endograft, is advantageous for frail patients where efficient oversizing is not possible for infrarenal wide aortic necks over 34 mm. We sought to determine the advantages and disadvantages of the Funnel-endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) technique using 60 mm length thoracic endograft. Methods: This retrospective study included 22 patients, all frail with high comorbidities, who were operated on with the Funnel technique using the 60 mm Lifetech Ankura thoracic endograft, in 7 urgent and 15 elective cases from January 2018. There were no exclusion criteria except having an age < 60 years. Primary endpoints were the technical success and early mortality and morbidity; secondary endpoints were late outcomes such as endoleak, migration, late open surgical conversion, successful sac shrinkage, and enlargement at the infrarenal aortic neck diameter. Results: The patients' mean age was 72.6 ± 7.3 years (62-86 years), with a mean aneurysm diameter of 83.2 ± 16.8 mm and mean infrarenal aortic diameter of 38.7 ± 2.4 mm. There was no early mortality. Technical success was 100%. 21 standard bifurcated and one aorto-uni-iliac abdominal endograft were deployed. The mean fluoroscopy time was 14.3 ± 5.2 minutes. Mean follow-up was 32.8 ± 19.6 months, with no endovascular complications. There was no Type-1a or Type-3 endoleak, migration, infrarenal aortic neck diameter enlargement, or aneurysm sac enlargement. During the follow-up, three patients died, but there was no aneurysm-related mortality. Conclusions: Funnel-EVAR is effective and safe for patients with a wide infrarenal aortic neck diameter when assessing midterm outcomes. Therefore, it should be part of the armamentarium of a vascular surgeon in patients with wide aortic necks > 34 mm.