Cutdown is Associated with Higher 30-day Unplanned Readmissions and Wound Complications than Percutaneous Access for EVAR

Abstract

ObjectivesA 2023 Cochrane review showed no difference in bleeding/wound infection complications, short-term mortality and aneurysm exclusion between the percutaneous and cut-down approach for femoral access in endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). In contrast, single-center studies have shown bilateral cutdown resulting in higher readmission rates due to higher rates of groin wound infections. Whether 30-day readmission rates vary by type of access during EVAR procedures is unknown. The goal of this study was to ascertain which femoral access approach for EVAR is associated with the lowest risk of 30-day readmission. MethodsThe Targeted Vascular Module from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was queried to identify patients undergoing EVAR for aortic disease from 2012-2021. All ruptures and other emergency cases were excluded. Cohorts were divided into bilateral cutdown, unilateral cutdown, failed percutaneous attempt converted to open and successful percutaneous access. The primary 30-day outcomes were unplanned readmission and wound complications. Univariate analyses were performed using the Fisher’s exact test, Chi-Square test and the Student’s t-test. Multivariable analysis was performed using logistic regression. ResultsFrom 2012 to 2021, 14,002 patients met study criteria. Most (7,395 [53%]) underwent completely percutaneous access, 5,616 (40%) underwent bilateral cutdown, 849 (6%) underwent unilateral cutdown, and 146 (1%) had a failed percutaneous access which was converted to open. Unplanned readmissions by access strategy included 7.6% for bilateral cutdown, 7.3% for unilateral cutdown, 7.8% for attempted percutaneous converted to cutdown, and 5.7% for completely percutaneous access (p<.001, Figure 1). After multivariable analysis, unplanned readmissions compared to percutaneous access yielded: percutaneous converted to cutdown adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.38, 95% CI [0.76-2.53], p=.29; unilateral cutdown AOR: 1.18, 95% CI [0.92-1.51], p=.20; bilateral cutdown AOR: 1.26, 95% CI [1.09-1.43], p=.001. Bilateral cutdown was also associated with higher wound complications compared to percutaneous access (AOR: 4.41, CI [2.86-6.79], p<.001), as was unilateral cutdown (AOR: 3.04, CI [1.46-6.32], p=.003). ConclusionPatients undergoing cutdown for EVAR are at higher risk for 30-day readmission compared to completely percutaneous access. If patient anatomy allows for percutaneous EVAR, this access option should be prioritized.