Aortic Aneurysm Repair In Patients Research Articles

Increased Mortality After Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients With Enlarged Aortic Necks

Increased Mortality After Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients With Enlarged Aortic Necks

Use of EndoAnchors during index endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in patients with hostile proximal aortic neck anatomy.

Standard endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is sometimes the only treatment option for patients with hostile aortic neck anatomy, but it carries an increased risk of both early and late procedure-related complications. The aim of this study was to report on single-center experience with the Heli-FX EndoAnchors (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA) as an adjunctive procedure to endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for prevention and perioperative treatment of proximal neck complications in patients with hostile neck anatomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Asingle-centre, retrospective study evaluating 24 consecutive patients treated with EndoAnchors during the index EVAR procedure between November 2018 and August 2021. EndoAnchor implantation was indicated for cases with hostile proximal aortic neck anatomy characterised by the presence of at least one of the following parameters: length of 28 mm, angle of >60°, circumferential thrombus/calcification involving ≥50%, and reverse taper. Median follow-up period was 22.5 months (IQR 2-31.5 months) with no aneurysm-related death, rupture, or conversion to open surgical repair during the follow-up. The procedural success rate was 100%, with no type Ia endoleak at the completion angiography. Amean of 7 EndoAnchors was used per patient (range 4-12). There were no EndoAnchor fractures and dislocations or stent graft fabric damage due to anchor implants.Twenty-three patients (95.8%) remained free of type Ia endoleak and migration on follow-up imaging. Aneurysm sac regression was observed in 13 patients (54.1%), while in 8 patients (33.3%) the sac remained stable. Sac enlargement was present in 1 patient (4.2%) due to late type Ia endoleak. Twopatients were lost to the follow-up immediately after the procedure.Between two groups of patients (sac regression versus failure to regress), the larger initial diameter of the proximal neck was the only significant independent factor associated with a lower possibility of sac regression (p= 0,021). The use of EndoAnchors during the index EVAR procedure in cases with challenging aortic neck anatomy with or without perioperative type Ia endoleak was associated with good midterm results and led to sac regression in most of the patients (Tab. 4, Fig. 3, Ref. 31).

Abstract 14618: Comparative Outcomes of Elective Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients With Preoperative Cardiac Stress Testing

Introduction: The use of cardiac stress testing (CST) before endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR) repair is controversial. While prior research has explored the utility of CST before EVAR, EVAR outcomes in patients with different CST results have not been studied. The objective of this study is to evaluate EVAR outcomes in patients with abnormal CST. Hypothesis: Patients with abnormal CST before EVAR have inferior outcomes compared to patients with normal CST. Methods: The Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database for EVAR was reviewed. Patients who underwent CST prior to elective EVAR were included. In VQI, abnormal CST is defined as having ischemia, infarction, or both ischemia and infarction (BII). Outcomes of patients with normal and abnormal CST were compared, including a subgroup analysis of CST abnormalities. Results: A total of 19,964 patients were included and 23.7% (4,723) had abnormal CST. Patients with abnormal CST were more commonly males with comorbidities. Patients with abnormal CST had significantly more perioperative complications including MACE and one-year mortality compared to patients with normal CST. ( Table ) Regression analysis revealed that abnormal CST was independently associated with increased perioperative MACE (OR=1.59 [1.28-1.97]) and one-year mortality (HR=1.11 [1.00-1.23]). Subgroup analysis of patients with abnormal CST showed that patients with BII had significantly more perioperative MACE (6.8% vs 4.1%, P =0.002) and mortality (1.1% vs 0.4%, P =0.040) compared to patients with either ischemia or infarction. BII was independently associated with MACE (OR=1.62 [1.06-2.41]) and 30-day mortality (OR=3.28 [1.21-8.16]) compared to either abnormality. Conclusions: Patients with abnormal CST have worse outcomes after elective EVAR compared to patients with normal CST, particularly patients with BII. CST is a useful tool for perioperative and long-term risk stratification in patients undergoing elective EVAR.

Outcomes of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair in patients with a previous myocardial infarction

ObjectiveMany patients undergoing thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair have had a previous myocardial infarction (MI). To address the paucity of data regarding outcomes in such patients, we aimed to compare outcomes after open TAAA repair in patients with and without previous MI. MethodsFrom 1986 to 2022, we performed 3737 consecutive open TAAA repairs. Of these, 706 (18.9%) were in patients with previous MI. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify predictors of operative death. Propensity score matching analyzed preoperative and select operative variables to create matched groups of patients with or without a previous MI (n = 704 pairs). Late survival was determined by Kaplan–Meier analysis and compared by log rank test. ResultsOverall, operative mortality was 8.5% and the adverse event rate was 15.2%; these were elevated in patients with MI (11.0% vs 7.9% [P = .01] and 18.0% vs 14.6% [P = .02], respectively). In the propensity score–matching cohort, the MI group had a greater rate of cardiac complications (32.4% vs 25.4%; P = .005) and delayed paraparesis (5.1% vs 2.4%; P = .1); however, there was no difference in operative mortality (11.1% vs 10.9%; P = 1) or adverse event rate (18.0% vs 16.8%; P = .6). Overall, previous MI was not independently associated with operative mortality in multivariable analysis (P = .1). The matched MI group trended toward poorer 10-year survival (29.8% ± 1.9% non-MI vs 25.0% ± 1.8% MI; P = .051). ConclusionsAlthough previous MI was not associated with early mortality after TAAA repair, patients with a previous MI had greater rates of cardiac complications and delayed paraparesis. Patients with a previous MI also trended toward poorer survival.

Transvenous Access for Emergent Thoracic and Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients Without Femoral Access.

To describe the technique of transvenous access for emergent endovascular repair of thoracic and thoracoabdominal aneurysms exemplified with 2 cases. Transvenous access to the aorta is described as an alternative access method to deliver aortic endografts in emergency situations. A 68-year-old female patient with severely compromised iliac and subclavian artery access was treated for a ruptured extent V thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm with a t-Branch (Cook Medical, Bjaeverskov, Denmark) delivered through a transcaval access. To avoid severe aortocaval shunting a balloon-expandable covered stent was deployed through a carotid access due to severe bilateral subclavian ostial stenosis. A 71-year-old man with an acute type B aortic dissection and bilateral narrow long-segment stenting of the iliac arteries was treated with a physician-modified thoracic endovascular aortic repair using an arteriovenous fenestration created at the level of the common iliac artery. We describe the access creation by fenestration using a transseptal needle. Transvenous access for thoracic and thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm repair is safe and feasible in selected emergent cases. A transvenous approach may be helpful in selected patients when an endovascular repair needs to be performed but no arterial femoral access is available. This approach proved to be feasible even with large-bore introducer sheaths, taking its place in the armamentarium of the vascular surgeon for emergent complex endovascular aortic repairs.

Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients with Concomitant Cancer: A Literature Review.

Abdominal aortic aneurysmal (AAA) repair in patients with concomitant cancer is controversial due to increased comorbidity and reduced life expectancy in this specific patient group. This literature review aims to investigate the evidence supporting one treatment modality over another (endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) or open repair (OR)), as well as treatment strategy (staged AAA-, cancer first or simultaneous procedures) in patients with AAA and concomitant cancer. Literature review, including studies published from 2000 to 2021 on surgical treatment in patients with AAA and concomitant cancer and related outcomes (30-day morbidity/complications as well as 30-day and 3-year mortality). 24 studies comprising 560 patients undergoing surgical treatment of AAA and concomitant cancer were included. Of these, 220 cases were treated with EVAR and 340 with OR. Simultaneous procedures were performed in 190 cases, 370 received staged procedures. The 30-day mortality for EVAR versus OR was 1% and 8%, corresponding to a relative risk (RR) of 0.11 (95% CI: 0.03-0.46, p = 0.002). No difference in mortality was observed between staged versus simultaneous procedure nor between AAA-first versus cancer-first strategy, RR 0.59 (95% CI: 0.29-1.1, p = 0.13) and 0.88 (95% CI 0.34-2.31, p = 0.80), respectively. Overall, 3-year mortality was 21% for EVAR and 39% for OR from 2000-2021, while the mortality up to 3 years after EVAR within recent years (2015-2021) was 16%. This review supports EVAR treatment as first choice if suitable. No consensus was established on treating either the aneurysm or the cancer first or simultaneously. Long-term mortality after EVAR was comparable to non-cancer patients within recent years.

Outcomes of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients with Recent Intraabdominal Malignancy Diagnosis

Outcomes of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients with Recent Intraabdominal Malignancy Diagnosis

Cost of Follow Up After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients With an Initial Post-Operative Computed Tomography Angiogram Without Abnormalities

The Observing a Decade of Yearly Standardised Surveillance in EVAR patients with Ultrasound or CT Scan (ODYSSEUS) study was conducted to assess differences in outcomes of patients with continued or discontinued yearly follow up after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Earlier results of this study showed that discontinued follow up was not associated with poor outcomes. Therefore, an incremental cost analysis and budget impact analysis of de-implementation of yearly imaging following EVAR was performed. In total, 1 596 patients from the ODYSSEUS study were included. The expected cost savings were assessed if yearly imaging was reduced in patients with a post-operative computed tomography angiogram without abnormalities made around 30 days after EVAR. Costs were derived from the Dutch costs manual, benchmark cost prices, and literature review. Costs were expressed in euros (€) and displayed at 2019 prices. Sensitivity analysis was performed by varying costs. A difference of 24% in cost was found between patients with continued and discontinued imaging follow up. The cost per patient was €1 935 in the continued group vs. €1 603 per patient in the discontinued group at five years post-EVAR, with a mean difference of €332 (95% bias corrected and accelerated bootstrap confidence interval -741 to 114). De-implementation of yearly imaging would result in an annual nationwide cost saving of €678 471. Sensitivity analysis with variation in adherence rates, imaging, or secondary intervention costs resulted in a saving of at least €271 388 per year. This study provided an in depth analysis of hospital costs for post-EVAR patients in the Netherlands with a modest impact on the Dutch healthcare budget.

Post-operative Surveillance and Long Term Outcome after Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients with an Initial Post-operative Computed Tomography Angiogram Without Abnormalities: the Multicentre Retrospective ODYSSEUS Study

Lifelong imaging surveillance is recommended following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). This study aimed to examine the association between adherence to post-operative surveillance and survival and secondary interventions in patients with an initial post-operative computed tomography angiogram (CTA) without abnormalities. All consecutive patients undergoing EVAR for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in 16 hospitals between 2007 and 2012 were identified retrospectively, with follow up until December 2018. Patients were included if the initial post-operative CTA showed no types I – III endoleak, kinking, infection, or limb occlusion. Discontinued follow up was defined as at least one 16 month period in which no imaging surveillance was performed. Primary outcomes were aneurysm related mortality and secondary interventions, and secondary outcome all cause mortality. Kaplan–Meier analysis was used to estimate survival, and Cox regression analyses to identify the association between independent variables and outcome. Sensitivity analyses were performed by varying the definition of continued yearly follow up. The study protocol was published (bmjopen-2019-033584). 1 596 patients (552 continued, 1 044 discontinued follow up) were included with a median (interquartile range) follow up of 89.1 months (52.6). Cumulative aneurysm related, overall, and intervention free survival was 99.4/94.8/96.1%, 98.5/72.9/85.9%, and 96.3/45.4/71.1% at 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively. American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification (ASA IV hazard ratio [HR] 3.810, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.296 – 11.198), increase in AAA diameter (HR 3.299, 95% CI 1.408 – 7.729), and continued follow up (HR 3.611, 95% CI 1.780 – 7.323) were independently associated with aneurysm related mortality. The same variables and age (HR 1.063 per year, 95% CI 1.052 – 1.074) were significantly associated with all cause mortality. No difference in secondary interventions was observed between patients with continued vs. discontinued follow up (89/552; 16% vs. 136/1044; 13%; p = .091). Sensitivity analyses showed worse aneurysm related and overall survival in patients with continued follow up. Discontinued follow up is not associated with poor outcomes. Future prospective studies are indicated to determine in which patients imaging follow up can be safely reduced.

Editor's Choice – Post-operative Surveillance and Long Term Outcome after Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients with an Initial Post-operative Computed Tomography Angiogram Without Abnormalities: the Multicentre Retrospective ODYSSEUS Study

Lifelong imaging surveillance is recommended following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). This study aimed to examine the association between adherence to post-operative surveillance and survival and secondary interventions in patients with an initial post-operative computed tomography angiogram (CTA) without abnormalities. All consecutive patients undergoing EVAR for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in 16 hospitals between 2007 and 2012 were identified retrospectively, with follow up until December 2018. Patients were included if the initial post-operative CTA showed no types I - III endoleak, kinking, infection, or limb occlusion. Discontinued follow up was defined as at least one 16 month period in which no imaging surveillance was performed. Primary outcomes were aneurysm related mortality and secondary interventions, and secondary outcome all cause mortality. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate survival, and Cox regression analyses to identify the association between independent variables and outcome. Sensitivity analyses were performed by varying the definition of continued yearly follow up. The study protocol was published (bmjopen-2019-033584). 1 596 patients (552 continued, 1 044 discontinued follow up) were included with a median (interquartile range) follow up of 89.1 months (52.6). Cumulative aneurysm related, overall, and intervention free survival was 99.4/94.8/96.1%, 98.5/72.9/85.9%, and 96.3/45.4/71.1% at 1, 5, and 10 years, respectively. American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification (ASA IV hazard ratio [HR] 3.810, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.296 - 11.198), increase in AAA diameter (HR 3.299, 95% CI 1.408 - 7.729), and continued follow up (HR 3.611, 95% CI 1.780 - 7.323) were independently associated with aneurysm related mortality. The same variables and age (HR 1.063 per year, 95% CI 1.052 - 1.074) were significantly associated with all cause mortality. No difference in secondary interventions was observed between patients with continued vs. discontinued follow up (89/552; 16% vs. 136/1044; 13%; p= .091). Sensitivity analyses showed worse aneurysm related and overall survival in patients with continued follow up. Discontinued follow up is not associated with poor outcomes. Future prospective studies are indicated to determine in which patients imaging follow up can be safely reduced.

Fenestrated Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients Treated Inside Versus Outside of Instructions for Use

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of patients treated with the Cook Zenith Fenestrated (ZFEN) device for juxtarenal aortic aneurysms inside versus outside the IFU. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed our institutional ZFEN database for cases performed between 2012 and 2018, with analysis performed in 2020 in order to report midterm outcomes. The cohort was stratified based on treatment inside (IFU group) and outside (non-IFU group) the IFU for criteria involving the proximal neck: neck length 4 to 14 mm, neck diameter 19 to 31 mm, and neck angulation ≤45°. Patients with thoracoabdominal aneurysms or concurrent chimney grafting were excluded. The primary outcomes in question were mortality, type 1a endoleak, and reintervention. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to determine associations between adherence to IFU criteria and outcomes. Results: We identified 100 consecutive patients (19% female, mean age 73.6 years) for inclusion in this analysis. Mean follow-up was 21.6 months. Fifty-four patients (54%) were treated outside the IFU because of inadequate neck length (n=48), enlarged neck diameter (n=10), and/or excessive angulation (n=16). Eighteen patients were outside IFU for two criteria, and one patient was outside IFU for all three. Non-IFU patients were exposed to higher radiation doses (3652 vs 5445 mGy, p=0.008) and contrast volume (76 vs 95 mL, p=0.004). No difference was noted between IFU and non-IFU groups for 30-day mortality (0% vs 3.7%, p=0.18), or type 1a endoleak (0% vs 1.9%, p=0.41). Reintervention was also similar between cohorts (13% vs 27.8%, p=0.13). Being outside IFU for neck diameter or length was each borderline significant for higher reintervention on univariate analysis (p=0.05), but this was not significant on multivariate Cox proportional hazard modeling (HR 1.82 [0.53–6.25]; 2.03 [0.68–7.89]), respectively. No individual IFU deviations were associated with the primary outcomes on multivariate analysis, nor being outside IFU for multiple criteria. Conclusions: Patients with juxtarenal aortic aneurysms may be treated with the ZFEN device with moderate deviations from the IFU. While no differences were seen in mortality or proximal endoleak, larger studies are needed to examine the potential association between IFU nonadherence and reinterventions and close follow-up is warranted for all patients undergoing such repair.

Long Term Results After Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients with Infective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Long Term Results After Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients with Infective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Analysis of Outcomes After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients With Abnormal Findings on the First Postoperative Computed Tomography Angiography

Purpose: Lifelong follow-up after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is recommended due to a continued risk of complications, especially if the first postoperative imaging shows abnormal findings. We studied the long-term outcomes in patients with abnormalities on the first postoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA) following EVAR. Materials and Methods: This is a retrospective study of all consecutive patients who underwent elective EVAR for nonruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) between January 2007 and January 2012 in 16 Dutch hospitals with follow-up until December 2018. Patients were included if the first postoperative CTA showed one of the following abnormal findings: endoleak type I–IV, endograft kinking, infection, or limb occlusion. AAA diameter, complications, and secondary interventions during follow-up were registered. Primary endpoint was overall survival, and other endpoints were secondary interventions and intervention-free survival. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to estimate overall and intervention-free survival. Cox regression analyses were used to identify the association of independent determinants with survival and secondary interventions. Results: A total of 502 patients had abnormal findings on the first postoperative CTA after EVAR and had a median follow-up (interquartile range IQR) of 83.0 months (59.0). The estimated overall survival rate at 1, 5, and 10 years was 84.7%, 51.0%, and 30.8%, respectively. Age [hazard ratio (HR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 1.10] and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification (ASA IV HR 3.20, 95% CI 1.99 to 5.15) were significantly associated with all-cause mortality. Overall, 167 of the 502 patients (33.3%) underwent 238 secondary interventions in total. Fifty-eight patients (12%) underwent an intervention based on a finding on the first postoperative CTA. Overall survival was 38.4% for patients with secondary interventions and 44.5% for patients without (log rank; p=0.166). The intervention-free survival rate at 1, 5, and 10 years was 82.9%, 61.3%, and 45.6%, respectively. Conclusions: Patients with abnormalities on the first postoperative CTA after elective EVAR for infrarenal AAA cannot be discharged from regular imaging follow-up due to a high risk of secondary interventions. Patients who had a secondary intervention had similar overall survival as those without secondary interventions.

Effect of sarcopenia on survival and spinal cord deficit outcomes after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair in patients 60 years of age and older

ObjectiveSarcopenia (core muscle loss) has been used as a surrogate marker of frailty. We investigated whether sarcopenia would adversely affect survival after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair. MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data from patients aged 60 years or older who underwent thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repairs from 2006 to 2016. Imaging was reviewed by 2 radiologists blinded to clinical outcomes. The total psoas index was derived from total psoas muscle cross-sectional area (cm2) at the mid-L4 level, normalized for height (m2). Patients were divided by sex-specific total psoas index values into sarcopenia (lower third) and nonsarcopenia (upper two-thirds) groups. Multivariable modeling identified operative mortality and spinal cord injury predictors. Unadjusted and adjusted survival curves were analyzed. ResultsOf 392 patients identified, those with sarcopenia (n = 131) were older than nonsarcopenic patients (n = 261) (70.0 years vs 68.0 years; P = .02) and more frequently presented with aortic rupture or required urgent/emergency operations. Operative mortality was comparable (sarcopenia 13.7% vs nonsarcopenia 10.0%; P = .3); sarcopenia was not associated with operative mortality in the multivariable model (odds ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-2.77; P = .3). Sarcopenic patients experienced more frequent delayed (13.0% vs 4.6%; P = .005) and persistent (10.7% vs 3.4%; P = .008) paraplegia. Sarcopenia independently predicted delayed paraplegia (odds ratio, 3.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.42-7.08; P = .005) and persistent paraplegia (odds ratio, 3.29; 95% confidence interval, 1.33-8.13; P = .01) in the multivariable model. Adjusted for preoperative/operative covariates, midterm survival was similar for sarcopenic and nonsarcopenic patients (P = .3). ConclusionsSarcopenia did not influence early mortality or midterm survival after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair but was associated with greater risk for delayed and persistent paraplegia.

Comparable surgical outcomes of abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in patients with and without Marfan syndrome

ObjectiveMarfan syndrome (MFS) affects the cardiovascular system. Aortic root aneurysm is a pathognomonic feature of MFS; however, the abdominal aorta is rarely affected. A consensus on surveillance for the abdominal aorta in patients with MFS has not been established. In the present study, we compared the outcomes after open surgical repair (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in patients with and without MFS. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective, single-center cohort study from 2003 to 2020. We reviewed and compared 28 patients with MFS and 426 patients without MFS who had undergone OSR for AAAs. The baseline characteristics, medical comorbidities, previous cardiovascular surgery, anatomic features of the AAAs, and surgical treatment outcomes were compared between the two groups. ResultsThe patients with MFS were younger than those without MFS at the AAA diagnosis (47.2 ± 12.3 vs 70.6 ± 7.9 years; P < .001). The proportion of women was also greater for those with MFS (46.4% vs 15.7%; P < .001). The AAAs were most often located at the infrarenal aorta in both groups. However, thoracoabdominal AAAs were more often found among patients with MFS (10.7% vs 0.9%; P < .012). The proportion of symptomatic patients was lower in the MFS group (3.6% vs 21.6%; P = .022). The maximum median diameter of the AAA at surgery was smaller in the patients with MFS (52 mm vs 58 mm; P = .001). However, concomitant aortic dissection (32.1% vs 3.3%; P < .001) was more prevalent among the patients with MFS. Consequent aneurysmal changes in the iliac artery after AAA repair were more frequent in the patients with MFS (7.1% vs 0%; P = .004). No significant differences were found in 30-day or overall mortality between the patients with and without MFS during a median follow-up period of 71 months (interquartile range, 24.7-121.1 months) and 26.7 months (interquartile range, 7.4-69.5 months), respectively. ConclusionsThe surgical outcomes of OSR for AAAs for patients with MFS were not significantly different from those for patients without MFS in a well-established surveillance program of MFS.

Contemporary outcomes of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in patients deemed unfit for open surgical repair

ObjectiveEndovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been preferred to open surgical repair (OSR) for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in high-risk patients. We compared the perioperative and long-term outcomes of EVAR for patients designated as unfit for OSR using a large national dataset. MethodsThe Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried for patients who had undergone elective EVAR for AAAs >5 cm from 2013 to 2019. The patients were stratified into two cohorts according to their suitability for OSR (fit vs unfit). The primary outcomes included perioperative (in-hospital) major adverse events, perioperative mortality, and mortality at 1 and 5 years. Patient demographics and postoperative outcomes were analyzed to identify the predictors of perioperative and long-term mortality. ResultsOf 16,183 EVARs, 1782 patients had been deemed unfit for OSR. The unfit cohort was more likely to be older and female, with a greater proportion of hypertension, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and larger aneurysm diameters. Postoperatively, the unfit cohort was more likely to have experienced cardiopulmonary complications (6.5% vs 3%; P < .001), with greater perioperative mortality (1.7% vs 0.6%; P < .001) and 1- and 5-year mortality (13% and 29% for the unfit vs 5% and 14% for the fit cohorts, respectively; P < .001). A subgroup analysis of the unfit cohort revealed that those deemed unfit because of a hostile abdomen had significantly lower 1- and 5-year mortality (6% and 20%, respectively) compared with those considered unfit because of cardiopulmonary compromise and frailty (14% and 30%, respectively; P = .451). Reintervention-free survival at 1 and 5 years was significantly greater in the fit cohort (93% and 82%, respectively) compared with that for the unfit cohort (85% and 68%, respectively; P < .001). The designation as unfit for OSR was an independent predictor of both perioperative (odds ratio, 1.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-2.46; P = .038) and long-term mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.92; 95% CI, 1.69-2.17; P < .001). Advanced age (odds ratio, 2.91; 95% CI, 1.28-6.66; P = .011) was the strongest determinant of perioperative mortality, and end-stage renal disease (HR, 2.51; 95% CI, 1.78-3.55; P < .001) was the strongest predictor of long-term mortality. Statin use (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.69-0.87; P < .001) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor use (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.93; P < .001) were protective of long-term mortality. ConclusionsDespite low perioperative mortality, the long-term mortality of those designated by operating surgeons as unfit for OSR was rather high for patients undergoing elective EVAR, likely owing to the competing risk of death from medical frailty. An unfit designation because of a hostile abdomen did not confer any additional risks after EVAR. Judicious estimation of the patient's life expectancy is essential when considering the treatment options for this subset of patients deemed unfit for OSR.

Outcomes after aortic aneurysm repair in patients with history of cancer: a nationwide dataset analysis

BackgroundSynchronous cancer in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) increases morbidity and mortality after AAA repair. However, little is known about the impact of the history of cancer on mortality after AAA repair.MethodsPatients with intact AAA who were treated with endovascular aneurysm repair or open surgical repair were selected from the Health Insurance and Review Assessment data in South Korea between 2007 and 2016. Primary endpoints included the 30- and 90-day mortality and long-term mortality after AAA repair. The Cox proportional hazards models were constructed to evaluate independent predictors of mortality.ResultsA total of 1999 patients (17.0%, 1999/11785) were diagnosed with cancer prior to the AAA repair. History of cancer generally had no effect in short-term mortality at 30 and 90 days. However, short-term mortality rate of patients with a history of lung cancer was more than twice that of patients without it (3.07% vs. 1.06%, P = 0.0038, 6.14% vs. 2.69%, P = 0.0016). Furthermore, the mortality rate at the end of the study period was significantly higher in AAA patients with a history of cancer than in those without a history of cancer (21.21% vs. 17.08%, P < .0001, HR, 1.31, 95% CI, 1.17–1.46).ConclusionsThe history of cancer in AAA patients increases long-term mortality but does not affect short-term mortality after AAA repair. However, AAA repair could increase both short- and long-term mortality in patients with lung cancer history, and those cases should be more carefully selected.

Short-term outcomes of combined neuraxial and general anaesthesia versus general anaesthesia alone for elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: retrospective population-based cohort study†

BackgroundUse of neuraxial anaesthesia for open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair is postulated to reduce mortality and morbidity. This study aimed to determine the 90-day outcomes after elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in patients receiving combined general and neuraxial anaesthesia vs general anaesthesia alone. MethodsA retrospective population-based cohort study was conducted from 2003 to 2016. All patients ≥40 yr old undergoing open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair were included. The propensity score was used to construct inverse probability of treatment weighted regression models to assess differences in 90-day outcomes. ResultsA total of 10 447 elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs were identified; 9003 (86%) patients received combined general and neuraxial anaesthesia and 1444 (14%) received general anaesthesia alone. Combined anaesthesia was associated with significantly lower hazards for all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR]=0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37–0.61) and major adverse cardiovascular events (HR=0.72; 95% CI, 0.60–0.86). Combined patients were at lower odds for acute kidney injury (odds ratio [OR]=0.66; 95% CI, 0.49–0.89), respiratory failure (OR=0.41; 95% CI, 0.36–0.47), and limb complications (OR=0.30; 95% CI, 0.25–0.37), with higher odds of being discharged home (OR=1.32; 95% CI, 1.15–1.51). Combined anaesthesia was also associated with significant mechanical ventilation and ICU and hospital length of stay benefits. ConclusionsCombined general and neuraxial anaesthesia in elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair is associated with reduced 90-day mortality and morbidity. Neuraxial anaesthesia should be considered as a routine adjunct to general anaesthesia for elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients with Marfan Syndrome

Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients with Marfan Syndrome

AAA 11. Outcomes After Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients With History of Cancer With a Nationwide Data Set Analysis

AAA 11. Outcomes After Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Patients With History of Cancer With a Nationwide Data Set Analysis