Elective Aneurysm Repair Research Articles

Long-Term Outcomes Following Elective Repair of Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Comparison Between Open Surgical and Endovascular Repair Using Linked Administrative and Clinical Registry Data.

Compare long-term mortality, secondary intervention and secondary rupture following elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR). EVAR has surpassed OSR as the most common procedure used to repair abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), but evidence regarding long-term outcomes is inconclusive. We included patients in linked clinical registry and administrative data undergoing EVAR or OSR for intact AAA between January 2010 and June 2019. We used an inverse probability of treatment-weighted survival analysis to compare all-cause mortality, cause-specific mortality, secondary interventions and secondary rupture, and evaluate the impact of secondary interventions and secondary rupture on all-cause mortality. The study included 3460 EVAR and 427 OSR patients. Compared to OSR, the EVAR all-cause mortality rate was lower in the first 30 days [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.140.33], but higher between 1 and 4 years (HR = 1.29, 95% CI 1.12-1.48) and after 4years (HR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.23-1.63). Secondary intervention rates were higher over the first 30 days (HR = 2.26, 95% CI 1.11-4.59), but lower between 1 and 4years (HR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.48-0.74). Secondary aortic intervention rates were higher across the entire follow-up period (HR = 2.52, 95% CI 2.06-3.07). Secondary rupture rates did not differ significantly (HR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.73-1.55). All-cause mortality beyond 1 year remained significantly higher for EVAR after adjusting for any secondary interventions, or secendary rupture. EVAR has an early survival benefit compared to OSR. However, elevated long-term mortality and higher rates of secondary aortic interventions and subsequent aneurysm repair suggest that EVAR may be a less durable method of aortic aneurysm exclusion.

Open aneurysm repair in patients with concomitant abdominal aortic aneurysm and aorto-iliac occlusive disease is associated with a high mortality and surgical complication rate.

To evaluate whether the outcome after open aneurysm repair combined with aorto-femoral bypass in patients with concomitant abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) and aorto-iliac occlusive disease (AIOD) is inferior to open aneurysm repair for isolated AAA or aorto-femoral bypass for isolated AIOD. We performed a retrospective analysis of 30-day mortality, 1-year mortality and surgical complications of consecutive patients undergoing elective aneurysm repair, aorto-femoral bypass or a combination of these at two vascular surgery departments from 2003 to 2013. Potential risk factors were investigated by multivariable analysis. Overall, 511 patients underwent open repair for isolated AAA, 104 aorto-femoral bypass for isolated AIOD and 46 open AAA repair combined with aorto-femoral bypass for concomitant AAA and AIOD. Surgical complications occurred in 17% of AAA, 23% of AIOD and 37% of combined patients (odds ratio [OR] combined vs AAA 2.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.43-5.34; p = 0.003). Colon ischaemia occurred in 3.7% of AAA, 2.9% of AIOD and 13% of combined patients (incicidence rate ratio [IRR] combined vs AAA 3.27, 95% CI 1.37-7.81; p = 0.01). The 30-day mortality was 3.1% in AAA, 4.8% in AIOD, and 11% in combined patients (IRR combined vs AAA 3.17, 95% CI 1.26-7.96; p = 0.01). One-year mortality was 5.7% in AAA, 5.8% in AIOD and 15% in combined patients (IRR combined vs AAA 2.50, 95% CI 1.17-5.35; p = 0.02). Combined AAA repair and aorto-femoral bypass has a significantly higher 30-day mortality and postoperative complication rate than isolated AAA repair. Patients with concomitant AAA and AIOD thus represent a high-risk population, which should be considered when deciding on the indication for AAA treatment.

Complications after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysms remain high compared with elective repair

ObjectiveThoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysms is associated with increased perioperative mortality and morbidity compared with intact repair. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the factors associated with the presentation of ruptured aneurysms and adverse outcomes after repair. MethodsThe Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) registry was queried (2010-2020) to identify patients who had undergone TEVAR for ruptured and intact thoracic aortic aneurysms. The primary outcome was to identify the factors associated with ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysms. The secondary outcomes included perioperative mortality and morbidity, 5-year survival, and the identification of factors associated with adverse outcomes after TEVAR. ResultsOf the 3039 patients identified with a thoracic aortic aneurysm, 2806 (92%) had undergone repair for an intact aneurysm and 233 (8%) had undergone repair for a ruptured aneurysm. Chronic kidney disease was associated with a greater odds of a presentation with a ruptured aneurysm (odds ratio [OR], 3.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-4.9; P < .001). The factors associated with a lower odds of rupture included prior aortic aneurysm repair (OR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.49-0.97; P = .05), prior smoker (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.24-0.53; P < .001), preoperative beta-blocker therapy (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41-0.80; P = .001), and preoperative statin therapy (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.49-0.94; P = .020). TEVAR for ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysms was associated with higher perioperative mortality (rupture vs intact, 27% vs 4.6%; OR, 6.6; 95% CI 4.3-10; P < .001) and the composite outcome of mortality, new dialysis, paralysis, and stroke (38% vs 9.5%; OR, 5.1; 95% CI, 3.5-7.4; P < .001). The 5-year survival was significantly lower after TEVAR for ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysms (50% vs 76%; P < .001; hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.29-0.52; P < .001). Preoperative statin therapy was associated with higher 5-year survival (hazard ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.0-1.6; P = .021). ConclusionsTEVAR for ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysms results in increased perioperative mortality and morbidity and lower 5-year survival compared with TEVAR for intact aneurysms. Patients with prior aortic aneurysm repair, prior smoking, and preoperative beta-blocker or statin therapy were less likely to present with ruptured thoracic aneurysms. This correlation might be attributed to increased exposure to cardiovascular healthcare providers and, thus, subsequently increased screening and surveillance, allowing for elective repair of thoracic aortic aneurysms.

Outcomes of popliteal artery aneurysms treated by ligation and in-situ saphenous vein bypass.

Modality of elective repair (open or endovascular) of popliteal artery aneurysms (PAAs) is still debated. About open repair no strict evidence exists about the best surgical technique. The aim of this study was to report a 20-year experience with ligation and in-situ saphenous vein bypass for the elective treatment of PAAs. A retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent elective open surgical PAA repair in our center between January 2001 and April 2020 was performed. Ninety-two limbs in 84 patients underwent a PAA ligation and in-situ saphenous bypass. Early (30 day) outcomes were assessed. Estimated 5-year outcomes according to Kaplan-Meier curves in terms of primary patency, primary assisted patency, secondary patency, and limb salvage were evaluated. Associations of patient and procedure variables with patency and limb salvage outcomes were sought with multivariate analysis. Patients were predominantly male (80/84, 95.2%) with a mean age of 73.1 years (range 50-89). In all cases technical success was obtained. The mean hospital stay was 5.8 days (range 2-27). Thirty-day overall mortality (N.=1) and major amputation (N.=1) rates were both 1.2%. Mean duration of follow-up was 31.3 months (range: 1-168). At 5 years estimated rates of primary patency, primary assisted patency, secondary patency, and limb salvage were 76.3%, 81.5%, 89.9%, and 96.6%, respectively. On multivariate analysis the associations were: primary patency with PAA diameter >30 mm (P=0.007), and poor run-off status (P<0.001); primary assisted patency with poor run-off status (P<0.001); secondary patency with poor run-off status (P=0.04). Major amputation had no independent predictors of poor outcomes. Elective surgical treatment of PAAs with ligation and in-situ saphenous vein bypass is safe, effective and durable with good 5-year outcomes in terms of overall patency and limb salvage. Poor run-off status seemed to be an independent predictor of worse patency rates. This surgical technique should be cautiously applied in patients with PAAs with a diameter >30 mm.

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair First for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Might Not Be Applicable To All and Every Case

We evaluated the relationship between the case volume (CV) and mortality outcomes after both open aneurysm repair (OAR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of elective (e) and ruptured (r) abdominal aortic aneurysms using a contemporary administrative database. The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Database for New York (2016) and New Jersey/Maryland/Florida (2016-2017) were queried using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, to identify patients who had undergone OAR and EVAR. The hospitals were categorized into quartiles (Q) per overall (EVAR+OAR) volume and OAR-alone volume. Cox regression analysis adjusted for confounding factors was used to estimate the hazard ratios for mortality. A total of 8825 patients (mean age, 73.5 ± 9.5 years; 6861 men [77.7%]) had undergone 1355 OARs and 7470 EVARs. The overall CV had no effect on in-hospital mortality across the quartiles after eEVAR (range, 0.7%-1.4%; P = .15), rEVAR (range, 20.5%-29.6%; P = .63), or eOAR (range, 4.9%-8.8%; P = .21; Table). However, the rOAR mortality rates in the highest volume (Q4) hospitals were significantly lower than those in the three lower quartile hospitals (23.1% vs 44.7%; P < .001). When analyzed per OAR-alone volume, the same findings were observed (22.0% for Q4 vs 41.6% for Q1-Q3; P < .001; Table). Furthermore, in the Q4 hospitals, the mortality hazard between rEVAR (30.0%) and rOAR (37.2%) was similar per the overall volume analysis (hazard ratio, 1.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-2.9; P = .1). Per the OAR-alone volume analysis, the mortality hazard was greater for rEVAR (39.0%) than for rOAR (22.0%; hazard ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-5.34; P < .05). The mortality rates for eEVAR, rEVAR and eOAR are independent of the CV. However, after rOAR, the mortality rates in the Q4 hospitals were lower than those in the Q1 to Q3 hospitals, and, at least comparable, if not superior, to those of rEVAR. EVAR first for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms might not be applicable to all and every case. rOAR should be deferred to high-volume aortic OAR centers. Further studies are warranted to determine the factors accounting for the differences.TableFindings stratified by quartile and treatment typeaVariableQ1Q2Q3Q4Per overall volume1-15.5 Cases/y16-30 Cases/y31-52 Cases/y(≥53 Cases/yTotalP value rOAR52.540.440.423.137.2<.001 eOAR8.88.44.99.28.0.21 rEVAR24.820.529.626.525.3.63 eEVAR1.11.40.70.91.0.15Per OAR volume0.5-3 Cases/y4-8 Cases/y9-25 Cases/y≥26 Cases/y rOAR52.934.629.722.037.2<.001 eOAR9.75.97.110.08.0.13 rEVAR23.222.524.230.023.9.66 eEVAR1.10.71.01.71.0.28eEVAR, Elective endovascular aneurysm repair; EVAR, endovascular aneurysm repair; eOAR, elective open aneurysm repair; NA, not applicable; OAR, open aneurysm repair; rEVAR, ruptured endovascular aneurysm repair; rOAR, ruptured open aneurysm repair; Q, quartile.aMortality was stratified by overall (OAR+EVAR) and OAR-alone volume. Open table in a new tab

S100B as a biomarker of blood-brain barrier disruption after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair: a secondary analysis from a prospective cohort study.

The objective of this study was to determine whether the magnitude of the peripheral inflammatory response to cardiovascular surgery is associated with increases in blood-brain barrier (BBB) permeability as reflected by changes in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)/plasma S100B concentrations. We conducted a secondary analysis from a prospective cohort study of 35 patients undergoing elective thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair with (n = 17) or without (n = 18) cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Plasma and CSF S100B, interleukin-6 (IL-6), and albumin concentrations were measured at baseline (C0) and serially for up to five days. Following CPB, the median [interquartile range] plasma S100B concentration increased from 58 [32-88] pg·mL-1 at C0 to a maximum concentration (Cmax) of 1,131 [655-1,875] pg·mL-1 over a median time (tmax) of 6.3 [5.9-7.0] hr. In the non-CPB group, the median plasma S100B increased to a lesser extent. There was a delayed increase in CSF S100B to a median Cmax of 436 [406-922] pg·mL-1 in the CPB group at a tmax of 23.7 [18.5-40.2] hr. In the non-CPB group, the CSF concentrations were similar at all time points. In the CPB group, we did not detect significant correlations between plasma and CSF S100B with plasma IL-6 [r = 0.52 (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.061 to 0.84)] and CSF IL-6 [r = 0.53 (95% CI, -0.073 to 0.85)] concentrations, respectively. Correlations of plasma or CSF S100B levels with BBB permeability were not significant. The lack of parallel increases in plasma and CSF S100B following CPB indicates that S100B may not be a reliable biomarker for BBB disruption after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair employing CPB. www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00878371); registered 7 April 2009.

Long-Term Outcomes of Popliteal Artery Aneurysms Treated by Ligation and in Situ Saphenous Vein Bypass

The modality of elective repair (open or endovascular) of popliteal artery aneurysms (PAAs) is still debated. No strict evidence exists regarding the best surgical technique for open repair. The aim of our study was to report a 20-year experience with ligation and in situ saphenous vein bypass for the elective treatment of PAAs.

Elective Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms with Modular and Unibody Type Endografts.

In this study, we aimed to evaluate the performance of modular and unibody endografts for the endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Between January 2012 and December 2017, 130 elective infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms treated in an endovascular manner were retrospectively evaluated. Sixty-six patients with the modular type (Medtronic EndurantTM II and Lifetech AnkuraTM AAA) and 64 patients with the unibody type (Endologix AFX®) were compared with regards to early and postoperative one-year results. There was one in-hospital mortality (0.8%) in the modular group. There was no difference in postoperative first-year mortality rate between the two groups (p = 0.678). Loco-regional anesthesia was used more often in the unibody group [34 patients (53.1%)] and the use of general anesthesia was higher in the modular group [56 patients (84.8%)] (p < 0.001). While the duration of the procedure was shorter in the unibody group (p < 0.001), no statistically significant difference was found in the duration of fluoroscopy (p = 0.813) and the amount of contrast agent used (p = 0.553). The follow-up period in the intensive care unit was shorter in the modular group (p < 0.001). Moreover, the five-year survival rate was similar between the groups (84.8% in the modular group and 78.4% in the unibody group, log-rank p = 0.703). The results obtained in our study show that modular and unibody grafts are effective and reliable, although there are some negligible differences in the early period.

Comparison of treatment options for aortic necks outside standard endovascular aneurysm repair instructions for use

Objective/BackgroundEndovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is associated with worse outcomes in patients whose anatomy does not meet the device instructions for use (IFU). However, whether open surgical repair (OSR) and commercially available fenestrated EVAR (Zenith Fenestrated [ZFEN]) represent better options for these patients is unknown. MethodsWe identified all patients without prior aortic surgery undergoing elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms with neck length ≥4 mm at a single institution with EVAR, OSR, and ZFEN. We applied device-specific aneurysm neck-related IFU to EVAR patients, and a generic EVAR IFU to ZFEN and OSR patients. Long-term outcomes were studied using propensity scores with inverse probability weighting. We compared outcomes in patients undergoing EVAR by adherence to IFU and outcomes by repair types in the subset of patients not meeting IFU. ResultsOf 652 patients (474 EVAR, 34 ZFEN, 143 OSR), 211 had measurements outside of standard EVAR IFU (109 EVAR [23%], 27 ZFEN [80%], and 74 OSR [52%]). Perioperative mortality was 0.5% overall. For EVAR, treatment outside the IFU was associated with significantly higher adjusted rates of long-term type IA endoleak (22% at 5 years compared to 2% within IFU, hazard ratio [HR]: 5.8 [3.1-10.9], P < .001), and lower survival (5- and 10-year survival: 56% and 34% vs 81% and 53%, HR: 2.3 [1.2-4.3], P = .01). There was no difference in reinterventions or open conversion. In patients not meeting IFU, ZFEN was associated with higher adjusted rates of reinterventions (EVAR as referent: HR: 2.6 [1.5-4.4, P < .001), whereas OSR and EVAR patients experienced similar reintervention rates (HR: 0.7 [0.4-1.1], P = .13). Patients outside the IFU experienced lower mortality with OSR compared with either EVAR (HR: 0.4 [0.2-0.9], P = .005) or ZFEN (HR: 0.3 [0.1-0.7], P = .002). When restricted to patients outside the IFU deemed fit for open repair, OSR patients remained associated with lower adjusted mortality compared with ZFEN (HR: 0.2 [0.1-0.5], P < .001), but statistical significance was lost in the comparison to EVAR (HR: 0.6 [0.3-1.1], P = .1). ConclusionsTreatment outside device-specific IFU is associated with adverse long-term outcomes. Open surgical repair is associated with higher long-term survival in patients who fall outside of the EVAR IFU and should be favored over EVAR or ZFEN in suitable patients. A three-vessel-based fenestrated strategy may not be a durable solution for difficult aortic necks, but more data are needed to evaluate the performance of newer, four-vessel devices.

Effects of hospital preference for endovascular repair on postoperative mortality after elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: analysis of the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit.

BackgroundIncreased use of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and reduced open surgical repair (OSR), has decreased postoperative mortality after elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). The choice between EVAR or OSR depends on aneurysm anatomy, and the experience and preference of the vascular surgeon, and therefore differs between hospitals. The aim of this study was to investigate the current mortality risk difference (RD) between EVAR and OSR, and the effect of hospital preference for EVAR on overall mortality.MethodsPrimary elective infrarenal or juxtarenal aneurysm repairs registered in the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (2013–2017) were analysed. First, mortality in hospitals with a higher preference for EVAR (high-EVAR group) was compared with that in hospitals with a lower EVAR preference (low-EVAR group), divided by the median percentage of EVAR. Second, the mortality RD between EVAR and OSR was determined by unadjusted and adjusted linear regression and propensity-score (PS) analysis and then by instrumental-variable (IV) analysis, adjusting for unobserved confounders; percentage EVAR by hospital was used as the IV.ResultsA total of 11 997 patients were included. The median hospital rate of EVAR was 76.6 per cent. The overall mortality RD between high- and low-EVAR hospitals was 0.1 (95 per cent −0.5 to 0.4) per cent. The OSR mortality rate was significantly higher among high-EVAR hospitals than low-EVAR hospitals: 7.3 versus 4.0 per cent (RD 3.3 (1.4 to 5.3) per cent). The EVAR mortality rate was also higher in high-EVAR hospitals: 0.9 versus 0.7 per cent (RD 0.2 (−0.0 to 0.6) per cent). The RD following unadjusted, adjusted, and PS analysis was 4.2 (3.7 to 4.8), 4.4 (3.8 to 5.0), and 4.7 (4.1 to 5.3) per cent in favour of EVAR over OSR. However, the RD after IV analysis was not significant: 1.3 (−0.9 to 3.6) per cent.ConclusionEven though EVAR has a lower mortality rate than OSR, the overall effect is offset by the high mortality rate after OSR in hospitals with a strong focus on EVAR.

Trigger and Target for Fibrinogen Supplementation Using Thromboelastometry (ROTEM) in Patients Undergoing Open Thoraco-Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

To determine the relationship between the value of fibrinogen assessed by the FIBTEM clot amplitude at 10 minutes (A10 FIBTEM) measured on admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) and the amount of drainage output at 24 hours, to investigate whether the A10 FIBTEM predicts severe bleeding (SB), and to define A10 FIBTEM thresholds to prevent (trigger) and treat (target) severe bleeding by fibrinogen supplementation. In a single centre, retrospective observational study, 166 patients underwent elective open thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA) repair between March 2016 and January 2019. Exclusion criteria were emergency, congenital, or acquired coagulopathy, or administration of P2Y12 inhibitor antiplatelet agents in the five days before surgery. All patients were managed intra-operatively and post-operatively according to a rotational thromboelastometry driven transfusion protocol. The principal endpoint was a composite outcome, which included bleeding, large volume transfusion, and re-operation. FIBTEM clot amplitude after 10 minutes measured on ICU admission and post-operative bleeding at 24 hours showed an inverse linear relationship (R2= .03; p= .026). Performance of A10 FIBTEM in predicting SB evaluated by Receiving Operating Curve analysis showed an area under the curve of 0.63 (95% CI 0.56 - 0.70; p= .026) with a best cutoff of 9 mm. An A10 FIBTEM of 3 mm was the cutoff associated with a positive predictive value of 50%, while an A10 FIBTEM of 9 mm showed a negative predictive value of 92%. On multivariable analysis, an A10 FIBTEM ≤ 3 mm remained independently associated with SB. The present investigation shows for the first time in a population undergoing open TAAA repair that an A10 FIBTEM ≤ 3mm on ICU admission is associated with post-operative severe bleeding. Trigger and target values for fibrinogen supplementation, based on A10 FIBTEM, have been provided. The transferability and reliability of these cutoff values require further study.

Outcome of elective endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in octogenarians.

The need to adjust the indications of elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair among patients with a limited life-span deserves a specific evaluation for octogenarians. The aim of this study was to compare the postoperative results and the long-term survival after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic and/or iliac aneurysms (EVAR) in octogenarians compared with patients under 80 years of age. Retrospective analysis of 241 consecutive patients who underwent an elective EVAR between 2000 and 2017. EVAR was not considered among patients with clear life-limiting conditions. Patients receiving other than commercially standard infra-renal endoprostheses were excluded. Seventy patients (29.0%) were octogenarians. They had a lower rate of active smoking (10.0% vs. 30.4%, P < 0.001) and a higher prevalence of previous cerebrovascular disease (21.4% vs. 11.7%, P = 0.055) than younger patients. Thirty-day/in-hospital complication and mortality rates were not significantly higher among octogenarians when compared with younger patients (24.3% vs. 16.9% and 2.9% vs. 2.4%, respectively). Octogenarians had a lower long-term survival at 1, 3 and 5 years (92.6% vs. 93.3%, 67.7% vs. 78.0% and 39.3% vs. 60.6%, P = 0.039) in the bivariate analysis. However, an age ≥ 80 years per se was not an independent predictor of survival after adjustment for confounding factors. An age above 80 years was not associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications or long-term mortality. Our results suggest that EVAR can be considered in elderly patients without a clear life-limiting condition and with a suitable aneurysm anatomy. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2021; 21: 392-397.

Trends and Outcomes of Elective Thoracic Aortic Repair and Acute Thoracic Aortic Syndromes in the United States

BackgroundThere is a paucity of data on the contemporary outcomes and trends of elective thoracic aortic aneurysm repair and aneurysm-associated acute aortic syndrome. MethodsWe queried the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database years 2012-2016 to identify hospitalizations for elective thoracic aortic aneurysm repair and aneurysm-associated acute aortic syndrome. The main study outcome was in-hospital mortality. ResultsThe analysis yielded 24,295 hospitalizations for elective thoracic aortic aneurysm repair and 8875 hospitalizations for aneurysm-associated acute aortic syndrome. The number of hospitalizations for elective aortic repair significantly increased from 4375 in 2012 to 5450 in 2016 (Ptrend = .01). The number of hospitalizations for acute aortic syndrome numerically increased from 1545 in 2012 to 2340 in 2016 (Ptrend = .10). Overall in-hospital mortality for elective aortic repair was 2.4% with no change over time. In-hospital mortality for acute aortic rupture was 39.4% and for acute aortic dissection was 6.2% with no change over time. Hospitalizations for elective aortic repair had lower incidence of complications compared with those for aneurysm-associated acute aortic syndrome, including cardiogenic shock, cardiac arrest, acute stroke, and shorter length of stay. Factors associated with higher mortality among admissions undergoing elective aortic repair included older age, heart failure, valvular disease, and chronic kidney disease. Older age, coagulopathy, and fluid/ electrolytes disorders were associated with increased mortality among those with acute aortic syndrome. ConclusionContemporary elective thoracic aortic aneurysm repair is associated with lower in-hospital mortality and morbidity when compared with a clinical presentation for an aneurysm-associated acute aortic syndrome. This should be taken into account when deciding the timing of elective aortic aneurysm repair and balancing the risks and benefits.

Society for Vascular Surgery implementation of clinical practice guidelines for patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm: Repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm

•The optimal timing of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair is based on clinical presentation and aneurysm status:○A ruptured AAA requires emergent repair.○A symptomatic, nonruptured aneurysm is best treated urgently.○An asymptomatic AAA can be treated electively after completion of preoperative assessment.•The choice of endovascular or open surgical repair for elective treatment of AAA should be individualized with appropriate consideration of:○Anatomic suitability for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).○Comorbidities and physical fitness.○Life expectancy.○Compliance with postoperative surveillance.○Patient preference. •If anatomically feasible, EVAR is recommended for treatment of a ruptured AAA (grade 1C), with a suggested door-to-intervention time of less than 90 minutes (Good Practice Standard) (Fig).1Chaikof E.L. Dalman R.L. Eskandari M.K. Jackson B.M. Lee W.A. Mansour M.A. et al.The Society for Vascular Surgery practice guidelines on the care of patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm.J Vasc Surg. 2018; 67: 2-77.e72Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (957) Google Scholar•Open surgical repair (OSR) should be considered for elective treatment of AAA when:○The aortic anatomy does not meet recommended indications for use for commercially available EVAR devices.○The estimated life expectancy exceeds 10 to 15 years.2Patel R. Sweeting M.J. Powell J.T. Greenhalgh R.M. EVAR trial investigatorsEndovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm in 15-years' follow-up of the UK endovascular aneurysm repair trial 1 (EVAR trial 1): a randomised controlled trial.Lancet. 2016; 388: 2366-2374Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (539) Google Scholar •Observational studies report short- and mid-term survival benefit for patients with a ruptured AAA treated by EVAR as compared with OSR,3Wang L.J. Locham S. Al-Nouri O. Eagleton M.J. Clouse W.D. Malas M.B. Endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm is superior to open repair: propensity-matched analysis in the Vascular Quality Initiative.J Vasc Surg. 2020; 72: 498-507Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (12) Google Scholar but caution is required in inferring causality.•The perioperative survival benefit associated with EVAR for ruptured AAA has not been supported by randomized, controlled trials.•EVAR for elective AAA treatment is associated with decreased mortality and morbidity, and faster recovery, but a greater incidence of late reintervention and without a late survival benefit as compared with OSR.4Paravastu S.C. Jayarajasingam R. Cottam R. Palfreyman S.J. Michaels J.A. Thomas S.M. Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014; : CD004178PubMed Google Scholar •The implementation of a treatment algorithm for the management of ruptured AAA is associated with a significant decrease in 30-day mortality.5Starnes B.W. Quiroga E. Hutter C. Tran N.T. Hatsukami T. Meissner M. et al.Management of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm in the endovascular era.J Vasc Surg. 2010; 51: 9-17Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (119) Google Scholar•Healthcare systems should consider the implementation of a structured, multidisciplinary triage protocol for the emergent management of ruptured AAA or rapid transfer to an EVAR-capable facility, if there are no contraindications to transfer (Figure). •Several scoring systems claim accurate predictions of thirty day mortality after ruptured AAA.6Hansen S.K. Danaher P.J. Starnes B.W. Hollis Jr., H.W. Garland B.T. Accuracy evaluations of three ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm mortality risk scores using an independent dataset.J Vasc Surg. 2019; 70: 67-73Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (4) Google Scholar•The validation of a risk assessment tool to predict treatment futility for ruptured AAA would inform:○Patient-centered communication and shared decision-making.○Cost-effective allocation of healthcare resources.•The Vascular Study Group of Northern New England risk calculator predicts in-hospital mortality after elective AAA repair and has been externally validated.○The Vascular Study Group of Northern New England risk calculator should be implemented routinely to facilitate patient-centered communication and shared decision-making, particularly for those patients with a calculated high mortality risk and limited life expectancy.7Eslami M.H. Rybin D.V. Doros G. Siracuse J.J. Farber A. External validation of Vascular Study Group of New England risk predictive model of mortality after elective abdominal aorta aneurysm repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative and comparison against established models.J Vasc Surg. 2018; 67: 143-150Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (12) Google Scholar

Safety of transition from a routine to a selective intensive care admission pathway after elective open aneurysm repair

BackgroundThere is a growing trend to implement intermediate care units to avoid unnecessary costs associated with intensive care unit (ICU) admission and associated resources. We sought to evaluate the safety of transitioning from a routine to a selective policy of postoperative transfer to the ICU for elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair.MethodsThis retrospective study included consecutive open elective AAA repair procedures performed at a single centre from Aug. 8, 2010, to Dec. 1, 2014. Patients were identified through a prospectively maintained database, and electronic charts were reviewed. Patients with interventions before Mar. 13, 2012, were routinely sent to the ICU after operation (group A). Patients treated after this date were sent directly to an intermediate care unit (group B) unless preoperative or intraoperative factors deemed them suitable for ICU admission. The primary outcome was in-hospital death; secondary outcomes were perioperative complications and length of stay. We used logistic and linear regression to determine the association between the use of an intermediate care unit and the primary and secondary outcomes after adjusting for confounders and clinically relevant covariates.ResultsThe cohort comprised 310 patients (266 men, 44 women) with a mean age of 69.7 (standard deviation 10.1) years and a mean AAA diameter of 61.2 mm (SD 9.6 mm). Groups A and B included 118 and 192 patients, respectively. Admission to the ICU was spared in 149 patients (77.6%) in group B. Only 2 patients (1.3%) in group B were subsequently admitted to the ICU. There was no statistically significant difference in in-hospital mortality or perioperative complications between the 2 groups on multivariable logistic regression. There was a nonsignificant trend toward slightly shorter length of stay in group B.ConclusionIn this single-centre experience with the majority of patients sent directly to an intermediate care unit, there was no statistically significant difference in mortality or morbidity between routine and selective ICU admission. Our results confirm the safety of a selective ICU admission pathway.

Outcomes after Elective Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Octogenarians Compared to Younger Patients in Korea.

BackgroundAlthough the first choice of treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is endovascular aneurysm repair, especially in elderly patients, some patients require open surgical repair. The purpose of this study was to compare the mortality outcomes of open AAA repair between octogenarians and younger counterparts and to identify the risk factors associated with mortality.MethodsAll consecutive patients who underwent elective open AAA repair due to degenerative etiology at a single tertiary medical center between 1996 and June 2020 were included in this retrospective review. Medical records and imaging studies were reviewed to collect the following information: demographics, comorbid medical conditions, clinical presentations, radiologic findings, surgical details, and morbidity and mortality rates. For analysis, patients were divided into two groups: older and younger than 80 years of age. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with mortality after elective open AAA repair.ResultsAmong a total of 650 patients who underwent elective open AAA repair due to degenerative AAA during the study period, 58 (8.9%) were octogenarians and 595 (91.1%) were non-octogenarians. Patients in the octogenarian group were predominantly female and more likely to have lower body weight and body mass index (BMI), hypertension, chronic kidney disease, and lower preoperative serum hemoglobin and albumin compared with patients in the non-octogenarian group. Maximal aneurysm diameter was larger in octogenarians. During the median follow-up duration of 34.4 months for 650 patients, the median length of total hospital and intensive care unit stay was longer in octogenarians. The 30-day (1.7% vs. 0.7%, P = 0.374) and 1-year (6.9% vs. 2.9%, P = 0.108) mortality rates were not statistically significantly different between the two groups. Multivariate analysis showed that low BMI was associated with increased 30-day (odds ratio [OR], 16.339; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.192–224.052; P = 0.037) and 1-year (OR, 8.236; CI, 2.301–29.477; P = 0.001) mortality in all patients.ConclusionBecause the mortality rate of octogenarians after elective open AAA repair was not significantly different compared with their younger counterparts, being elderly is not a contraindication for open AAA repair. Low BMI might be associated with increased postoperative mortality.

A histopathological classification scheme for abdominal aortic aneurysm disease

ObjectiveTwo consensus histopathological classifications for thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs) and inflammatory aortic diseases have been issued to facilitate clinical decision-making and inter-study comparison. However, these consensus classifications do not specifically encompass abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Given its high prevalence and the existing profound pathophysiologic knowledge gaps, extension of the consensus classification scheme to AAAs would be highly instrumental. The aim of this study was to test the applicability of, and if necessary to adapt, the issued consensus classification schemes for AAAs. MethodsSeventy-two AAA anterolateral wall samples were collected during elective and emergency open aneurysm repair performed between 2002 and 2013. Histologic analysis (hematoxylin and eosin and Movat Pentachrome) and (semi-quantitative and qualitative) grading were performed in order to map the histological aspects of AAA. Immunohistochemistry was performed for visualization of aspects of the adaptive and innate immune system, and for a more detailed analysis of atherosclerotic lesions in AAA. ResultsBecause the existing consensus classification schemes do not adequately capture the aspects of AAA disease, an AAA-specific 11-point histopathological consensus classification was devised. Systematic application of this classification indicated several universal features for AAA (eg, [almost] complete elastolysis), but considerable variation for other aspects (eg, inflammation and atherosclerotic lesions). ConclusionsThis first multiparameter histopathological AAA consensus classification illustrates the sharp histological contrasts between thoracic and abdominal aneurysms. The value of the proposed scoring system for AAA disease is illustrated by its discriminatory capacity to identify samples from patients with a nonclassical (genetic) variant of AAA disease.

Increased Soluble Interleukin-1 Type II Receptor Concentrations in Postoperative Patients and in Patients With Sepsis Syndrome

Plasma interleukin-1 (IL-1) activity is modulated in part through the simultaneous appearance of several inhibitors of IL-1 action, including interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1ra) and the soluble IL-1 type II receptor (IL-1RII). However, little is known concerning the plasma appearance of these inhibitors in patients following operative trauma or those with sepsis syndrome. In the present report, plasma IL-1beta, IL-1ra, and soluble IL-1RI and IL-1RII concentrations were evaluated in 118 patients with sepsis syndrome or after elective operative trauma. Plasma concentrations of IL-1ra increased significantly following elective operative repair of thoraco-abdominal and abdominal aortic aneurysms, and after bowel resection for inflammatory bowel disease, but did not increase after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Plasma IL-1ra levels were also elevated in patients with sepsis syndrome. In contrast, soluble IL-1RII levels were only increased in patients after operative repair of thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysms and in sepsis syndrome, whereas concentrations were unaffected by the other more modest surgical procedures. Plasma IL-1RI concentrations decreased in all postoperative patients in the first 24 hours after surgery. We conclude that both plasma IL-1ra and soluble IL-1RII concentrations often increase in sepsis and following some operative trauma. Less severe operative trauma increases the plasma concentration of only IL-1ra, whereas both IL-1ra and soluble IL-1RII are increased in patients with sepsis syndrome or following thoraco-abdominal aneurysm repair.

Association between operation volume and postoperative mortality in the elective open repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms: systematic review

AbstractBackgroundAn inverse association between the case volume per hospital and surgeon and perioperative mortality has been shown for many surgical interventions. There are numerous studies on this issue for the open treatment of infrarenal aortic aneurysms.AimTo present the available data on the association between the case volume per hospital and surgeon and perioperative mortality in the elective open repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms in a systematic review.Materials and methodsUsing the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL, Current Contents Medicine (CCMed), and ClinicalTrials.gov databases, a systematic search was performed using defined keywords. From the search results, all original papers were included that compared the elective open repair of an infrarenal aortic aneurysm in a “high volume” center with a “low volume” center or by a “high volume” surgeon with a “low volume” surgeon, as defined in the respective study.ResultsAfter deduplication, the literature search yielded 1021 hits of which 60 publications met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 37/43 studies showed a lower mortality in “high volume” compared to “low volume” centers and 14/17 comparisons showed a lower mortality for “high volume” compared to “low volume” surgeons. The effect measures, usually odds ratios, ranged from 0.37 to 0.99 for volume per hospital and 0.31 to 0.92 for volume per surgeon. Regarding the threshold values for the definition of “high volume” and “low volume,” a clear heterogeneity was shown between the individual studies.DiscussionThe available data on the association between the case volume per hospital and surgeon and perioperative mortality in the elective open repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms show that interventions performed in “high volume” centers or by “high volume” surgeons are associated with lower mortality. To ensure the best possible outcome in terms of low perioperative mortality in the open repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms, the aim should be centralization with high case volume per hospital and surgeon.

Association between operation volume and postoperative mortality in elective endovascular repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms: systematic review—continuation

AbstractBackgroundMany surgical interventions show an inverse association between case volume per hospital/surgeon and perioperative mortality. In the first part of this systematic review it was shown that such an association also exists for the open treatment of infrarenal aortic aneurysms. The second part now examines a possible association with endovascular treatment of infrarenal aortic aneurysms.ObjectiveIn a systematic review, the data available on the association between the case volume per hospital/surgeon and perioperative mortality in elective endovascular treatment of infrarenal aortic aneurysms are presented.Materials and MethodsSystematic research using defined keywords was carried out. All original works comparing elective endovascular treatment of an infrarenal aortic aneurysm in a “high volume” center with a “low volume” center or by a “high volume” surgeon with a “low volume” surgeon, as defined in each study, were included.ResultsAfter deduplication, the literature search produced 1,021 hits. Of these, 16 publications fulfilled the inclusion criteria. With regard to the thresholds for the definition of high volume and low volume, there was marked heterogeneity between individual studies. Twelve of the 15 studies showed a significantly lower mortality in high volume than in low volume centers. The effect measures, usually odds ratios, were between 0.43 and 0.91. In the comparison between high volume and low volume surgeons, there was no difference in mortality in any of the five studies included.DiscussionThe available data on the association between case volume per hospital and surgeon and the perioperative mortality in elective endovascular treatment of infrarenal aortic aneurysms consistently show that patients operated on in high volume centers have a lower mortality. The volume per surgeon seems to have no influence on perioperative mortality. To achieve the lowest perioperative mortality possible in endovascular treatment of infrarenal aortic aneurysms, centralization with high volume per hospital should be aimed for, taking into consideration the context of the health care system.