Open Surgical Repair Patients Research Articles

Comparative study of acute kidney injury in pararenal aortic aneurysm: open surgical versus endovascular repair

BackgroundPararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (PR-AAA), constituting around 15%-20% of AAA patients, are defined as having no neck between the aneurysm and the renal arteries. Due to an insufficient sealing zone, open surgical repair (OSR) is the gold standard, while EVAR is reserved for those unfit for surgery. Renal outcomes disturb long-term survival, and they have massive socioeconomic and quality of life implications, especially if patients require dialysis.MethodsThis study aims to elucidate any difference between EVAR and OSR of PR-AAA, excluding suprarenal aneurysms, with specific emphasis on renal dysfunction over the short and long term. An existing database of PR-AAA between 2002 and 2023 was used to glean information regarding the therapeutic option used. Renal events were defined by the RIFLE criteria. Out of 1,563 aortic interventions, we identified 179 PR-AAA, of which 99 high-risk patients had an aortic neck of less than 10 mm with complete follow-up. We excluded patients with fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR), branched EVAR (BEVAR), or chimney EVAR (Ch-EVAR) and any patients requiring visceral artery reimplantation.ResultsIn total, 63 patients underwent EVAR, and 36 required OSR. 17.46% of patients who underwent EVAR experienced acute kidney injury (AKI) compared with 36.11% of the OSR group (P = 0.037). The mean post-op creatinine for OSR was 109.88 µmol/L, and for EVAR was 127.06 µmol/L (P = 0.192). The mean difference between long-term (9–12 years) creatinine values in OSR was 14.29 µmol/L (P = 0.191), and the mean difference for EVAR was 25.05 µmol/L (P = 0.024). Furthermore, 27.8% of OSR patients who underwent Left Renal Vein Division and Ligation (LRVDL) experienced an AKI, while 50% who did not undergo LRVDL experienced an AKI (P = 0.382). Thirty-day morbidity in the EVAR group (20.97%) was significantly lower than in the OSR group (42.62%) (P = 0.022). Moreover, 3.17% in EVAR group and 7.14% in OSR group had aneurysm-related mortality (P = 0.584).ConclusionThe rate of renal events for OSR is higher, while the rate of endovascular renal events was lower. Our study shows that PR-AAA undergoing OSR may benefit from endovascular repair.

Editor's Choice – Comparison of Open Surgery and Endovascular Techniques for Juxtarenal and Complex Neck Aortic Aneurysms: The UK COMPlex AneurySm Study (UK-COMPASS) – Peri-operative and Midterm Outcomes

Treatment of juxtarenal and complex neck abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is now commonly by endovascular rather than open surgical repair (OSR). Published comparisons show poor validity and scientific precision. UK-COMPASS is a comparative cohort study of endovascular treatments vs. OSR for patients with an AAA unsuitable for standard on label endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). All procedures for AAA in England (November 2017 to October 2019) were identified, AAA anatomy assessed in a Corelab, peri-operative risk scores determined, and propensity scoring used to identify patients suitable for either endovascular treatment or OSR. Patients were stratified by aneurysm neck length (0 - 4 mm, 5 - 9 mm, or ≥ 10 mm) and operative risk; the highest quartile was considered high risk and the remainder standard risk. Death was the primary outcome measure. Endovascular treatments included fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR) and off label standard EVAR (± adjuncts). Among 8 994 patients, 2 757 had AAAs that were juxtarenal, short neck, or complex neck in morphology. Propensity score stratification and adjustment method comparisons included 1 916 patients. Widespread off label use of standard EVAR devices was noted (35.6% of patients). The adjusted peri-operative mortality rate was 2.9%, lower for EVAR (1.2%; p= .001) and FEVAR (2.2%; p= .001) than OSR (4.5%). In standard risk patients with a 0 - 4 mm neck, the mortality rate was 7.4% following OSR and 2.3% following FEVAR. Differences were smaller for patients with a neck length ≥ 5 mm: 2.1% OSR vs. 1.0% FEVAR. At 3.5 years of follow up, the overall mortality rate was 20.7% in the whole study population, higher following FEVAR (27.6%) and EVAR (25.2%) than after OSR (14.2%). However, in the 0 - 4 mm neck subgroup, overall survival remained equivalent. The aneurysm related mortality rate was equivalent between treatments, but re-intervention was more common after EVAR and FEVAR than OSR. FEVAR proves notably safer than OSR in the peri-operative period for juxtarenal aneurysms (0 - 4 mm neck length), with comparable midterm survival. For patients with short neck (5 - 9 mm) and complex neck (≥10mm) AAAs, overall survival was worse in endovascularly treated patients compared with OSR despite relative peri-operative safety. This warrants further research and a re-appraisal of the current clinical application of endovascular strategies, particularly in patients with poor general survival outlook owing to comorbidity and age.

Danish Nationwide Study on Surgical Treatment of Infective Native Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

This study aimed to describe surgical trends, survival, and infection related complications (IRC) in a Danish cohort of patients with infective native aortic aneurysms (INAAs). A retrospective nationwide cohort study including all patients in Denmark who were surgically treated for abdominal INAA 2000 - 2020 was conducted. Patients were identified through the Danish vascular registry, Karbase, which is a database registering all patients treated with vascular surgery in Denmark. Subsequent data on clinical presentation, treatment, all-cause mortality, and complications were obtained from the electronic patient charts. Seventy-five patients were included in the study, of which 60 (80%) were male, with a median age of 69 (IQR 64, 75) years. Open surgical repair (OSR) was performed in 54 (72%) patients and endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in 21 (28%) patients. Median follow up was 52 (IQR 32, 103) months. Open repair was consistently the most frequent treatment modality throughout the study period, but EVAR became more frequent over time. The 30 day survival of the total cohort was 97% (94 - 100%). Kaplan-Meier survival estimates for the cohort were 92% (95% CI 85 - 98%), 80% (95% CI 71 - 91%), 63% (95% CI 52 - 78%), and 48% (95% CI 35 - 66%) at 1, 3, 5 and 10 years, respectively. Patients treated with EVAR had comparable long term survival to patients treated with OSR, with a hazard ratio of 0.35 (95% CI 0.10 - 1.22), but was associated with better short term survival up to 5 years. The most common cause of death was sepsis. Five (9%) OSR patients had IRC compared with one (5%) EVAR patient. In this nationwide study of patients treated for abdominal INAA, an increasing number of patients were surgically treated during the study period. Patients treated with EVAR demonstrated long term survival comparable with OSR. The incidence of post-operative IRC was low. These results should be interpreted with caution and prospective registers are desired.

Assessing Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Suitability According to Graft-Specific Instructions for Use in Patients With a Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

The purpose of the study is to ascertain endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) suitability in relation to stent-graft-specific instructions for use (IFU) in patients with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA). Using the preoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA), the aortic morphology of patients undergoing surgical repair of a RAAA in 2 Dutch hospitals between January 2014 and December 2019 was retrospectively assessed. Three-dimensional and central luminal line reconstructions were used. Anatomical suitability was defined according to the IFU of the stent graft system used. Of 128 included patients, 112 (88%) were men and the mean age was 74.1 (SD=7.6) years. Anatomy within IFU for EVAR was present in 31 patients (24%). Overall, 94 patients (73%) were treated with open surgical repair (OSR) and 34 patients (27%) were treated with EVAR. Anatomy within IFU was present in 15 OSR patients (16%) and 16 EVAR patients (47%). In patients with anatomy outside of IFU, 90% (87/97) had unsuitable neck anatomy and 64% (62/97) had insufficient neck length. An unsuitable distal iliac landing zone was observed in 35 patients. Perioperative mortality was 27% (34/128), with no difference between OSR and EVAR (25/94 vs 9/34; p=0.989). Most RAAA patients in this series did not have aortic anatomy within IFU for EVAR, mainly due to insufficient neck length. However, whether anatomy outside of IFU equates to unsuitability for EVAR in an emergency setting remains a matter of debate and warrants further research. The treatment of a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm can consist of endovascular repair or open repair. Retrospective anatomical assessment shows that most patients do not have anatomy inside the instructions for use for endovascular aneurysm repair, mainly due to insufficient neck length. Whether anatomy outside the instructions for use equates unsuitability for endovascular aneurysm repair remains a matter of debate.

Machine learning model predicts the occurrence of acute kidney injury after open surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm is a pathological condition in which the abdominal aorta is dilated beyond 3.0 cm. The surgical options include open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Prediction of acute kidney injury (AKI) after OSR is helpful for decision-making during the postoperative phase. To find a more efficient method for making a prediction, this study aims to perform tests on the efficacy of different machine learning models. Perioperative data of 80 OSR patients were retrospectively collected from January 2009 to December 2021 at Xiangya Hospital, Central South University. The vascular surgeon performed the surgical operation. Four commonly used machine learning classification models (logistic regression, linear kernel support vector machine, Gaussian kernel support vector machine, and random forest) were chosen to predict AKI. The efficacy of the models was validated by five-fold cross-validation. AKI was identified in 33 patients. Five-fold cross-validation showed that among the 4 classification models, random forest was the most precise model for predicting AKI, with an area under the curve of 0.90±0.12. Machine learning models can precisely predict AKI during early stages after surgery, which allows vascular surgeons to address complications earlier and may help improve the clinical outcomes of OSR.

Outcomes and Cost-Analysis of Open Versus Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in a Developing Country: A 15-year Experience at a Tertiary Medical Center

Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the most common procedure for treating abdominal aortic aneurysms based on multiple studies conducted in the western world. The implication of such findings in developing countries is not well demonstrated. The objective of this study was to compare medical outcomes and costs of EVAR and open surgical repair (OSR) in a developing country. This is a retrospective study of all patients undergoing elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair between 2005 and 2020 at a tertiary medical center in a developing country. Medical records were used to retrieve demographics, comorbidities, and perioperative complications. Medical records were also used to provide data on the need of reintervention, date of last follow-up, and mortality. The study included a total of 164 patients. Median follow-up time was 41months. The mean age was 69.9 +/- 7.84years and 90.24% (n=148) of patients were males. Regarding long-term mortality outcomes, no significant difference was detected between both groups; OSR patients had a survival rate of 91.38% and 74.86% at 5 and 10years, compared to 77.29% and 56.52% in the EVAR group (P value=0.10). Both groups had comparable long-term reintervention rates (P value=0.334). The OSR group was charged significantly less than the EVAR group ($27,666.35 vs. $44,528.04, P value=0.008). OSR and EVAR have comparable survival and reintervention outcomes. Unlike what was reported in developed countries, patients undergoing OSR in countries with low hospital stay costs incur lower treatment costs.

Endovascular versus conventional open surgical repair for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

Thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) are a life-threatening condition which remain difficult to treat. Endovascular and open surgical repair (OSR) provide treatment options for patients, however, due to the lack of clinical trials comparing these, the optimum treatment option is unknown. To assess the effectiveness and safety of endovascular repair versus conventional OSR for the treatment of TAAAs. The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and AMED databases and World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 26 April 2021. We also searched references of relevant articles retrieved from the electronic search for additional citations. We considered all published and unpublished randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing endovascular repair to OSR for TAAAs for inclusion in the review. The main outcomes of interest were prevention of aneurysm rupture (participants without aneurysm rupture up to 5 years from intervention), aneurysm-related mortality (30 days and 12 months), all-cause mortality, spinal cord ischaemia (paraplegia, paraparesis), visceral arterial branch compromise causing mesenteric ischaemia or renal failure, and rate of reintervention. Two review authors independently screened all titles and abstracts identified from the searches to identify those that met the inclusion criteria. We planned to undertake data collection, risk of bias assessment, and analysis in accordance with Cochrane recommendations. We planned to assess the certainty of the evidence using GRADE. No RCTs or CCTs met the inclusion criteria for this review. Due to the lack of RCTs or CCTs, we were unable to determine the safety and effectiveness of endovascular compared to OSR in patients with TAAAs and are unable to provide any evidence on the optimal surgical intervention for this cohort of patients. High-quality RCTs or CCTs addressing this objective are necessary, however conducting such studies will be logistically and ethically challenging for this life-threatening disease.

Five-year survival after elective open and endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

Current evidence suggests short-term survival benefit from endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) versus open surgical repair (OSR) in elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) procedures, but this benefit is lost during long-term follow-up. The aim of this study was to compare short- and mid-term all-cause mortality in patients with non-ruptured aneurysm treated by OSR and EVAR; and to assess the rate of complications and reinterventions, as well as to evaluate their impact on survival. The medical records of the non-ruptured AAA patients undergoing OSR or EVAR between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2019 at Tartu University Hospital, Estonia, were retrospectively reviewed. We gathered survival data from the national registry (mean follow-up period was 3.7 ± 2.3 years). A total of 225 non-ruptured AAA patients were treated operatively out of whom 95 (42.2%) were EVAR and 130 (57.8%) were OSR procedures. The difference in estimated all-cause mortality between the OSR and EVAR groups at day 30 was statistically irrelevant (2.3% vs 0%; p = 0.140), but OSR patients showed statistically significantly higher 5 year survival compared with EVAR patients (75.3% vs 50.0%, p = 0.002). Complication and reintervention rates for the EVAR and OSR groups did not differ statistically (26.3% vs 16.9%, p = 0.122; 10.5% vs 11.5%, p = 0.981, respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed that greater aneurysm diameter (p = 0.012), EVAR procedure (p = 0.016), male gender (p = 0.023), and cerebrovascular diseases (p = 0.028) were independently positively associated with 5-year mortality. Thirty-day mortality, and complication and reintervention rates for EVAR and OSR after elective AAA repair were similar. Although the EVAR procedure is an independent risk factor for 5-year mortality, higher age and greater proportion of comorbidities among EVAR patients may influence not only the choice of treatment modality, but also prognosis.

Frailty as a Predictor of Mortality for Fenestrated EVAR and Open Surgical Repair of Aortic Aneurysms Involving Visceral Vessels

Frailty has been correlated with poor outcomes after major surgery across multiple specialties, but has not been studied in patients undergoing open or endovascular repair of suprarenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) has emerged as a lower risk alternative to open surgical repair (OSR) for patients with complex aortic aneurysms involving the visceral artery branches. The objective of the current study was to examine the relationship between frailty and peri-operative outcomes for FEVAR and OSR in patients with suprarenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. The American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was used to identify patients who underwent FEVAR or OSR for the years 2011 through 2017. Frailty was quantified using a modified 5-factor frailty index (mFI-5) that was previously validated for surgical patients. Frailty was correlated with the primary endpoint of 30-day mortality. Logistic regression was used to identify predictors of 30-day mortality. A total of 675 FEVAR and 1,779 OSR operations were included in the analysis. The 30-day mortality rate was 3.0% for FEVAR and 7.1% for OSR (P=0.002). Increasing frailty was significantly associated with higher 30-day mortality for both FEVAR (P=0.018) and OSR (P=0.0003). Independent predictors of 30-day mortality were frailty score (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.22 [per 0.1-unit increase]; P=0.0005), type of repair (OSR versus FEVAR, OR 2.46; P=0.0001), age (OR 1.03; P=0.0025), female sex (OR 1.61; P=0.007), Hispanic ethnicity (OR 2.68; P=0.021), American Society of Anesthesiology [ASA] class (OR 1.57; P=0.035), preoperative dialysis (OR 3.45; P=0.032), and history of bleeding disorder (OR 2.60; P < 0.0001). Frailty, as measured using a mFI-5 score, is an independent predictor of 30-day mortality, overall complications, and length of stay after FEVAR or OSR. Frailty should be used to identify patients at high risk of adverse postoperative outcomes to determine if this risk is modifiable or whether nonoperative is the most appropriate option. FEVAR may offer improved 30-day outcomes, compared to OSR, for the frailest patients.

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.

Outcomes of transctheter mitral valve repair in a large urban US health system

Abstract Background Transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVR) has become an important minimally invasive alternative to open surgical repair in patients with severe mitral regurgitation. As TMVR develops as an established practice, real-world outcome data is needed to guide clinical decision making as the body of literature on this topic is limited. In our study, we investigate TMVR outcomes in a large urban health system. Methods We retrospectively analyzed clinical data from the electronic health records of the extensive urban health system Mount Sinai Data Warehouse and analyzed all individuals who underwent TMVR. Baseline demographics were obtained as well as significant morbidity and mortality outcomes. Finally, multivariable analysis was used to determine associated characteristics with mortality. Results We identified 3533 patients who underwent TMVR from 2008 to 2018. The overall mortality was 3.7%. The most common comorbidities observed were heart failure (56%), pulmonary hypertension (26%), atrial fibrillation (26%) and CKD or ESRD (16%). After multivariable analyses, ischemic stroke (adjusted OR 3.46; 95% CI 1.93–5.97, p = &amp;lt;0.001), CKD or ESRD (3.95; 2.72–5.75, p 0.01), aortic stenosis (2.23; 1.12–4.15, p&amp;lt;0.001), and heart failure (8.18; 4.16–18.5, p&amp;lt;0.001) were independently associated with mortality. Conclusion In all patients who underwent TMVR at a large urban health system, ischemic stroke, aortic stenosis, heart failure, CKD and ESRD were independently associated with mortality. Future prospective studies will be needed to further define these observed associations. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None.

Clinical Utility of Urinary Biomarkers for Prediction of Acute Kidney Injury and Chronic Renal Dysfunction After Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair.

PurposeWe examined the clinical utility of perioperative monitoring of urinary liver-type fatty acid binding protein (L-FABP), neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL), and albumin, for prediction of acute kidney injury (AKI) and prediction of chronic renal dysfunction in patients undergoing open surgical repair (OSR) of an abdominal aortic aneurysm.Patients and MethodsUrine and serum samples were obtained perioperatively from 64 such patients (n=64). Patients in whom OSR-related AKI (defined by the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes criteria) occurred were identified. Renal function was evaluated 3 years after OSR in patients with OSR-related AKI.ResultsThe urinary biomarkers examined increased to maximum levels by 2 hours after aortic cross-clamping (AXC), regardless of whether AKI occurred. Notably, the serum creatinine (Cr) levels increased significantly immediately after OSR in patients with AKI (n=19) (vs that in patients without AKI). In patients with AKI, the increased serum Cr elevation rate, the urinary L-FABP levels 2 hours after AXC and immediately after OSR, and a reduction in eGFR documented 3 years after OSR were significantly greater in patients who underwent suprarenal AXC (n=11) than in those who underwent infrarenal AXC (n=8). Furthermore, urinary L-FABP levels 2 hours after AXC correlated significantly with the reductions in eGFR 3 years after OSR in patients with AKI.ConclusionUrinary L-FABP, NGAL and albumin concentrations 2 hours after AXC may be useful for early detection of OSR-related AKI. Furthermore, the increase in urinary L-FABP 2 hours after AXC may be predictive of chronic renal dysfunction in patients with OSR-related AKI.

Outcomes in Octogenarians and the Effect of Comorbidities After Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in the Netherlands: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Age is an independent risk factor for mortality after both elective open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). As a result of an ageing population, and the less invasive nature of EVAR, the number of patients over 80 years (octogenarians) being treated is increasing. The mortality and morbidity following aneurysm surgery are increased for octogenarians. However, the mortality for octogenarians who have either low or high peri-operative risks remains unclear. The aim of this study was to provide peri-operative outcomes of octogenarians vs. non-octogenarians after OSR and EVAR for intact aneurysms, including separate subanalyses for elective and urgent intact repair, based on a nationwide cohort. Furthermore, the influence of comorbidities on peri-operative mortality was examined. All patients registered in the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA) undergoing intact AAA repair between 2013 and 2018, were included. Patient characteristics and peri-operative outcomes (peri-operative mortality, and major complications) of octogenarians vs. non-octogenarians for both OSR and EVAR were compared using descriptive statistics. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to examine whether age and the presence of cardiac, pulmonary, or renal comorbidities were associated with mortality. This study included 12 054 EVAR patients (3 015 octogenarians), and 3 815 OSR patients (425 octogenarians). Octogenarians in both the EVAR and OSR treatment groups were more often female and had more comorbidities. In both treatment groups, octogenarians had significantly higher mortality rates following intact repair as well as higher major complication rates. Mortality rates of octogenarians were 1.9% after EVAR and 11.8% after OSR. Age ≥ 80 and presence of cardiac, pulmonary, and renal comorbidities were associated with mortality after EVAR and OSR. Because of the high peri-operative mortality rates of octogenarians, awareness of the presence of comorbidities is essential in the decision making process before offering aneurysm repair to this cohort, especially when OSR is considered.

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.

Endovascular repair of intercostal and visceral aortic patch aneurysms following open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair

PurposeReoperative open surgical repair (OSR) of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study was to analyze outcomes of fenestrated–branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) for the treatment of intercostal or visceral aortic patch aneurysms after OSR of TAAAs. MethodsWe reviewed the clinical data and outcomes of consecutive patients treated at 8 academic centers by F-BEVAR for visceral and intercostal aortic patch aneurysms after OSR of TAAAs (2011-2019). All patients had involvement of at least one target vessel requiring incorporation by a fenestration or directional branch. End points were technical success, 30-day and/in-hospital mortality, major adverse events, patient survival, target vessel patency/instability, and freedom from reintervention. ResultsThere were 29 patients with a median age of 70 (interquartile range, 63-74) years. Seven patients (24%) had connective tissue disorders. Technical success was 100%. There were no 30-day/in-hospital mortalities. Major adverse events occurred in 5 patients (17%), including estimated blood loss >1 L in 3 patients (10%), acute kidney injury and respiratory failure in 2 patients (7%) each, and transient paraparesis in 1 patient (3%). Median follow-up was 14 (interquartile range, 7-37) months. At 2 years, primary and secondary patency, freedom from target artery instability, freedom from reintervention, and patient survival were 95%, 100%, 83%, 61%, and 96%, respectively. ConclusionsF-BEVAR could be considered as an alternative to reoperative OSR in patients with visceral or intercostal aortic patch aneurysms. This series showed no mortality and a low rate of major adverse events, but a significant need for reintervention.

Outcomes in Octogenarians and the Effect of Comorbidities After Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in the Netherlands: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Age is an independent risk factor for mortality after both elective open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). As a result of an ageing population, and the less invasive nature of EVAR, the number of patients over 80 years (octogenarians) being treated is increasing. The mortality and morbidity following aneurysm surgery are increased for octogenarians. However, the mortality for octogenarians who have either low or high peri-operative risks remains unclear. The aim of this study was to provide peri-operative outcomes of octogenarians vs. non-octogenarians after OSR and EVAR for intact aneurysms, including separate subanalyses for elective and urgent intact repair, based on a nationwide cohort. Furthermore, the influence of comorbidities on peri-operative mortality was examined. All patients registered in the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA) undergoing intact AAA repair between 2013 and 2018, were included. Patient characteristics and peri-operative outcomes (peri-operative mortality, and major complications) of octogenarians vs. non-octogenarians for both OSR and EVAR were compared using descriptive statistics. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to examine whether age and the presence of cardiac, pulmonary, or renal comorbidities were associated with mortality. This study included 12 054 EVAR patients (3 015 octogenarians), and 3 815 OSR patients (425 octogenarians). Octogenarians in both the EVAR and OSR treatment groups were more often female and had more comorbidities. In both treatment groups, octogenarians had significantly higher mortality rates following intact repair as well as higher major complication rates. Mortality rates of octogenarians were 1.9% after EVAR and 11.8% after OSR. Age ≥ 80 and presence of cardiac, pulmonary, and renal comorbidities were associated with mortality after EVAR and OSR. Because of the high peri-operative mortality rates of octogenarians, awareness of the presence of comorbidities is essential in the decision making process before offering aneurysm repair to this cohort, especially when OSR is considered.

Systematic review of endovascular stent grafting versus open surgical repair for the elective treatment of arch/descending thoracic aortic aneurysms

ObjectiveTo review comparisons of the effectiveness of endovascular stent grafting (ESG) against open surgical repair (OSR) for treatment of chronic arch or descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAA).DesignSystematic review and meta-analysisData...

Early and late results of open surgical and endovascular treatment of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms, selected according to surgical risk.

BackgroundOpen surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) surgery are alternative treatments for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (IRAAA).ObjectivesTo compare OSR and EVAR for the treatment of IRAAA.Methods119 patients with IRAAA were electively operated by the same surgeon between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2015, following selection for OSR or EVAR according to surgical risk. Complications, reinterventions, failures, and early and late mortality were analyzed.Results63 OSR and 56 EVAR patients were analyzed. They were similar in terms of age (70 years), gender (92% men), and average diameter of IRAAA (6.5 cm), but with different comorbidities, surgical risk, and anatomy. EVAR was better than OSR regarding time in the operating theatre (177.5 vs. 233.3 minutes), need for transfusion (25 vs. 73%), and length of stay in ICU (1.3 vs. 3.3 days) and hospital (8.1 vs. 11.1 days). OSR allowed more associated procedures to be conducted simultaneously (19.0 vs. 1.8%). There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to complications (25.4 vs. 25.1%), reinterventions (3.2 vs. 5.2%), or early mortality (1.6 vs. 0%). During follow-up, OSR was associated with fewer revisions (3.13 vs. 4.21), angio-CTs (0.22 vs. 3.23), complications (6.4 vs. 37.5%), reinterventions (3.2 vs. 23.2%), and failures (1.6 vs. 10.7%), and had better survival (78.2 vs. 63.2%).ConclusionsCorrect selection of patients achieves excellent results because it avoids OSR in patients at high risk and avoids EVAR in patients with high anatomical complexity, achieving similar results in the perioperative period, but better results for OSR over the course of follow-up.

Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm Using Total Percutaneous Transfemoral Approach

Fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair has gained widespread acceptance as an alternative option to open surgical repair in patients with thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms . Incorporation of the renal and mesenteric arteries is possible using fenestrations or directional branches, with either off the shelf or custom designs that are tailored to the patient anatomy. Fenestrations are ideally suited for target vessels that have origin in narrower aortic segments with transverse or upgoing orientation, whereas directional branches are preferentially selected to incorporate vessels with down-going orientation with origin in large aortic segments. Traditionally, directional branches are accessed via the upper extremity approach for placement of bridging stents into the target vessels. Recent developments in steerable sheath technology have allowed total transfemoral access, decreasing the risks of cerebrovascular emboli associated with manipulations across the aortic arch. We describe the technical pitfalls of Fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms using total trans-femoral access.

Open surgical repair of juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms in the elderly is not associated with increased thirty-day mortality compared with fenestrated endovascular grafting

ObjectiveEndovascular repair of juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (JAAAs) with fenestrated grafts (fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair [FEVAR]) has been reported to decrease operative mortality and morbidity compared with open surgical repair (OSR). However, previous comparisons of OSR and FEVAR have not necessarily included patients with comparable clinical profiles and aneurysm extent. Although FEVAR has often been chosen as the first-line therapy for high-risk patients such as the elderly, many patients will not have anatomy favorable for FEVAR. At present, a paucity of data has examined the operative outcomes of OSR in elderly patients for JAAAs relative to FEVAR. Therefore, we chose to perform a propensity-matched comparison of OSR and FEVAR for JAAA repair in patients aged ≥70 years. MethodsPatients aged ≥70 years who had undergone elective nonruptured JAAA repairs from 2012 to 2018 were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) targeted endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and AAA databases. Patients who had undergone FEVAR were identified in the targeted EVAR database as those who had received the Cook Zenith Fenestrated endograft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind). Because our study specifically examined JAAAs, those patients who had undergone OSR with supraceliac proximal clamping or concomitant renal/visceral revascularization were excluded. A 1:1 propensity-match algorithm matched the OSR and FEVAR patients by preoperative clinical and demographic characteristics, operative indications, and aneurysm extent. The 30-day outcomes, including mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, and pulmonary and renal complications, were compared between the propensity-matched OSR and FEVAR groups. ResultsA 1:1 propensity match was achieved, and the final analysis included 136 OSR patients and 136 FEVAR patients. No significant differences were found in 30-day mortality (4.4% vs 3.7%; odds ratio [OR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-4.06; P = .759) between the OSR and FEVAR groups. OSR was associated with a higher incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with FEVAR; however, the trend was not statistically significant (8.1% vs 3.7%; OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 0.78-6.82; P = .131). Compared with FEVAR, the OSR group had significantly greater rates of pulmonary complications (19.1% vs 3.7%; OR, 6.19; 95% CI, 2.30-16.67; P < .001) and renal complications (8.1% vs 2.2%; OR, 3.90; 95% CI, 1.06-14.31; P = .040). ConclusionsIn the samples assessed in the present study, the results with OSR of JAAAs in the elderly did not differ from those of FEVAR with respect to 30-day mortality despite a greater incidence of pulmonary and renal complications. Although FEVAR should remain the first-line therapy for JAAAs in elderly patients, OSR might be an acceptable alternative for select patients with anatomy unfavorable for FEVAR.