Risk Aversion in Vascular Intervention: The Consequences of Publishing Surgeon-specific Mortality for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Reporting individual surgeon outcomes does not lead to risk aversion in abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery

INTRODUCTION Reporting surgeons' outcomes has recently been introduced in the UK. This has the potential to result in surgeons becoming risk averse. The aim of this study was to investigate whether reporting outcomes for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery impacts on the number and risk profile (level of fitness) of patients offered elective treatment. METHODS Publically available National Vascular Registry data were used to compare the number of AAAs treated in those centres across the UK that reported outcomes for the periods 2008-2012, 2009-2013 and 2010-2014. Furthermore, the number and characteristics of patients referred for consideration of elective AAA repair at a single tertiary unit were analysed yearly between 2010 and 2014. Clinic, casualty and theatre event codes were searched to obtain all AAAs treated. The results of cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) were assessed. RESULTS For the 85 centres that reported outcomes in all three five-year periods, the median number of AAAs treated per unit increased between the periods 2008-2012 and 2010-2014 from 192 to 214 per year (p=0.006). In the single centre cohort study, the proportion of patients offered elective AAA repair increased from 74% in 2009-2010 to 81% in 2013-2014, with a maximum of 84% in 2012-2013. The age, aneurysm size and CPET results (anaerobic threshold levels) for those eventually offered elective treatment did not differ significantly between 2010 and 2014. CONCLUSIONS The results do not support the assumption that reporting individual surgeon outcomes is associated with a risk averse strategy regarding patient selection in aneurysm surgery at present.

Late Survival in Nonoperated Patients with Infrarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND

Historical studies report high rupture rates in patients with nonoperated abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) of > 5.5 cm diameter, although a recent audit has questioned this.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of 138/764 (18%) patients with AAAs evaluated in a preassessment anaesthetic clinic (PAC) between 2006 and 2012, who either did not undergo elective AAA repair or who underwent deferred repair. The remaining 626 underwent repair. Patients with severe comorbidities (dementia, advanced malignancy, life-expectancy < 1 year) and not referred to PAC were excluded.

RESULTS

At a median of 27 months, 71 (52%) died, 36 (51%) following rupture. Cumulative survival, free from rupture or surgery for acute symptoms, was 96% at 1 year, 84% at 3 years, and 64% at 5 years, where baseline AAA diameters were 5.5-6.9 cm. For diameters ≥ 7 cm, survival, free from rupture, was 65% at 1 year, 29% at 3 years, and 0% at 5 years. Median interval to rupture was 47 months (AAA diameter 5.5-6.9 cm) and 21 months where baseline diameters were ≥ 7 cm. Rupture accounted for 32% of late deaths in patients with AAAs of 5.5-5.9 cm diameter, 46% in those with AAAs measuring 6.0-6.9 cm in diameter, and 71% in patients with AAA measuring ≥ 7 cm in diameter.

CONCLUSION

Approximately half of all late deaths in this nonoperated cohort were not AAA related, suggesting that even had repair been undertaken, it would not have prolonged patient survival. The incidence of rupture in "high-risk" patients with an AAA < 7 cm diameter was < 5% at 1 year, thereby giving ample time to optimise risk factors and improve pre-existing medical conditions prior to undertaking a deferred intervention. Even if these patients did not undergo surgical repair, the risk of late rupture was relatively low. By contrast, nonoperated patients with AAAs ≥ 7 cm in diameter face a very high risk of rupture and will probably benefit from elective surgery, with the caveat that a higher procedural risk might have to be incurred.