The retroperitoneal approach to the abdominal aorta in the endovascular era

Increased market competition is associated with lower mortality after complex aortic surgery

OBJECTIVE

Centralized aortic hubs frequently exist in competitive markets, which have at times demonstrated inferior surgical outcomes. Here we evaluate the impact of local market competition specifically on complex aortic surgical outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective review included all Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) patients between 2013 and 2022 undergoing index complex endovascular aortic repair, thoracic endovascular aortic repair, or open aortic repair. Market competition was defined by the Herfindahl-Hirschman index (HHI), using surgeon-level market share within blinded VQI regions or metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs). A higher HHI indicates lower competition. Multivariable logistic 30-day mortality models and Cox survival models were used to examine the association between HHI and outcomes. A sensitivity analysis further adjusted for complexity among all complex and routine aortic surgical patients in the Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network from 2017 to 2019, using generalized estimating equations with MSA-level clustering.

RESULTS

The VQI contained 10,868 complex aortic surgical patients, with 4372 additional patients in MSA-based Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network sensitivity analysis. The median patient age was 75 years. Of these patients, 68.4% were male, with a greater number of patients in high competition regions (51.3%) and MSAs (34.6%) vs medium and low competition locales. Comorbidities and aneurysm diameter were broadly similar across HHI intervals. Lower 30-day mortality was observed in high competition regions (high, 23.7%; medium, 25.9%; low, 25.9%; P = .03). In multivariable logistic models, medium regional competition was associated with greater 30-day mortality odds vs high competition (odds ratio [OR], 1.39; 95% CI, 1.21-1.60; P < .001), with a trend toward increased mortality for low competition (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.98-1.45; P = .07). MSA-based sensitivity analyses demonstrated a similar trend for medium competition MSAs (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.98-1.58; P = .07), without significant relationship for low-competition MSAs. Regional interval was not associated with any long-term mortality difference.

CONCLUSIONS

More competitive regions demonstrate lower 30-day mortality after complex aortic surgery but equivalent long-term survival. Further efforts should focus on drivers of this difference to widen access to high-quality complex aortic care.

Greater Patient Travel Distance is Associated with Perioperative and One-Year Cost Increases After Complex Aortic Surgery

BACKGROUND

With increasing regionalization of complex aortic surgery within fewer US centers, patients may face increased travel burden when accessing aortic surgery. Longer travel distances have been associated with inferior outcomes after major surgery; however, the impacts of distance on reinterventions and costs have not been described. This study aims to assess the association between patient travel distance and longer-term outcomes including costs and reinterventions after complex aortic surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of all patients in the Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network database undergoing complex endovascular aortic repair including internal iliac or visceral vessel involvement, complex thoracic endovascular aortic repair including Zone 0-2 proximal extent or branched devices, and complex open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair including suprarenal or higher clamp sites. Travel distance was stratified by Rural-Urban Commuting Area population-density category. Multinomial logistic regression models, negative-binomial models, and zero-inflated Poisson models were used to assess the association between travel distance and index procedural and comprehensive first-year costs, long-term imaging, and long-term reinterventions, respectively.

RESULTS

Between 2011 and 2018, 8,782 patients underwent complex aortic surgery in the Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network database, including 4,822 complex endovascular aortic repairs, 2,672 complex thoracic endovascular aortic repairs, and 1,288 complex open abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs. Median travel distance was 22.8 miles (interquartile range 8.6-54.8 miles, range 0-2,688.9 miles). Median age was 75 years for all distance quintiles. Patients traveling farther were more likely to be female (26.8% in quintile 5 [Q5] vs. 19.9% in Q1, P < 0.001) and to have had a prior aortic surgery (20.8% for Q5 vs. 5.9% for Q1, P < 0.001). Patients traveling farther had higher index procedural costs, with adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.34 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.86-2.94, P < 0.0001) of being in the highest cost tertile versus lowest for patients in Q5 vs. Q1. For patients with ≥ 1-year follow-up, those traveling farther had higher imaging costs, with adjusted Q5 OR 1.55 (95% CI 1.22-1.95, P = 0.0002), and comprehensive first-year costs, with adjusted Q5 OR 2.06 (95% CI 1.57-2.70, P < 0.0001). In contrast, patients traveling farther had similar numbers of reinterventions and imaging studies postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients traveling farther for complex aortic surgery have higher procedural costs, postoperative imaging costs, and comprehensive first-year costs. These patients should be targeted for increased care coordination for improved outcomes and healthcare system burden.

Longer patient travel distance is associated with increased non-index readmission after complex aortic surgery

OBJECTIVE

Recently evolving practice patterns in complex aortic surgery have led to regionalization of care within fewer centers in the United States, and thus patients may have to travel farther for complex aortic care. Travel distance has been associated with inferior outcomes after non-vascular surgery, particularly non-index readmission. This study aims to assess the impact of patient travel distance on perioperative outcomes and readmissions after complex aortic surgery.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of all patients in the Vascular Quality Initiative and Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network databases undergoing complex endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) including internal iliac or visceral vessel involvement, complex thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) including zone 0 to 2 proximal extent or branched devices, and complex open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair including suprarenal or higher clamp sites. Travel distance was stratified by rural/urban commuting area (RUCA) population-density category. Wilcoxon and χ2 tests were used to assess relationships between travel distance quintiles and baseline characteristics, mortality, and readmission. Travel distance and other factors were included in multivariable Cox models for survival and Fine-Gray competing risk models for freedom from readmission.

RESULTS

Between 2011 and 2018, 8782 patients underwent complex aortic surgery in the Vascular Quality Initiative and Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network databases, including 4822 complex EVARs, 2672 complex TEVARs, and 1288 complex open AAA repairs. Median travel distance was 22.8 miles (interquartile range [IQR], 8.6-54.8 miles). Median age was 75 years for all distance quintiles, but patients traveling longer distances were more likely female (26.8% in quintile 5 [Q5] vs 19.9% in Q1; P < .001), white (93.8% of Q5 vs 83.8% of Q1; P < .001), to have larger-diameter AAAs (median 59 mm for Q5 vs 55 mm for Q1; P < .001), and to have had prior aortic surgery (20.8% for Q5 vs 5.9% for Q1; P < .001). Overall 30-day readmission was more common at farther distances (18.1% for Q5 vs 14.8% for Q1; P = .003), with higher non-index readmission (11.2% for Q5 vs 2.7% for Q1; P < .001) and conversely lower index readmission (6.9% for Q5 vs 12.0% for Q1; P < .001). Multivariable-adjusted Fine-Gray models confirmed greater hazard of non-index readmission with farther distance, with a Q5 hazard ratio of 3.02 (95% confidence interval, 2.12-4.30; P < .001). Multivariable-adjusted Cox models demonstrated no association between travel distance and long-term survival but found that non-index readmission was associated with increased long-term mortality (hazard ratio, 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-1.78; P = .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients traveling farther for complex aortic surgery demonstrate higher non-index readmission, which, in turn, is associated with increased long-term mortality risk. Aortic centers of excellence should consider targeting these patients for more comprehensive follow-up and care coordination to improve outcomes.

Multidisciplinary diagnosis and management of inflammatory aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND

Inflammatory abdominal aortic aneurysms (IAAAs) are a variant involving a distinct immunoinflammatory process, with nearly one half believed to be associated with IgG4-related disease (IgG4-RD).

METHODS

MEDLINE and Google Scholar searches were conducted for English-language publications relevant to inflammatory aortic aneurysms from January 1970 onward. The search terms included inflammatory aortic aneurysms, aortitis, periaortitis, IgG4-related disease, and retroperitoneal fibrosis. Relevant studies were selected for review based on their relevance.

RESULTS

Morphologically, IAAAs are characterized by a thickened aneurysm wall often displaying contrast enhancement and elevated metabolic activity on fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography imaging. A strong association exists with perianeurysmal and retroperitoneal fibrosis. Although the rupture risk appears lower with IAAAs than with noninflammatory abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), the currently recommended diameter threshold for operative management is the same. Open repair has been associated with increased morbidity compared with noninflammatory AAAs, and a retroperitoneal approach or minimal dissection transperitoneal approach has been recommended to avoid duodenal and retroperitoneal structural injuries. Endovascular aneurysm repair has been increasingly used, especially for patients unfit for open surgery. It is important to exclude an infectious etiology before the initiation of immunosuppressive therapy or operative repair. Multimodality imaging follow-up is critical to monitor disease activity and secondary involvement of retroperitoneal structures by the associated fibrotic process. Maintenance of immunosuppressive therapy will be needed postoperatively for most patients with active systemic disease, especially those with IgG4-RD and those with persistent symptoms. Additional interventions aimed at ureteral decompression could also be required, and lifelong follow-up is mandatory.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative multimodality imaging is a diagnostic cornerstone for assessment of the disease extent and activity. IgG4-RD is an increasingly recognized category of IAAAs, with implications for tailoring adjunctive medical therapy. Open surgical repair remains the procedure of choice, although endovascular aneurysm repair is increasingly being offered. Maintenance immunosuppressive therapy can be offered according to the disease activity as assessed by follow-up imaging studies.

Retroperitoneal Compared to Transperitoneal Approach for Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair Is Associated with Reduced Systemic Inflammation and Postoperative Morbidity

BACKGROUND

 In the United Kingdom, the most common surgical approach for repair of open abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is transperitoneal (TP). However, retroperitoneal (RP) approach is favored in those with more complex vascular anatomy often requiring a cross-clamp on the aorta superior to the renal arteries. This study compared these approaches in patients matched on all major demographic, comorbid, anatomic, and physiological variables.

METHODS

 Fifty-seven patients (TP: n = 24; RP: n = 33) unsuitable for endovascular aneurysm repair underwent preoperative cardiopulmonary exercise testing prior to open AAA repair. The surgical approach undertaken was dictated by individual surgeon preference. Postoperative mortality, complications, and length of hospital stay (LoS) were recorded. Patients were further stratified according to infrarenal (IR) or suprarenal/supraceliac (SR/SC) surgical clamping. Systemic inflammation (C-reactive protein) and renal function (serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate) were recorded.

RESULTS

 Twenty-three (96%) of TP patients only required an IR clamp compared with 12 (36%) in the RP group. Postoperative systemic inflammation was lower in RP patients (p = 0.002 vs. TP) and fewer reported pulmonary/gastrointestinal complications whereas renal impairment was more marked in those receiving SR/SC clamps (p < 0.001 vs. IR clamp). RP patients were defined by lower LoS (p = 0.001), while mid-/long-term mortality was low/comparable with TP, resulting in considerable cost savings.

CONCLUSION

 Despite the demands of more complicated vascular anatomy, the clinical and economic benefits highlighted by these findings justify the more routine adoption of the RP approach for complex AAA repair.

A Novel Approach for the Treatment of Nutcracker Syndrome: A Case Report

We describe a case of nutcracker syndrome in a 35 year-old male that was treated with a left renal vein transposition via an open retroperitoneal approach. Our case highlights some of the advantages of the retroperitoneal approach, which may decrease the risk of postoperative complications when compared to the traditional midline abdominal transperitoneal approach. The patient agreed to publish the case details and images included below.

Retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal approach for elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

There has been extensive debate in the surgical literature regarding the optimum surgical access approach to the infrarenal abdominal aorta during an operation to repair an abdominal aortic aneurysm. The published trials comparing retroperitoneal (RP) and transperitoneal (TP) aortic surgery show conflicting results. This is an update of the review first published in 2016.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of the retroperitoneal versus transperitoneal approach for elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair on mortality, complications, hospital stay and blood loss.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Vascular Information Specialist searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CINAHL databases and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and the ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 30 November 2020. The review authors searched the Chinese Biomedical Literature Database and handsearched reference lists of relevant articles to identify additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the RP approach versus the TP approach for elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. There were no restrictions on language or publication status.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data from the included trials. We resolved any disagreements through discussion with a third review author. Two review authors independently assessed the risk of bias in included trials with the Cochrane risk of bias tool. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated the odds ratio (OR) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). For continuous data, we calculated a pooled estimate of treatment effect by calculating the mean difference (MD) and standard deviation (SD) with corresponding 95% CIs. We pooled data using a fixed-effect model, unless we identified heterogeneity, in which case we used a random-effects model. We used GRADE to assess the overall certainty of the evidence. We evaluated the outcomes of mortality, complications, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, hospital stay, blood loss, aortic cross-clamp time and operating time.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified no new studies from the updated searches. After reassessment, we included one study which had previously been excluded. Five RCTs with a combined total of 152 participants are included. The overall certainty of the evidence ranged from low to very low because of the low methodological quality of the included trials (unclear random sequence generation method and allocation concealment, and no blinding of outcome assessors), small sample sizes, small number of events, high heterogeneity and inconsistency between the included trials, no power calculations and relatively short follow-up. There was no evidence of a difference between the RP approach and the TP approach regarding mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.32, 95% CI 0.01 to 8.25; 3 studies, 110 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Similarly, there was no evidence of a difference in complications such as hematoma (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.48; 2 studies, 75 participants; very low-certainty evidence), abdominal wall hernia (OR 10.76, 95% CI 0.55 to 211.78; 1 study, 48 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or chronic wound pain (OR 2.20, 95% CI 0.36 to 13.34; 1 study, 48 participants; very low-certainty evidence) between the RP and TP approaches in participants undergoing elective open AAA repair. The RP approach may reduce ICU stay (mean difference (MD) -19.02 hours, 95% CI -30.83 to -7.21; 3 studies, 106 participants; low-certainty evidence); hospital stay (MD -3.30 days, 95% CI -4.85 to-1.75; 5 studies, 152 participants; low-certainty evidence); and blood loss (MD -504.87 mL, 95% CI -779.19 to -230.56; 4 studies, 129 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference between the RP approach and the TP approach regarding aortic cross-clamp time (MD 0.69 min, 95% CI -7.23 to 8.60; 4 studies, 129 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or operating time (MD -15.94 min, 95% CI -34.76 to 2.88; 4 studies, 129 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Very low-certainty evidence from five small RCTs showed no clear evidence of a difference between the RP approach and the TP approach for elective open AAA repair in terms of mortality, or for rates of complications including hematoma (very low-certainty evidence), abdominal wall hernia (very low-certainty evidence), or chronic wound pain (very low-certainty evidence). However, a shorter intensive care unit (ICU) stay and shorter hospital stay was probably indicated following the RP approach compared to the TP approach (both low-certainty evidence). A possible reduction in blood loss was also shown after the RP approach (very low-certainty evidence). There is no clear difference between the RP approach and TP approach in aortic cross-clamp time or operating time. Further well-designed, large-scale RCTs assessing the RP approach versus TP approach for elective open AAA repair are required.

The Cattell-Braasch maneuver might be a good option for a huge abdominal aortic aneurysm

Endovascular repair is often difficult in the case of a huge abdominal aortic aneurysm for anatomic reasons. Here, we describe open repair of a huge infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm. Open repair was performed through laparotomy with the Cattell-Braasch maneuver, a technique for right-sided medial visceral rotation. Laparotomy with the Cattell-Braasch maneuver is simple and effective in open repair of a huge abdominal aortic aneurysm extending into the right common iliac artery, for which proximal clamping is difficult because of a tortuous proximal neck just below the hepatic region.

Combined Aorto-Iliac and Anterior Lumbar Spine Reconstruction: A Case Series

BACKGROUND

Treatment options for aortic-iliac pathology may include endovascular repair and open surgical repair. Treatment options for degenerative disc disease (DDD) are varied but commonly include anterior reconstruction. When both the aortic-iliac and spinal pathologies are significant and surgical intervention is indicated for each pathology, the opportunity exists for concurrent treatment of both the aortic-iliac pathology and DDD in the same operation. The purpose of this case series was to document the safety and feasibility of a surgical strategy whereby a combined elective reconstructive procedure was performed for aortic and anterior lumbar spinal pathologies.

METHODS

The case histories of 5 patients who were treated for both spinal and vascular pathology are presented. Surgical outcome measures included operative time, blood loss, length of stay, and complications. Spine-specific outcome measures included Oswestry Disability Index, Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire, and visual analogue scores (back and leg).

RESULTS

The spinal reconstructions performed included 1 L4-5 total disc replacement (TDR), 1 L4-5, L5-S1 anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), 1 L5-S1 ALIF, and 2 hybrid procedures (L4-5 TDR with L5-S1 ALIF). Vascular reconstructions included 4 aorto-bi-iliac bypass grafts and 1 aortic tube graft. The average operative time was 365 minutes (ranging between 330 and 510 minutes), the average blood loss was 1699 mL (range between 1160 and 2960 mL), and the average length of hospital stay was 14 days (range from 8 to 22 days). There were no in-hospital complications, and all patients experienced significant improvement in both back and leg pain. One patient developed kinking of the iliac limbs of the vascular graft 1 year postoperatively, which was managed with endovascular stenting of the graft.

CONCLUSIONS

Aortic-iliac pathology and DDD are significant pathologies often treated in isolation. This study illustrates that, despite its complexity, highly trained individuals in a specialized setting can perform combined surgery to achieve a satisfactory outcome for the patient.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV evidence.

Transperitoneal versus retroperitoneal approach for open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the targeted vascular National Surgical Quality Improvement Program

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare current practices in patient selection and 30-day outcomes for transperitoneal and retroperitoneal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repairs.

METHODS

All patients undergoing elective transperitoneal or retroperitoneal surgical repair for AAA between January 2011 and December 2013 were identified in the Targeted Vascular National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Emergency cases were excluded. Baseline characteristics, anatomic details, and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were evaluated among those with infrarenal or juxtarenal AAA only.

RESULTS

We identified 1135 patients: 788 transperitoneal (69%) and 347 retroperitoneal (31%). When only infrarenal and juxtarenal AAAs were evaluated, the retroperitoneal patients were less likely to have an infrarenal clamp location (43% vs 68%) and had more renal revascularizations (15% vs 6%; P < .001), more visceral revascularizations (5.6% vs 2.4%; P = .014), and more lower extremity revascularizations (11% vs 7%; P = .021) compared with the transperitoneal approach. Postoperative mortality and return to the operating room were similar. Transperitoneal patients had a higher rate of wound dehiscence (2.4% vs 0.4%; P = .045), and retroperitoneal patients had higher incidence of pneumonia (9% vs 5%; P = .034), transfusion (77% vs 71%; P = .037), and reintubation (11% vs 7%; P = .034), and a longer median length of stay (8 vs 7 days; P = .048). After exclusion of all concomitant procedures, only transfusions remained more common in the retroperitoneal approach (78% vs 70%; P = .036). Multivariable analyses showed only higher rates of reintubation in the retroperitoneal group (odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-3.0; P = .047).

CONCLUSIONS

The retroperitoneal approach is more commonly used for more proximal aneurysms and was associated with higher rates of pneumonia, reintubation, and transfusion, and a longer length of stay on univariate analyses. However, multivariable analysis demonstrated similar results between groups. The long-term benefits and frequency of reinterventions remain to be proven.

Regional variation exists in patient selection and treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

Significant regional variation in surgical rates has been identified following multiple surgical procedures. However, limited data have examined the regional variability in patient selection and treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). This study aimed to evaluate regional variation in patient selection, perioperative management, and operative approach for the repair of AAAs.

METHODS

All patients undergoing open repair or endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of an AAA in the Vascular Quality Initiative from 2009 to 2014 were identified. All regional groups were deidentified, and those with fewer than 100 open repairs were combined into a single region.

RESULTS

We identified 17,269 elective repairs (EVAR, 13,759; open, 3510) and 1462 ruptured AAAs (EVAR, 749; open, 713). There was significant regional variation in the use of EVAR for elective repair (range, 66%-88%; P < .01) and ruptured AAA repair (40%-80%; P < .01). The median diameter for elective repair was similar among regions (EVAR, 5.4 cm; open, 5.7 cm). There was wide variation in the treatment of small aneurysms in male patients (<5.5 cm) for EVAR (34%-49%; P < .01) and open repair (17%-38%; P < .01) and variation in the treatment of small aneurysms in female patients (<5 cm) for EVAR (14%-32%; P < .01) but not significant for open repair (6%-24%). For elective cases, preoperative aspirin (EVAR, 50%-75% [P < .01]; open, 49%-78% [P < .01]) and statin use (EVAR, 61%-75% [P < .01]; open, 56%-80% [P < .01]) varied widely. Among elective cardiac patients, preoperative management varied significantly, including beta-blocker use (EVAR, 66%-78% [P < .01]; open, 69%-88% [P = .01]) and the frequency of stress tests (EVAR, 33%-64% [P < .01]; open, 31%-73% [P < .01]). Among open repairs for aneurysms extending at or beyond the juxtarenal segment, there was wide variation in the use of retroperitoneal exposures (7%-70%; P < .01) and adjunctive renal protective measures (cold renal perfusion, 2%-43% [P < .01]; mannitol, 47%-92% [P < .01]).

CONCLUSIONS

Significant regional variation exists in patient selection, perioperative management, and operative approach for the repair of AAA. Definitive evidence is lacking in many aspects of operative care, including the use of the retroperitoneal approach and renal protective strategies. However, this variation emphasizes the importance of research to determine best practice in the areas of greatest variation. Furthermore, where current clinical process measures exist and data are clear, such as the use of statin and antiplatelet agents, the high degree of variation should serve as an impetus for regional quality improvement projects.

Benefit of minimally invasive treatment of concomitant multiple aortic aneurysms, atrial septal defect and colon cancer

Minimally invasive treatment of cardiovascular disease might decrease the risk of morbidity and mortality for high-risk patients. We describe a patient with concomitant large thoracic and abdominal aortic aneurysms, atrial septal defect (ASD) with heart failure and colon cancer with bleeding. We applied minimally invasive, transcatheter closure of the ASD and a hybrid approach to treat two aortic aneurysms, followed by colectomy. The postoperative course was uneventful with no complications. Minimal invasive treatment for cardiovascular diseases allowed safe and early treatment of malignancy in an elderly, high-risk patient.

Wound complications of the retroperitoneal approach for the abdominal aortic aneurysm repair-an evaluation of abdominal bulge formation-

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the incidence of wound complications after the retroperitoneal approach for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair, and to ascertain the cause of abdominal bulge (AB).

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Forty-three patients with AAA repair via the retroperitoneal space were retrospectively investigated. Wound complications and their incidence were studied by chart review. The thickness of the abdominal wall muscle was measured by follow-up computed tomography films. Compound muscle action potentials (CMAPs) of the abdominal rectus muscle were examined for three bulge patients and three non-bulge patients.

RESULTS

Wound hypoesthesia (30%), wound numbness (21%), AB (7%), and wound pain (2%) were found in these patients. The thickness of the abdominal wall muscle was reduced in the incision side. CMAP of abdominal rectus muscle in the incision side disappeared only in AB patients.

CONCLUSIONS

(1) Wound hypoesthesia and numbness displayed a high incidence. (2) Atrophy of the abdominal wall muscle in the incision side was found in these patients. (3) The cause of AB is considered to be muscle atrophy induced by denervation injury of an 11th intercostal nerve. (4) To avoid an eleventh intercostal nerve injury must be deemed the most effective method for preventing AB.

Left retroperitoneal aortic aneurysm repair in patients unsuitable for endovascular treatment

BACKGROUND

This study aims to evaluate the contemporary outcome of left open retroperitoneal (RP) abdominal aortic surgery over a 7-year time period in patients with difficult anatomy unsuitable for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

Eighty-four consecutive patients unsuitable for EVAR/FEVAR underwent left RP open aortic surgery. Of these, 44 (52%) required an infrarenal cross-clamp, 17 (20%) a suprarenal cross-clamp and 15 (18%) a supracoeliac cross-clamp. Eight (10%) were thoracoabdominal aneurysms.

RESULTS

There were four mortalities within 30 days (4.8%). Two occurred in patients with a supracoeliac cross-clamp, one in a suprarenal cross-clamp (total suprarenal mortality 10%) and one in an infrarenal cross-clamp. Four patients required prolonged ventilatory support (>10 days). Three patients (9%) from the suprarenal group developed post-operative renal dysfunction, one of these required permanent dialysis. Paralytic ileus occured in two patients (2%) and was secondary to ischaemia in both cases.

CONCLUSION

There will always remain a small group of patients best treated by open aortic surgery. By definition, these are complex, difficult cases and are decreasing in number. However, in vascular units regularly performing the RP approach, excellent results can be obtained. This series provides further evidence for centralization of vascular services.