Population-based long-term outcomes of open versus endovascular aortic repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms

Long-term costs to Medicare associated with endovascular and open repairs of infrarenal and complex abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The vast majority of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) undergoing repairs receive endovascular interventions (EVARs) instead of open operations (OARs). Although EVARs have better short-term outcomes, OARs have improved longer-term durability and require less radiographic follow-up and monitoring, which may have significant implications on health care economics surrounding provision of AAA care nationally. Herein, we compared costs associated with EVAR and OAR of both infrarenal and complex AAAs.

METHODS

We examined patients undergoing index elective EVARs or OARs of infrarenal and complex AAAs in the 2014-2019 Vascular Quality Initiative-Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network (VQI-VISION) dataset. We defined overall costs as the aggregated longitudinal costs associated with: (1) the index surgery; (2) reinterventions; and (3) imaging tests. We evaluated overall costs up to 5 years after infrarenal AAA repair and 3 years for complex AAA repair. Multivariable regressions adjusted for case-mix when evaluating cost differences between EVARs vs OARs.

RESULTS

We identified 23,746 infrarenal AAA repairs (8.7% OAR, 91% EVAR) and 2279 complex AAA repairs (69% OAR, 31% EVAR). In both cohorts, patients undergoing EVARs were more likely to be older and have more comorbidities. The cost for the index procedure for EVARs relative to OARs was lower for infrarenal AAAs ($32,440 vs $37,488; P < .01) but higher among complex AAAs ($48,870 vs $44,530; P < .01). EVARs had higher annual imaging and reintervention costs during each of the 5 postoperative years for infrarenal aneurysms and the 3 postoperative years for complex aneurysms. Among patients undergoing infrarenal AAA repairs who survived 5 years, the total 5-year cost of EVARs was similar to that of OARs ($35,858 vs $34,212; -$223 [95% confidence interval (CI), -$3042 to $2596]). For complex AAA repairs, the total cost at 3 years of EVARs was greater than OARs ($64,492 vs $42,212; +$9860 [95% CI, $5835-$13,885]). For patients receiving EVARs for complex aneurysms, physician-modified endovascular grafts had higher index procedure costs ($55,835 vs $47,064; P < .01) although similar total costs on adjusted analyses (+$1856 [95% CI, -$7997 to $11,710]; P = .70) relative to Zenith fenestrated endovascular grafts among those that were alive at 3 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Longer-term costs associated with EVARs are lower for infrarenal AAAs but higher for complex AAAs relative to OARs, driven by reintervention and imaging costs. Further analyses to characterize the financial viability of EVARs for both infrarenal and complex AAAs should evaluate hospital margins and anticipated changes in costs of devices.

Transition from Open Repair to Endovascular Aneurysm Repair for Rupture Aortic Aneurysms throughout a 16-Year Period of Time in a Single Tertiary Center

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is recommended as the first option for both elective and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs) with suitable anatomy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of the gradual adoption of ruptured EVAR (rEVAR) as first option in the management of rAAAs in a reference tertiary center over a 16 year-period.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected clinical data was undertaken, including all patients that were treated for rAAA infrarenal or juxtarenal either with open surgical repair (OSR) or EVAR from 2006-2023. Three periods were identified and analyzed: Initial (2006-2011); intermediate (2012-2017); and current (2018-2023). The primary outcomes were the 30-day mortality rate in relation to the changing pattern of treatment. Secondary outcomes were re-intervention and mortality during the follow up period.

RESULTS

Two hundred patients were treated for rAAA; 52% by endovascular means [EVAR (94), Ch-EVAR (9), and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (1)] and 48% by OSR (96). In the initial period, 61 patients were treated for rAAA (21% EVAR vs. 79% OSR), 68 in intermediate patients (47% EVAR vs. 53% OSR), and 71 in current period (83% EVAR vs. 17% OSR). Only in the current period juxta -renal rAAAs were treated by endovascular means (14%). The 30-day mortality rate was 46% in initial period (31% for EVAR vs. 50% for OSR), 64% in second period (46% in EVAR vs. 80% for OSR), and 35% in third period (25% for EVAR vs. 83% for OSR). The mean follow up did not differ between the groups, (EVAR 28.3 ± 2 months, vs. OSR 33.1 ± 3 months, P = 0.56). The survival rate did not differ between the groups; in rEVAR was 82% (SE 5%), 74% (SE 6%), 68% (SE 6.5%), and 63% (SE 7.7%) at 12, 24, 36, and 48 months, respectively, and in OSR was 76% (SE 7%), 66% (SE 8%), and 56% (SE 9.5%) at 6, 24, and 48 months, respectively (P = 0.544).

CONCLUSIONS

Through a 16-year period, the implementation of EVAR as treatment of choice for rAAAs over OSR resulted in a noticeable reduction in the 30-day mortality. rEVAR was feasible in over 80% of rAAA patients.

Editor's Choice -- European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-Iliac Artery Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) has developed clinical practice guidelines for the care of patients with aneurysms of the abdominal aorta and iliac arteries in succession to the 2011 and 2019 versions, with the aim of assisting physicians and patients in selecting the best management strategy.

METHODS

The guideline is based on scientific evidence completed with expert opinion on the matter. By summarising and evaluating the best available evidence, recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of patients have been formulated. The recommendations are graded according to a modified European Society of Cardiology grading system, where the strength (class) of each recommendation is graded from I to III and the letters A to C mark the level of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 160 recommendations have been issued on the following topics: Service standards, including surgical volume and training; Epidemiology, diagnosis, and screening; Management of patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), including surveillance, cardiovascular risk reduction, and indication for repair; Elective AAA repair, including operative risk assessment, open and endovascular repair, and early complications; Ruptured and symptomatic AAA, including peri-operative management, such as permissive hypotension and use of aortic occlusion balloon, open and endovascular repair, and early complications, such as abdominal compartment syndrome and colonic ischaemia; Long term outcome and follow up after AAA repair, including graft infection, endoleaks and follow up routines; Management of complex AAA, including open and endovascular repair; Management of iliac artery aneurysm, including indication for repair and open and endovascular repair; and Miscellaneous aortic problems, including mycotic, inflammatory, and saccular aortic aneurysm. In addition, Shared decision making is being addressed, with supporting information for patients, and Unresolved issues are discussed.

CONCLUSION

The ESVS Clinical Practice Guidelines provide the most comprehensive, up to date, and unbiased advice to clinicians and patients on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms.

Treatment Outcomes of Patients With Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) is a serious complication of abdominal aortic aneurysm associated with high operative mortality and morbidity rates. The present study evaluated the perioperative and long-term outcomes of Korean patients with rAAA based on national health insurance claims data.

METHODS

The National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database was searched retrospectively to identify patients with rAAA who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) from 2009 to 2018. Perioperative (≤ 30 days), early postoperative (≤ 3 month), and long-term (> 3 month) survival, reinterventions, and complications were assessed.

RESULTS

The search identified 1,034 patients with rAAA, including 594 who underwent EVAR and 440 who underwent OSR. When the study period was divided into two, the total numbers of patients with rAAA, patients who underwent EVAR, and octogenarians were higher during the second half. The perioperative mortality rate was 29.8% in the EVAR and 35.0% in the OSR group (P = 0.028). Hartmann's procedure for bowel infarction was performed more frequently in the OSR than in the EVAR group (adjusted odds ratio, 6.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.33-21.84; P = 0.001), but other complication rates did not differ significantly. All-cause mortality during the entire observation period did not differ significantly in the EVAR and OSR groups (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.98-1.41; P = 0.087). Abdominal aortic aneurysm-related reintervention rate was significantly lower in the OSR group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14-0.70; P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Although EVAR showed somewhat superior perioperative outcomes for rAAA, the long-term outcomes of EVAR after excluding initial 3 months were significantly worse than OSR. When anatomically feasible for both treatments, the perioperative mortality risk and reasonable prospects of long-term survival should be considered in rAAA.

Long-term Survival After Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Is Improving Over Time: Nationwide Analysis During Twenty-four Years in Sweden (1994-2017)

OBJECTIVE

To investigate long-term survival after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA) repair in Sweden during twenty-four years (1994-2017).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Management of rAAA has seen significant changes in the past decades, with the shifting from open (OAR) to endovascular (EVAR) being the most striking, thereby enabling treatment of elderly patients with multiple comorbidities.

METHODS

A registry-based nationwide cohort study was performed, and three 8-year periods (1994-2001, 2002-2009, 2010-2017) were compared for crude long-term survival with Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards analyses. Relative survival compared to matched general population referents was estimated.

RESULTS

Overall, 8928 rAAA repair subjects were identified (1994-2001 N = 3368; 2002-2009 N = 3405; 2010-2017 N = 2155). The proportion of octogenarians (20.6%; 27.5%; 34.0%; P < 0.001), women (14.3%; 18.5%; 20.6%; P < 0.001), and EVAR procedures (1.5%; 14.9%; 35.5%; P < 0.001) increased over time. The crude 5-year survival was 36%; 44%; 43% (P < 0.0001). Multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis displayed a decreasing mortality hazard ratio (HR) over time (1.00; 0.80; 0.72; P < 0.001). Use of EVAR was associated with reduced hazards of crude long-term mortality (HR = 0.80, P < 0.001). Relative survival for patients surviving the perioperative period (ie, 90 days) was lower than matched general population referents, and was stable over time (relative 5-year survival: 86% vs 88%, vs 86% P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Nationwide analysis of long-term outcomes after repair of rAAA in Sweden during 24 years (1994-2017) has revealed that, despite changes in the baseline population characteristics as well as in the treatment strategy, long-term survival improved over time.

Controversies in Vascular Surgery

There have been significant advances in vascular surgery in recent years. These advances include procedural techniques, choice of procedure, and application of nonoperative management. Endovascular techniques have expanded greatly over the past decade. As a result, for many clinical scenarios there is more than 1 option for management, which has given rise to controversies in the choice of best management. This article reviews current controversies in the management of carotid artery disease, abdominal aortic aneurysms, acute deep venous thrombosis, and inferior vena cava filter placement.

Preoperative risk score accuracy confirmed in a modern ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm experience

OBJECTIVE

Various risk score calculators used to predict 30-day mortality after treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs) have produced mixed results regarding their usefulness and reproducibility. We prospectively validated the accuracy of our preoperative scoring system in a modern cohort of patients with rAAAs.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients wiith rAAAs who had presented to a single academic center from January 2002 to December 2018 was performed. The patients were divided into three cohorts according to when the institutional practice changes had occurred: the pre-endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) era (January 2002 to July 2007), the pre-Harbor View risk score era (August 2007 to October 2013), and the modern era (November 2013 to December 2018). The primary outcome measure was 30-day mortality. Our preoperative risk score assigns 1 point for each of the following: age >76 years, pH <7.2, creatinine >2 mg/dL, and any episode of hypotension (systolic blood pressure <70 mm Hg). The previously reported mortality from a retrospective analysis of the first two cohorts was 22% for 1 point, 69% for 2 points, 78% for 3 points, and 100% for 4 points. The goal of the present study was to prospectively validate the Harborview scoring system in the modern era.

RESULTS

During the 17-year study period, 417 patients with rAAAs were treated at our institution. Of the 118 patients treated in the modern era, 45 (38.1%) had undergone open aneurysm repair (OAR), 61 (51.7%) had undergone EVAR, and 12 (10.2%) had received comfort measures only. Excluding the 12 patients without aneurysm repair, we found a statistically significant linear trend between the preoperative risk score and subsequent 30-day mortality for all patients combined (P < .0001), for OAR patients alone (P = .0003), and for EVAR patients alone (P < .0001). After adjustment for the Harborview risk score, the 30-day mortality was 41.3% vs 31.6% after OAR vs EVAR, respectively (P = .2). For all repairs, the 30-day mortality was 14.6% for a score of 0, 35.7% for a score of 1, 68.4% for a score of 2, and 100% for a score of 3 or 4.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results, representing one of the largest modern series of rAAAs treated at a single institution, have confirmed the accuracy of a simple 4-point preoperative risk score in predicting 30-day mortality in the modern rAAA patient. Such tools should be used when discussing the treatment options with referring physicians, patients, and their family members to help guide transfer and treatment decision-making.

Time-Dependent Risk of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients With Primary Aldosteronism After Medical or Surgical Treatment Initiation

[Figure: see text].

Increased risk of atrial fibrillation was reported in patients with primary aldosteronism. However, data are limited regarding the time-dependent risk of atrial fibrillation in surgically or medically treated primary aldosteronism. From the National Health Insurance Claim database in Korea (2003–2017), a total of 1418 patients with primary aldosteronism (adrenalectomy [ADX], n=755, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist n=663) were age- and sex-matched at a 1:5 ratios to patients with essential hypertension (n=7090). Crude incidence of new onset atrial fibrillation was 2.96% in primary aldosteronism and 1.97% in essential hypertension. Because of nonproportional hazard observed in new onset atrial fibrillation, analysis time was split at 3 years. Compared with essential hypertension, risk of new onset atrial fibrillation peaked at 1 year gradually declined but remained elevated up to 3 years in overall treated primary aldosteronism (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 3.02; P<0.001) as well as in both ADX (aHR, 3.54; P<0.001) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist groups (aHR 2.27; P=0.031), which became comparable to essential hypertension afterward in both groups (ADX aHR, 0.38; P=0.102; mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist aHR, 0.60; P=0.214). Nonetheless, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist group was associated with increased risk of nonfatal stroke (aHR, 1.21; P=0.031) compared with essential hypertension, whereas ADX was not (aHR, 1.26; P=0.288). Our results suggest the risk of new-onset atrial fibrillation remained elevated up to 3 years in treated primary aldosteronism compared with essential hypertension, which declined to comparable risk in essential hypertension thereafter. Monitoring for atrial fibrillation up to 3 years after treatment, particularly ADX, might be warranted.

Time-to-event data meta-analysis of late outcomes of endovascular versus open repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

We investigated whether the well-documented perioperative survival advantage of emergency endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open repair would be sustained during follow-up.

METHODS

A systematic review conforming to the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) statement standards was conducted to identify studies that had reported the follow-up outcomes of endovascular vs open repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms. Electronic bibliographic sources (MEDLINE [medical literature analysis and retrieval system online], Embase [Excerpta Medica database], CINAHL [cumulative index to nursing and allied health literature], and CENTRAL [Cochrane central register of controlled trials]) were interrogated using the Healthcare Databases Advanced Search interface (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, London, United Kingdom). A time-to-event data meta-analysis was performed using the inverse variance method, and the results were reported as summary hazard ratios (HRs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Mixed effects regression was applied to investigate the outcome changes over time. The quality of the body of evidence was appraised using the GRADE (grades of recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation) system.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials and 22 observational studies reporting a total of 31,383 patients were included in the quantitative synthesis. The mean follow-up duration across the studies ranged from 232 days to 4.9 years. The overall all-cause mortality was significantly lower after EVAR than after open repair (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.73-0.86). However, the postdischarge all-cause mortality was not significantly different (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.85-1.43). The aneurysm-related mortality, which was reported by one randomized controlled trial, was not significantly different between EVAR and open repair (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.69-1.15). Meta-regression showed the mortality difference in favor of EVAR was more pronounced in more recent studies (P = .069) and recently treated patients (P = .062). The certainty for the body of evidence for overall and postdischarge all-cause mortality was judged to be low and that for aneurysm-related mortality to be high.

CONCLUSIONS

EVAR showed a sustained mortality benefit during follow-up compared with open repair. A wider adoption of an endovascular-first strategy is justified.