Risk Factors Affecting Survival after Surgical Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Intraoperative Predictors and Proposal for a Novel Prognostic Risk Score for In-Hospital Mortality after Open Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms (SPARTAN Score)

(1) Background: Several mortality risk scores have been developed to predict mortality in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs), but none focused on intraoperative factors. The aim of this study is to identify intraoperative variables affecting in-hospital mortality after open repair and develop a novel prognostic risk score. (2) Methods: The analysis of a retrospectively maintained dataset identified patients who underwent open repair for rAAA from January 2007 to October 2023 in three Italian tertiary referral centers. Multinomial logistic regression was used to calculate the association between intraoperative variables and perioperative mortality. Independent intraoperative factors were used to create a prognostic score. (3) Results: In total, 316 patients with a mean age of 77.3 (SD ± 8.5) were included. In-hospital mortality rate was 30.7%. Hemoperitoneum (p < 0.001), suprarenal clamping (p = 0.001), and operation times of >240 min (p = 0.008) were negative predictors of perioperative mortality, while the patency of at least one hypogastric artery had a protective role (p = 0.008). Numerical values were assigned to each variable based on the respective odds ratio to create a risk stratification for in-hospital mortality. (4) Conclusions: rAAA represents a major cause of mortality. Intraoperative variables are essential to estimate patients' risk in surgically treated patients. A prognostic risk score based on these factors alone may be useful to predict in-hospital mortality after open repair.

The Management of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: An Ongoing Challenge

BACKGROUND

despite improvements in the diagnosis and treatment of elective AAAs, ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAAs) continue to cause a substantial number of deaths. The choice between an open or endovascular approach remains a challenge, as does postoperative complications in survivors. The aim of this manuscript is to offer an overview of the contemporary management of RAAA patients, with a focus on preoperative and intraoperative factors that could help surgeons provide more appropriate treatment.

METHODS

we performed a search on MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus from 1 January 1985 to 1 May 2023 and reviewed SVS and ESVS guidelines. A total of 278 articles were screened, but only those with data available on ruptured aneurysms' incidence and prevalence, preoperative scores, and mortality rates after emergency endovascular or open repair for ruptured AAA were included in the narrative synthesis. Articles were not restricted due to the designs of the studies.

RESULTS

the centralization of RAAAs has improved outcomes after both surgical and endovascular repair. Preoperative mortality risk scores and knowledge of intraoperative factors influencing mortality could help surgeons with decision-making, although there is still no consensus about the best treatment. Complications continue to be an issue in patients surviving intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

RAAA still represents a life-threatening condition, with high mortality rates. Effective screening and centralization matched with adequate preoperative risk-benefit assessment may improve outcomes.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the risk of bowel ischemia after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Outcomes after repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA) have improved in the last decade. It is unknown whether this has resulted in a reduction of postoperative bowel ischemia (BI). The primary objective was to determine BI prevalence after RAAA repair. Secondary objectives were to determine its major sequelae and differences between open repair (OR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

This systematic review (PROSPERO CRD42017055920) followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. MEDLINE and Embase were searched for studies published from 2005 until 2018. The methodologic quality of observational studies was assessed with the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool. The quality of the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. BI prevalence and rates of BI as cause of death, reoperation, and bowel resection were estimated with meta-analyses with a random-effects model. Differences between OR and EVAR were estimated with pooled risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Changes over time were assessed with Spearman rank test (ρ). Publication bias was assessed with a funnel plot analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 101 studies with 52,670 patients were included; 72 studies were retrospective cohort studies, 14 studies were prospective cohort studies, 12 studies were retrospective administrative database studies, and 3 studies were RCTs. The overall methodologic quality of the RCTs was high, but that of observational studies was low. The pooled prevalence of BI ranged from of 0.08 (95% CI, 0.07-0.09) in database studies to 0.10 (95% CI, 0.08-0.12) in cohort studies. The risk of BI was higher after OR than after EVAR (risk ratio, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.25-2.57). The pooled rate of BI as cause of death was 0.04 (95% CI, 0.03-0.05), and that of BI as cause of reoperation and bowel resection ranged between 0.05 and 0.07. BI prevalence did not change over time (ρ, -0.01; P = .93). The funnel plot analysis was highly suggestive of publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of clinically relevant BI after RAAA repair is approximately 10%. Approximately 5% of patients undergoing RAAA repair suffer from severe consequences of BI. BI is less prevalent after EVAR than after OR.

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair-First Strategy for Ruptured Aneurysm Focuses on Fitzgerald Classification and Vein Thrombosis

BACKGROUND

Recent study have demonstrated the good results of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAAs). We report on the results of our EVAR-first strategy for RAAAs focuses on Fitzgerald (F) classification and vein thrombosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2011 to 2017, 31 patients with RAAA underwent EVAR at our hospital. We compared F-1 patients (group A) with F-2 to F-4 patients with obvious retroperitoneal hematoma (group B).

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics in group A (n = 9) and group B (n = 22) were similar. In group B, there were 8 cases of F-2, 10 cases of F-3, and 4 cases of F-4. Of the 22 cases in group B, 16 (73%) cases involved preoperative shock. Operation time was not significantly different (group A: 147 min and group B: 131 min, P = 0.48). The total mortality rate of group A and group B combined was 77.4%. The 30-day mortality was 0% for group A and 23.8% for group B, in which there were 2 F-4 cases and 3 F-3 cases. In group B, hematoma-related complications developed in 6 cases (deep vein thrombosis: 4 cases, abdominal compartment syndrome: 1 case, and hematoma infection: 1 case), and 1 case with deep vein thrombosis developed a pulmonary embolism that resulted in cardiac arrest. The 3-year survival rate was significantly higher for group A (100% vs. 52.3%, P = 0.016), but the freedom from aortic death rate was not significantly different (100% vs. 66.7%, P = 0.056).

CONCLUSIONS

Using EVAR for RAAA is a valid strategy. Certain complications that are associated with peritoneal hematoma, especially venous thrombosis, should receive particular attention.

The beneficial place for the treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

To study the beneficial place for the treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAAs).

METHOD

A retrospective chart review of consecutive RAAA patients was performed. Patients were divided into two groups: direct group and transfer group. We retrospectively reviewed patients' hospital charts and recorded various clinical factors apparent on presentation. The primary consequence was mortality during hospitalization, and some other parameters such as duration of intensive care unit (ICU). All patients were followed up at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months and one year after discharge.

RESULTS

During 4-year period, 56 RAAA patients were treated (24 in direct group, and 32 in transfer group). Significant differences were shown for systolic blood pressure, pulse oxygen saturation, hemoglobin, the time interval from diagnosis to operation et al. There was no difference concerning age and comorbidity among two groups. All the patients were treated by open surgical aneurysm repair. The mortality rate was 68.8% ((6 + 16)/32) in transfer group and 33.3% (8/24) in direct group (P = 0.00067). Both the duration of ICU stay and entire hospitalization were a bit longer in the transfer group, but there was no significant difference. The mean follow-up time was 25.2 ± 12.9 months. The cumulative survival difference was significant (P = 0.042) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

It is beneficial that we treat RAAAs in the diagnosed hospital. The reasons are: 1) to avoid the development of unstable state of aneurysm after rupturing of stable state; 2) the time interval from initial symptoms to operation will be shortened.