Editor's Choice - Nationwide Analysis of Patients Undergoing Iliac Artery Aneurysm Repair in the Netherlands

OBJECTIVE

The new 2019 guideline of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) recommends consideration for elective iliac artery aneurysm (eIAA) repair when the iliac diameter exceeds 3.5 cm, as opposed to 3.0 cm previously. The current study assessed diameters at time of eIAA repair and ruptured IAA (rIAA) repair and compared clinical outcomes after open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

This retrospective observational study used the nationwide Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA) registry that includes all patients who undergo aorto-iliac aneurysm repair in the Netherlands. All patients who underwent primary IAA repair between 1 January 2014 and 1 January 2018 were included. Diameters at time of eIAA and rIAA repair were compared in a descriptive fashion. The anatomical location of the IAA was not registered in the registry. Patient characteristics and outcomes of OSR and EVAR were compared with appropriate statistical tests.

RESULTS

The DSAA registry comprised 974 patients who underwent IAA repair. A total of 851 patients were included after exclusion of patients undergoing revision surgery and patients with missing essential variables. eIAA repair was carried out in 713 patients, rIAA repair in 102, and symptomatic IAA repair in 36. OSR was performed in 205, EVAR in 618, and hybrid repairs and conversions in 28. The median maximum IAA diameter at the time of eIAA and rIAA repair was 43 (IQR 38-50) mm and 68 (IQR 58-85) mm, respectively. Mortality was 1.3% (95% CI 0.7-2.4) after eIAA repair and 25.5% (95% CI 18.0-34.7) after rIAA repair. Mortality was not significantly different between the OSR and EVAR subgroups. Elective OSR was associated with significantly more complications than EVAR (intra-operative: 9.8% vs. 3.6%, post-operative: 34.0% vs. 13.8%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In the Netherlands, most eIAA repairs are performed at diameters larger than recommended by the ESVS guideline. These findings appear to support the recent increase in the threshold diameter for eIAA repair.

Cost-effectiveness and cost–utility of endovascular versus open repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm in the Amsterdam Acute Aneurysm Trial

Background

Minimally invasive endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) could be a surgical technique that improves outcome of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA). The aim of this study was to analyse the cost-effectiveness and cost–utility of EVAR compared with standard open repair (OR) in the treatment of rAAA, with costs per 30-day and 6-month survivor as outcome parameters.

Methods

Resource use was determined from the Amsterdam Acute Aneurysm (AJAX) trial, a multicentre randomized trial comparing EVAR with OR in patients with rAAA. The analysis was performed from a provider perspective. All costs were calculated as if all patients had been treated in the same hospital (Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, teaching hospital).

Results

A total of 116 patients were randomized. The 30-day mortality rate was 21 per cent after EVAR and 25 per cent for OR: absolute risk reduction (ARR) 4·4 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) –11·0 to 19·7) per cent. At 6 months, the total mortality rate for EVAR was 28 per cent, compared with 31 per cent among those assigned to OR: ARR 2·4 (−14·2 to 19·0) per cent. The mean cost difference between EVAR and OR was €5306 (95 per cent c.i. –1854 to 12 659) at 30 days and €10 189 (−2477 to 24 506) at 6 months. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio per prevented death was €120 591 at 30 days and €424 542 at 6 months. There was no significant difference in quality of life between EVAR and OR. Nor was EVAR superior regarding cost–utility.

Conclusion

EVAR may be more effective for rAAA, but its increased costs mean that it is unaffordable based on current standards of societal willingness-to-pay for health gains.

Local anesthesia for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVES

This study reports the results of a prospective continuous cohort of patients treated for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with a unified anesthetic strategy based on the use of local anesthesia (LA) in all patients, while reserving regional (RA) or general anesthesia (GA) only for those with predefined individually or surgically specific indications.

METHODS

All patients treated by EVAR for an elective aortic abdominal aneurysm (AAA) between April 1998 and December 2003 were included. The strategy of treatment generated three cohorts of patients (LA, RA, or GA). Primary outcome included all-cause mortality, nonfatal cardiac morbidity, respiratory complications, and renal failure. Secondary outcome measures included conversion to general anesthesia, use of analgesics, and time-related outcomes (operating time, length of stay in intensive care unit and hospital, time required to resume oral intake, and time to ambulation).

RESULTS

A total of 239 patients underwent EVAR: 170 LA, 31 RA, and 38 GA. Overall mortality was one patient (0.4%). LA was associated with a lower incidence of complications compared with GA (P < .001). In the LA group, two patients had to be converted to GA, one because of a dissection and one because of anxiety. In 13% of the patients in the LA group, additional intravenous sedation or analgesia was required. Operating time and length of stay in intensive care was shorter in the LA and RA groups than in the GA group (P < .001). Length of stay in hospital and time to ambulation and regular diet was shorter in the LA group compared with the RA and GA groups (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

A strategy based on the preferential use of LA for EVAR restricting RA or GA only to those with predefined contraindications is feasible and appears to be well tolerated.

Endovascular Treatment of Acute Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm with a Bifurcated Stentgraft

OBJECTIVES

To analyse the results of emergency endovascular aneurysm repair (eEVAR) for acute abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), in comparison to open repair, and to evaluate suitability and application rate.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients treated for an acute AAA between January 1998 and August 2004 were included. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcome measures were procedure time, intra-operative blood loss, transfusion requirement, intensive care unit, and hospital length of stay. Suitability and application rate for eEVAR were assessed in a subgroup of patients, from January 2003.

RESULTS

A total of 253 patients were treated. eEVAR was performed in 40 patients, 5 (13%) died in-hospital. Open repair was performed in 213 patients, 64 (30%) died in-hospital. Secondary outcome measures were all significantly improved in the eEVAR subgroup. From January 2003, 56 patients were treated. Of the 44 (79%) patients who were evaluated for eEVAR, 16 (36%) patients were anatomically suitable. Eventually, 15 out of the 56 (27%) patients were treated by eEVAR.

CONCLUSION

The results of eEVAR in a selected group of patients are promising, but suitability and application rate were low.

Fenestrated and branched endovascular techniques for thoraco-abdominal aneurysm repair

Since 1991, endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been established as an alternative for open surgical repair of aortic aneurysms. One of the main limitations for EVAR is the need for a sufficient sealing zone below or above vital aortic side branches. Recently, efforts have been made to overcome these limitations by incorporating fenestrations or branches in customized stent-grafts. This paper reviews the technical and clinical possibilities, as well as the results with fenestrated and branched stent-grafts. All these techniques can be classified into 6 groups, including abdominal fenestrated, abdominal branched, thoraco-abdominal fenestrated, thoraco-abdominal branched, thoracic fenestrated, and thoracic branched stent-grafting. The only well-elaborated technique at this moment is abdominal fenestrated stent-grafting. Currently, branched stent-grafting must be regarded as experimental, but advancements are taking place rapidly. It is anticipated that wider adoption will take place in the near future. New developments include the further use of reinforced fenestrations, indwelling catheters and flexor sheaths, as well as the use of new type branches.

Major amputation for intractable extremity melanoma after failure of isolated limb perfusion

AIM

The aim of this study was to analyse indications and results of amputation for intractable extremity melanoma after failure of isolated limb perfusion (ILP).

METHODS

Between 1978 and 2001, 451 patients with loco-regional advanced extremity melanoma underwent 505 ILPs. Amputation of the affected extremity had to be carried out for intractable recurrent disease in 11 of these patients.

RESULTS

The indications for amputation were uncontrollable pain (n=2), extensive loco-regional tumour progression (n=4), loss of ankle function due to local tumour growth (n=1), and ulcerating and fungating lesions, not responding to other treatments (n=4). Four patients developed stump recurrence after amputation. Ten patients died of melanoma metastases after a median of 11 months (range 2-110 months). Two patients survived more than 5 years after amputation.

CONCLUSIONS

Major amputation is rarely indicated for intractable extremity melanoma but long-term survival can be achieved in selected patients.