A comparison of endovascular versus open repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm – Meta-analysis of propensity score-matched data

Vascular ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 170853812110251
Author(s):  
Hatim Alsusa ◽  
Abbas Shahid ◽  
George A Antoniou
Keyword(s):  
Open Repair ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Kidney Injury ◽  
The Body ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Perioperative Mortality ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
Overall Mortality

Background Optimal management of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA) has been heavily debated in the literature. The aim of this review is to assess comparative outcomes from propensity-matched studies of endovascular versus open for rAAA. Methods Electronic databases (MEDLINE and Embase) were searched in January 2021 using the Healthcare Databases Advanced Search interface. Eligible studies compared endovascular versus open repair for rAAA using propensity-matched cohorts. Pooled estimates of perioperative outcomes were calculated using odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) using the random-effects model. Time-to-event data meta-analysis was conducted using the inverse-variance method and reported as summary hazard ratio (HR) and associated 95% CI. The quality of evidence was graded using a system developed by the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. Results Six studies published between 2010 and 2020 were selected for qualitative and quantitative synthesis, reporting a total of 6731 patients. The odds of perioperative mortality after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) were significantly lower than after open surgical repair (OSR) (OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.41–0.65). The hazard of overall mortality during follow-up was lower, although not significantly, after EVAR than after OSR (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.62–1.01). The odds of acute kidney injury and early aneurysm-related reintervention were both significantly lower after EVAR than after OSR (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.14–0.78 and OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.33–0.98, respectively). Patients treated with EVAR stayed in hospital for significantly less time than those treated with OSR (MD −5.13, 95% CI −7.94 to −2.32). The certainty of the body of evidence for perioperative mortality was low and for overall mortality was very low. Conclusion The evidence suggests that EVAR confers a significant benefit on perioperative mortality.

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in patients with Marfan syndrome

Vascular ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-52
Author(s):  
Allan Marc Conway ◽  
Khalil Qato ◽  
Gautam Anand ◽  
Laurie Mondry ◽  
Gary Giangola ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Marfan Syndrome ◽  
Open Repair ◽  
Aortic Surgery ◽  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Type I ◽  
Femoral Access ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
Aneurysm Repair

Objectives Marfan syndrome patients are at risk for aortic degeneration. Repair is traditionally performed with open surgery as this is deemed more durable. Endovascular aneurysm repair remains controversial. We report on the outcomes of Marfan syndrome patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair. Methods The Vascular Quality Initiative registry identified 35,889 patients, including 29 with Marfan syndrome, treated with endovascular aneurysm repair from January 2003 to December 2017. Outcomes were analyzed per the Society for Vascular Surgery reporting standards. Results Median age was 70.0 years (IQR, 57.0–75.0), and 22 (75.9%) were male. Median aneurysm diameter was 5.3 cm (IQR, 4.9–6.3 cm), with an aortic neck length and diameter of 2.0 cm (IQR, 1.6–2.8 cm) and 2.5 cm (IQR, 2.2–2.8 cm), respectively. Twenty-one (72.4%) patients were asymptomatic, seven (24.1%) symptomatic, and one (3.4%) presented with rupture. Ten (34.5%) patients had prior aortic surgery. Six (20.7%) were unfit for open surgical repair. Length of stay was 2.0 days (IQR, 1.0–3.0 days). Percutaneous femoral access was performed in 15 (51.7%) patients with no complications. A type IA endoleak was present in one (3.4%), type IB in one (3.4%), and type II endoleak in two (6.9%) patients. There were no postoperative pulmonary, cardiac, or neurological complications. In-hospital mortality occurred in one (3.4%) patient who presented with a rupture and had been deemed unfit for open repair. A conversion to open repair was required. The patient expired on post-operative day 0. Early clinical success was achieved in 26 (89.7%) patients. Follow-up was available for 15 (51.7%) patients at a median time of 766 days (IQR, 653–937). There were no reinterventions or mortalities. Change in sac diameter was −0.6 cm (IQR, −1.1 to −0.2 cm), with no type I or III endoleaks. Discussion Endovascular aneurysm repair for patients with Marfan syndrome is feasible, and can be performed safely. Mid-term outcomes suggest this technique is durable. More robust long-term follow-up is needed.

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Increases Aortic Arterial Stiffness When Compared to Open Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

2016 ◽  
Vol 50 (5) ◽  
pp. 317-320 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cleona Gray ◽  
Patrick Goodman ◽  
Stephen A. Badger ◽  
M. Kevin O’Malley ◽  
Martin K. O’Donohoe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Arterial Stiffness ◽  
Open Repair ◽  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
Aneurysm Repair

Elective endovascular vs. open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm in octogenarians

Vascular ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 348-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koichi Morisaki ◽  
Takuya Matsumoto ◽  
Yutaka Matsubara ◽  
Kentaro Inoue ◽  
Yukihiko Aoyagi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm ◽  
Aortic Aneurysm ◽  
Operative Mortality ◽  
Open Repair ◽  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
Elective Repair ◽  
Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Repair Group

Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the operative mortality and short-term and midterm outcomes of treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm in Japanese patients over 80 years of age. Methods Between January 2007 and December 2011, 207 patients underwent elective repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms. Comorbidities, operative morbidity and mortality, midterm outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. Results The average age (endovascular aneurysm repair, 84.4 ± 0.3; open, 82.8 ± 0.3, P < 0.01) and the percentage of hostile abdomen (endovascular aneurysm repair, 22.2%; open repair, 11.1%, P < 0.05) were higher in the endovascular aneurysm repair group. Percentage of outside IFU was higher in open repair (endovascular aneurysm repair, 38.5%; open repair, 63.3%, P < 0.01). The cardiac complication (endovascular aneurysm repair, 0%; open repair, 5.6%, P < 0.01) and length of postoperative hospital stay (endovascular aneurysm repair, 10.3 ± 0.8 days; open, 18.6 ± 1.6 days, P < 0.05) were significantly lower in the endovascular aneurysm repair group. There were no differences in operative mortality (endovascular aneurysm repair, 0%; open, 1.1%, P = 0.43) and the aneurysm-related death was not observed. The rate of secondary interventions (EVAR, 5.1%; open repair, 0%, P < 0.01) and midterm mortality rate were much higher in the endovascular aneurysm repair group. Conclusions Endovascular aneurysm repair is less invasive than open repair and useful for treating abdominal aortic aneurysm in octogenarians; however, open repair can be acceptable treatment in the inappropriate case treated by endovascular aneurysm repair.

scholarly journals Risk prediction for perioperative mortality of endovascular vs open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms using the Medicare population

2009 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 256-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristina A. Giles ◽  
Marc L. Schermerhorn ◽  
A. James O'Malley ◽  
Philip Cotterill ◽  
Ami Jhaveri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Prediction ◽  
Open Repair ◽  
Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Perioperative Mortality ◽  
Medicare Population ◽  
Abdominal Aortic

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair versus Open Repair in Patients with Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Ben Pearce ◽  
Tze-Woei Tan ◽  
Wayne W. Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Endovascular Repair ◽  
Open Repair ◽  
Perioperative Complications ◽  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Study Intervention ◽  
Complications And Mortality

This chapter provides a summary of the landmark EVAR Trial 1, which compared endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) with open repair in patients judged to be fit for both open and endovascular repair. Although endovascular AAA (EVAR) repair was associated with lower perioperative complications and mortality than open surgical repair, after 4 years of follow-up the outcomes of the two approaches were similar. Follow-up at 15 years found EVAR had inferior late survival, necessitating lifelong surveillance of EVAR and reintervention if necessary. The chapter describes the basics of the study, including funding, year study began, year study was published, study location, who was studied, who was excluded, how many patients, study design, study intervention, follow-up, endpoints, results, and criticism and limitations. The chapter briefly reviews other relevant studies and information, gives a summary and discusses implications, and concludes with a relevant clinical case.

Acute Kidney Injury after Complex Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

2020 ◽  
Vol 25 (44) ◽  
pp. 4686-4694 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan L. Liang ◽  
Abhisekh Mohapatra ◽  
Efthymios D. Avgerinos ◽  
Athanasios Katsargyris
Keyword(s):  
Acute Kidney Injury ◽  
Aortic Aneurysm ◽  
Endovascular Repair ◽  
Associated Factors ◽  
Endovascular Aneurysm Repair ◽  
Kidney Injury ◽  
Aortic Aneurysms ◽  
Perioperative Morbidity ◽  
Abdominal Aortic ◽  
Aneurysm Repair

Background: Complex endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm carries higher perioperative morbidity than standard infrarenal endovascular repair. Objective: This study reviews the incidence and associated factors of acute kidney injury in complex aortic endovascular repair of juxtarenal, pararenal, and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. Methods: A literature review was performed for all studies on the endovascular repair of juxtarenal, pararenal, and thoracoabdominal aneurysms that evaluated rates of acute kidney injury as an outcome. Outcomes were further analyzed by the level of anatomic complexity and method of repair. Results: 52 studies met inclusion criteria, with a total of 5454 individuals undergoing repair from 2004 to 2017. The overall rate of acute kidney injury ranged widely from 0 to 41%, with a rate of hemodialysis from 0 to 19% (temporary) and 0 to 14% (permanent). Increasing anatomic complexity was associated with higher rates of acute kidney injury. Mode of endovascular repair, learning curve effect, and preoperative chronic renal insufficiency did not demonstrate any associations with the outcome. Conclusion: Published rates of acute kidney injury in complex aortic aneurysm repair vary widely with few definitively associated factors other than increasing anatomic complexity and operative time. Further study is needed for the identification of predictors related to postoperative acute kidney injury.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document