Population-Based Outcomes Following Endovascular and Open Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Journal of Endovascular Therapy (Impact Factor: 3.59). 10/2009; 16(5):554-64. DOI: 10.1583/09-2743.1
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To evaluate national outcomes after endovascular and open surgical repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA).
The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was interrogated to identify all repairs between 2000 and 2005 for rAAA based on ICD-9 codes. In the study period, 2323 patients (1794 men; median age 75 years, range 45-98) with rAAAs had endovascular repair, while 26,106 patients (20,311 men; median age 73 years, range 22-99) had an open procedure. Outcomes included in-hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS), complications, and hospitalization charge. A secondary analysis was performed to compare outcomes from low-, medium-, and high-volume institutions based on annual rAAA repair volume.
Patients in the endovascular group were significantly older (p<0.05). Mortality was 41% overall: 33% and 41% for endovascular versus open repair, respectively (p<0.001). Mortality after endovascular repair was lower than open surgery for patients >or=70 years (36% versus 47%, p<0.001), but not for those <70 years (24% versus 30%, p = 0.15). LOS was shorter after endovascular repair (7 versus 9 days, p<0.001). Respiratory complications (8% versus 4%, p<0.05) and acute renal failure were more common following open repair (30% versus 23%, p<0.01). Costs were similar (endo $73,590 versus open $67,287, p = 0.15). Mortality decreased as hospital surgical volume increased (low 44%, medium 39%, high 38%; p<0.001). Over time, endovascular repair utilization increased more rapidly at high-volume centers, and a lower mortality was seen with endovascular repair at high-volume compared to low-volume hospitals (22% versus 44%, p<0.001). Multivariate predictors of mortality were age, female gender, lower hospital surgical volume, open repair, and year of surgery.
This population-based study found that mortality associated with rAAAs may be improved by the performance of endovascular repair, especially in older patients. Mortality after rAAA for both endovascular and open repairs was also lower at high-volume institutions.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a serious complication after repair of a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA). In the present Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS)/International Society for CardioVascular Surgery (ISCVS) reporting standards patients are classified as no dialysis (grade I), as temporary dialysis (grade II), and as permanent dialysis or fatal outcome (grade III). However, AKI is a broad clinical syndrome including more than the requirement for renal replacement therapy. The recently introduced 'Risk,' 'Injury,' 'Failure,' 'Loss,' and 'End-stage' (RIFLE) classification for AKI comprises three severity categories based on serum creatinine and urine output ('Risk,' 'Injury,' and 'Failure'). The objective of the present study was to assess the incidence of AKI using the RIFLE criteria (AKIRIFLE). Secondary objectives were to assess the incidence of AKI as defined using the SVS/ISCVS reporting standards (AKISVS/ISCVS) and the association between AKIRIFLE and death.
    Journal of Vascular Surgery 07/2014; 60(5). DOI:10.1016/j.jvs.2014.04.072 · 2.98 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Zielsetzung Evaluation der Patientenpopulation, der Behandlungsmodalitäten und des perioperativen Outcomes bei der Behandlung des rupturierten abdominellen Aortenaneurysmas (rAAA) im Qualitätssicherungsregister „Bauchaortenaneurysma“ der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Gefäßchirurgie und Gefäßmedizin (DGG). Patienten und Methoden Zwischen 1999 und 2010 nahmen 201 Kliniken an der freiwilligen Datensammlung teil. In 192 dieser Kliniken wurden rAAA behandelt. Dokumentiert wurden 4859 Patienten [offener Aortenersatz (OR): n = 4284; „endovascular aortic repair“ (EVAR): n = 575). Primärer Endpunkt dieser Auswertung war die Krankenhausletalität, sekundäre Endpunkte umfassen sonstige perioperative Komplikationen (pulmonal, kardial, operationspflichtige Nachblutungen, Darm- und Glutealischämie, Graftthrombosen/periphere Ischämien, Nierenversagen mit Dialyse, postoperative Sepsis und Endoleckagen). Darüber hinaus wurden etwaige Veränderungen der Behandlungsmodalitäten, des Patientenguts (z. B. Lebensalter) sowie des Behandlungsergebnisses im Untersuchungszeitraum analysiert. Die Auswertung erfolgte deskriptiv und mithilfe eines logistischen Regressionsmodells. Ergebnisse Die Krankenhausletalität hat von 42,7 % im Jahr 1999 auf 33,3 % im Jahr 2010 abgenommen (p Schlussfolgerungen Die Registerdaten zeigen eine Zunahme der Anwendung von EVAR zur Behandlung des rAAA. Diese stellt auch in der Notfallsituation eine Alternative zum klassischen offenen Aortenersatz dar und zeigt eine geringere perioperative Letalität und geringere Komplikationsraten.
    Gefässchirurgie 09/2013; 18(5):372-380. DOI:10.1007/s00772-013-1194-9 · 0.24 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Despite advances in operative repair, ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) remains associated with high mortality and morbidity rates, especially in elderly patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of emergency endovascular aneurysm repair (eEVAR), conventional open repair (OPEN), and conservative treatment in elderly patients with rAAA. Methods We conducted a retrospective study of all rAAA patients treated with OPEN or eEVAR between January 2005 and December 2011 in the vascular surgery department at Amphia Hospital, the Netherlands. The outcome in patients treated for rAAA by eEVAR or OPEN repair was investigated. Special attention was paid to patients who were admitted and did not receive operative intervention due to serious comorbidity, extremely advanced age, or poor physical condition. We calculated the 30-day rAAA-related mortality for all rAAA patients admitted to our hospital. Results Twelve patients did not receive operative emergency repair due to extreme fragility (mean age 87 years, median time to mortality 27 hours). Twenty-three patients had eEVAR and 82 had OPEN surgery. The 30-day mortality rate in operated patients was 30% (7/23) in the eEVAR group versus 26% (21/82) in the OPEN group (P=0.64). No difference in mortality was noted between eEVAR and OPEN over 5 years of follow-up. There were more cardiac adverse events in the OPEN group (n=25, 31%) than in the eEVAR group (n=2, 9%; P=0.035). Reintervention after discharge was more frequent in patients who received eEVAR (35%) than in patients who had OPEN (6%, P<0.001). Advancing age was associated with increasing mortality (hazard ratio 1.05 [95% confidence interval 1.01–1.09]) per year for patients who received operative repair, with a 67%, 76%, and 100% 5-year mortality rate in the 34 patients aged <70 years, 59 patients aged 70–79 years, and 12 octogenarians, respectively; 30-day rAAA-related mortality was also associated with increasing age (21%, 30%, and 61%, respectively; P=0.008). Conclusion The 30-day and 5-year mortality in patients who survived rAAA was equal between the treatment options of eEVAR and OPEN. Particularly fragile and very elderly patients did not receive operative repair. The decision to intervene in rAAA should not be made on the basis of patient age alone, but also in relation to comorbidity and patient preference.
    Clinical Interventions in Aging 10/2014; 9:1721-32. DOI:10.2147/CIA.S64718 · 1.82 Impact Factor


Available from