Survival After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in a Population with a Low Incidence of Coronary Artery Disease

Atrial fibrillation in vascular surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis on prevalence, incidence and outcome implications

AIMS

To know the prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF), as well as the incidence of postoperative AF (POAF) in vascular surgery for arterial diseases and its outcome implications.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis following the PRISMA statement.

RESULTS

After the selection process, we analyzed 44 records (30 for the prevalence of AF history and 14 for the incidence of POAF).The prevalence of history of AF was 11.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 1-13.3] with high heterogeneity (I2 = 100%). Prevalence was higher in the case of endovascular procedures. History of AF was associated with a worse outcome in terms of in-hospital death [odds ratio (OR) 3.29; 95% CI 2.66-4.06; P < 0.0001; I2 94%] or stroke (OR 1.61; 95% CI 1.39-1.86; P < 0.0001; I2 91%).The pooled incidence of POAF was 3.6% (95% CI 2-6.4) with high heterogeneity (I2 = 100%). POAF risk was associated with older age (mean difference 4.67 years, 95% CI 2.38-6.96; P = 0.00007). The risk of POAF was lower in patients treated with endovascular procedures as compared with an open surgical procedure (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.13-0.91; P = 0.03; I2 = 61%).

CONCLUSIONS

In the setting of vascular surgery for arterial diseases a history of AF is found overall in 11.5% of patients, more frequently in the case of endovascular procedures, and is associated with worse outcomes in terms of short-term mortality and stroke.The incidence of POAF is overall 3.6%, and is lower in patients treated with an endovascular procedure as compared with open surgery procedures. The need for oral anticoagulants for preventing AF-related stroke should be evaluated with randomized clinical trials.

Comparative performance of three comorbidity scores in predicting survival after the elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND

We aimed to study the discriminative power of 3 comorbidity scores for predicting 5-year survival after the elective repair of aorto-iliac aneurysms (AAA).

METHODS

444 patients with AAA undergoing elective repair (33% open and 67% endovascular) between 2000 and 2020 were reviewed. The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and subsequent adjustments by Schneeweiss, Quan and Armitage, the Modified Frailty Index (MFI) and the American Society of Anesthesiologists Score (ASA) were calculated from preoperative data. Their association with 5-year survival was analyzed using Cox regression models and their discriminative power and its changes with C statistics and Net Reclassification Index (NRI).

RESULTS

All comorbidity scores were associated with survival after adjusting by age, sex and type of surgical repair: original CCI HR=1.24, P<0.001; Schneeweiss CCI HR=1.23, P<0.001; Quan CCI HR=1.27, P<0.001, Armitage CCI HR=1.46, P<0.001, MFI HR=1.39, P<0.001 and ASA HR=1.68 (P=0.04) and 2.86 (P=0.01) for classes III and IV, respectively. Associated C statistics were of 0.64, 0.65, 0.65, 0.64, 0.61 and 0.59, respectively. Compared with the original CCI, models based on Schneeweiss CCI and Armitage CCI provided minor improvements in NRI (0.32 and 0.23), and the model based on ASA showed lower C statistics (P=0.014) and NRI (-0.30).

CONCLUSIONS

Established comorbidity scores, such as CCI, MFI or ASA, are all associated with 5-year survival after the elective repair of AAAs, being ASA the worst of them. However, their predictive power is in no case sufficient to identify, by themselves, those patients who may not be eligible for intervention on the basis of life expectancy.

Prognostic Value of Inflammatory Biomarkers in 5-Year Survival After Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms in a Predominantly Male Cohort: Implications for Practice

BACKGROUND

Prognostic factors of long-term survival can guide selection of patients for endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR). The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), the platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), the lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) and the systemic immune-inflammation index (SIII) with survival after EVAR and to assess whether the addition of these biomarkers improved the prediction of survival after surgery.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 284 consecutive patients who underwent an EVAR at a single institution. The association between biomarkers and survival was explored using generalized additive models with penalized smoothing splines and multivariate Cox models. C-statistics and continuous net reclassification indexes (c-NRI) were used to assess the improvement in prediction.

RESULTS

Survival rates at 2 and 5 years were 83.9% and 66.2%, respectively. The predictive score of survival included hemoglobin (HR = 0.849, p = 0.004), statin intake (HR = 0.538, p = 0.004), atrial fibrillation (HR = 2.515, p < 0.001), heart failure (HR = 2.542, p = 0.017) and the non-revascularized coronary artery disease (HR = 2.163, p = 0.004). Spline analyses showed a linear relationship between survival and NLR, PLR, LMR and SII. After adjusting for the predictive score, there was an independent relationship between survival and NLR (HR = 1.072, p = 0.006), PLR (HR = 1.002, p = 0.014) and SII (HR = 1.000, p = 0.043). However, only the addition of NLR improved moderately the c-NRI. A NLR ≥ 3 was independently associated with lower survival rates at 2-years (HR 1.98; 95% CI 1.07-3.66) and 5-years (HR 1.84, 95% CI 1.22-2.78) of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Most inflammatory biomarkers are linear and independently associated with survival after EVAR, but only the NLR improved moderately the prediction of a survival score. Therefore, a NLR ≥ 3 may be used to identify patients with a low survival rate and help in decision-making.

External validation of a 5-year survival prediction model after elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

The benefit of prophylactic repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is based on the risk of rupture exceeding the risk of death from other comorbidities. The purpose of this study was to validate a 5-year survival prediction model for patients undergoing elective repair of asymptomatic AAA <6.5 cm to assist in optimal selection of patients.

METHODS

All patients undergoing elective repair for asymptomatic AAA <6.5 cm (open or endovascular) from 2002 to 2011 were identified from a single institutional database (validation group). We assessed the ability of a prior published Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE) model (derivation group) to predict survival in our cohort. The model was assessed for discrimination (concordance index), calibration (calibration slope and calibration in the large), and goodness of fit (score test).

RESULTS

The VSGNE derivation group consisted of 2367 patients (70% endovascular). Major factors associated with survival in the derivation group were age, coronary disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, renal function, and antiplatelet and statin medication use. Our validation group consisted of 1038 patients (59% endovascular). The validation group was slightly older (74 vs 72 years; P < .01) and had a higher proportion of men (76% vs 68%; P < .01). In addition, the derivation group had higher rates of advanced cardiac disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and baseline creatinine concentration (1.2 vs 1.1 mg/dL; P < .01). Despite slight differences in preoperative patient factors, 5-year survival was similar between validation and derivation groups (75% vs 77%; P = .33). The concordance index of the validation group was identical between derivation and validation groups at 0.659 (95% confidence interval, 0.63-0.69). Our validation calibration in the large value was 1.02 (P = .62, closer to 1 indicating better calibration), calibration slope of 0.84 (95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.97), and score test of P = .57 (>.05 indicating goodness of fit).

CONCLUSIONS

Across different populations of patients, assessment of age and level of cardiac, pulmonary, and renal disease can accurately predict 5-year survival in patients with AAA <6.5 cm undergoing repair. This risk prediction model is a valid method to assess mortality risk in determining potential overall survival benefit from elective AAA repair.