The Association Between Preoperative Independent Ambulatory Status and Outcomes After Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repairs

Long-term costs to Medicare associated with endovascular and open repairs of infrarenal and complex abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The vast majority of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) undergoing repairs receive endovascular interventions (EVARs) instead of open operations (OARs). Although EVARs have better short-term outcomes, OARs have improved longer-term durability and require less radiographic follow-up and monitoring, which may have significant implications on health care economics surrounding provision of AAA care nationally. Herein, we compared costs associated with EVAR and OAR of both infrarenal and complex AAAs.

METHODS

We examined patients undergoing index elective EVARs or OARs of infrarenal and complex AAAs in the 2014-2019 Vascular Quality Initiative-Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network (VQI-VISION) dataset. We defined overall costs as the aggregated longitudinal costs associated with: (1) the index surgery; (2) reinterventions; and (3) imaging tests. We evaluated overall costs up to 5 years after infrarenal AAA repair and 3 years for complex AAA repair. Multivariable regressions adjusted for case-mix when evaluating cost differences between EVARs vs OARs.

RESULTS

We identified 23,746 infrarenal AAA repairs (8.7% OAR, 91% EVAR) and 2279 complex AAA repairs (69% OAR, 31% EVAR). In both cohorts, patients undergoing EVARs were more likely to be older and have more comorbidities. The cost for the index procedure for EVARs relative to OARs was lower for infrarenal AAAs ($32,440 vs $37,488; P < .01) but higher among complex AAAs ($48,870 vs $44,530; P < .01). EVARs had higher annual imaging and reintervention costs during each of the 5 postoperative years for infrarenal aneurysms and the 3 postoperative years for complex aneurysms. Among patients undergoing infrarenal AAA repairs who survived 5 years, the total 5-year cost of EVARs was similar to that of OARs ($35,858 vs $34,212; -$223 [95% confidence interval (CI), -$3042 to $2596]). For complex AAA repairs, the total cost at 3 years of EVARs was greater than OARs ($64,492 vs $42,212; +$9860 [95% CI, $5835-$13,885]). For patients receiving EVARs for complex aneurysms, physician-modified endovascular grafts had higher index procedure costs ($55,835 vs $47,064; P < .01) although similar total costs on adjusted analyses (+$1856 [95% CI, -$7997 to $11,710]; P = .70) relative to Zenith fenestrated endovascular grafts among those that were alive at 3 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Longer-term costs associated with EVARs are lower for infrarenal AAAs but higher for complex AAAs relative to OARs, driven by reintervention and imaging costs. Further analyses to characterize the financial viability of EVARs for both infrarenal and complex AAAs should evaluate hospital margins and anticipated changes in costs of devices.

Five-factors Modified Frailty Index role as predictors of outcomes after proximal abdominal aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to evaluate the correlation between frailty, measured by the Five-Factor Modified Frailty Index (mFI-5) and mortality and all major adverse events (MAE) in patients who underwent proximal abdominal aortic aneurysm (p-AAA) open surgery (OS).

METHODS

Data of all elective patients submitted to p-AAA OS from 2010 to 2021 were recorded. Primary endpoints were 30-day mortality and mid-term survival and secondary endpoints included postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI), freedom from aortic reintervention and any MAE. The impact of frailty was assessed by univariate and multivariate analysis; mid-term overall survival were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method (log-rank test).

RESULTS

Two-hundred twenty-one patients (197 male, 24 female; aged 72.2±7.4) were included. Thirty-seven (16.4%) were octogenarians (>80 years). The mFI-5 was assessed in the entire group: mean mFI-5 was 0.29±0.12. One-hundred patients (100/221, 45.25%, 91:9 male-to-female ratio) were defined "frail" considering the mFI-5 cut-off >0.25. At univariate analysis a correlation was found between mFI-5>0.25 and mid-term mortality (Pearson correlation [r] 0.280, P<0.001) and AKI (r=0.146, P=0.030). No correlation with 30-day mortality was found (P not significant). At multivariate analysis mFI-5>0.25 increased the risk for midterm mortality (odds ratio 3.32, P=0.021) and postoperative AKI (OR 2.09, P<0.001). The effect of mFI-5>0.25 on mid-term mortality persisted after adjustment for age (P<0.001). Survival was estimated with Kaplan-Meyer method (mean follow-up of 52.7 months, 95% CI: 48.6-56.8); 68 (30.7%) deaths were recorded: 23 among non-frail patients (19.0%) and 45 among frail patients (45/100, 45%, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that mFI-5 is a tool capable to identify "frail" patients, who appear to be at increased risk of postoperative AKI and mid-term mortality, but not 30-day mortality. Five-factor modified Frailty Index assessment is simple, fast and can be widely applied in surgical practice to perform appropriate risk stratifications.

Functional Impairment is Associated with Poor Long-Term Outcomes after Arteriovenous Access Creation

BACKGROUND

Functional impairment affects outcomes after a variety of procedures. However, the impact of functional impairment on outcomes of arteriovenous (AV) access creation is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the association of patients' ability to ambulate and perform activities of daily living (ADL) with AV access outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing AV access creation at an urban, safety-net hospital from 2014 to 2022. We evaluated associations of impaired ambulatory and assisted ADL status with 90-day readmission, 1-year primary patency, and 5-year mortality.

RESULTS

Among the 689 patients receiving AV access, mean age was 59.6 ± 13.9 years, 59% were male, and 60% were Black. Access types included brachiocephalic (42%), brachiobasilic (26%), radiocephalic (14%), other autogenous (5%) fistulas, and prosthetic grafts (13%). Impaired ambulatory status was identified in 35% and assisted ADL status, when assessed, was identified in 21% of patients. Ninety-day readmission was more likely in patients with impaired ambulatory (58% vs. 39%, P < 0.001) and assisted ADL (56% vs. 41%, P = 0.004) status. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, 1-year primary patency was lower for patients with impaired ambulatory status (44% ± 3% vs. 29% ± 3%, P = 0.001), but was not significantly different for patients with assisted ADL status (41% ± 3% vs. 32% ± 5%, P = 0.12). Five-year survival was lower for patients with impaired ambulatory status (53% ± 5% vs. 74% ± 4%, P < 0.001), but was not significantly different for patients with assisted ADL status (45% ± 9% vs. 71% ± 4%, P = 0.1). On multivariable analysis, increased likelihood of 90-day readmission was significantly associated with impaired ambulatory status (odds ratio (OR) 2.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4-2.94, P < 0.001) and assisted ADL status (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.07-2.57, P = 0.02). One-year primary patency was not significantly associated with impaired ambulatory (hazard ratio (HR) 1.25, 95% CI 0.98-1.6, P = 0.07) or assisted ADL status (HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.87-1.48, P = 0.36). Increased likelihood of 5-year mortality was associated with impaired ambulatory (HR 1.65, 95% CI 1.04-2.62, P = 0.04) and assisted ADL status (HR 2.63, 95% CI 1.35-5.11, P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Impaired ambulatory and assisted ADL statuses were associated with increased readmissions and long-term mortality after AV access creation. Approximately half of patients with functional impairment were not alive at 5 years. Setting outcome expectations as well as prospectively examining the impact of physical therapy and visiting nursing services for functionally impaired patients undergoing AV access creation are warranted.