Quality of life before and after endovascular and retroperitoneal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Towards Patient Centred Outcomes for Elective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: A Scoping Review of Quality of Life Scales

OBJECTIVE

In order to better incorporate the patient's perspective in medical decision making, core outcome sets (COS) are being defined. In the field of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), efforts to capture the patient's perspective focus on generic quantitative quality of life (QoL) scales. The question arises whether these quantitative scales adequately reflect the patient's perspective on QoL, and whether they can be included in the QoL aspect of COS. A scoping review of QoL assessment in the context of elective AAA repair was undertaken.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library.

REVIEW METHODS

A scoping review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Articles reporting QoL assessment in the context of elective AAA repair were identified. Quantitative studies (i.e., traditional QoL scales) were aligned (triangulation approach) with qualitative studies (i.e., patient perspective) to identify parallels and discrepancies. Mean Short Form 36 item survey (SF-36) scores were pooled using a random effects model to evaluate sensitivity to change.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies were identified, of which 29 (88%) were quantitative and four (12%) qualitative. The 33 studies reported a total of 54 quantitative QoL scales; the most frequently used were the generic SF-36 (16 studies) and five dimension EuroQol (EQ-5D; eight studies). Aneurysm specific scales were reported by one study. The generic quantitative scales showed poor alignment with the patient's perspective. The aneurysm specific scales better aligned but missed "concerns regarding symptoms" and "the impact of possible outcomes/complications". "Self control and decision making", which was brought forward by patients in qualitative studies, was not captured in any of the current scales.

CONCLUSION

There is no established tool that fully captures all aspects of the patient's perspective appropriate for a COS for elective AAA repair. In order to fulfil the need for a COS for the management of^, AAA disease, a more comprehensive overview of the patient's perspective is required.

Long-term survival and quality of life after open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

Open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) generally involves postsurgery admission to the intensive care unit (ICU). Few studies have evaluated the impact of surgery for either ruptured or nonruptured AAA (with postoperative ICU treatment) on long-term survival and quality of life. The primary aim of this study was to quantify long-term survival and health-related quality of life (HrQpL) of a cohort of patients undergoing open AAA repair after hospital discharge.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing open elective or acute AAA reconstruction with postoperative admission to the ICU and discharged alive from the hospital during 2009 were identified. Primary outcome measures were 1-year and long-term mortality. The secondary outcome was the HrQoL using the EuroQol-6D (EQ-6D) questionnaire at the end of the follow-up period.

RESULTS

A total of 263 patients were treated and postoperatively discharged alive: 56 had a ruptured AAA (rAAA), 35 a symptomatic AAA, and 172 an asymptomatic AAA. The 1-year mortality after open AAA repair was 8 %. Overall, 39 % of patients died within 10 postoperative years (mean 6.0 ± 2.8 years). Long-term survival of patients with a ruptured or symptomatic aneurysm was similar to that of patients undergoing elective aneurysm repair. Long-term HrQoL of the total study population was worse than that of an age-matched general Dutch population on the EQ-us (range 0-1, difference 0.12). This decrease in HrQoL was mainly seen in mobility, self-care, usual activities, and cognition.

CONCLUSIONS

Ten years after open AAA repair, the overall survival rate was 59 %. Long-term survival and HrQoL were similar for patients with a repaired ruptured or symptomatic aneurysm and those who underwent elective aneurysm repair. There were also no differences in patients with infrarenal versus juxtarenal/suprarenal aneurysms. Surviving patients had a lower HrQoL than the age-matched general Dutch population, especially regarding mobility, self-care, usual activities, and cognition.

Meta-analysis of prospective trials determining the short- and mid-term effect of elective open and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms on quality of life

Background

Repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is undertaken to prevent rupture. Intervention is by either open repair (OR) or a more minimally invasive endovascular repair (EVAR). Quality-of-life (QoL) analysis is an important health outcome and a number of single studies have assessed QoL following OR and EVAR. This was a meta-analysis of published studies to assess the effect of an intervention on QoL in patients with an AAA.

Methods

A systematic literature search was undertaken for studies prospectively reporting QoL analysis in patients with an AAA undergoing elective intervention. A multivariable meta-analysis model was developed in which the outcomes were mean changes in QoL scores over time, both for all AAA repairs (OR and EVAR) and comparing OR with EVAR.

Results

Data were collated from 16 studies (14 OR, 12 EVAR). The results suggested that treating an AAA had an effect on patient-reported QoL, evident from the statistically significant changes predominantly in domains assessing physical ability and pain. QoL was affected most within the first 3 months after any form of intervention, and was more pronounced following OR. Furthermore, a deterioration in the Physical Component Summary score following an AAA repair (either OR or EVAR) was evident at 12 months after intervention.

Conclusion

Treating an AAA deleteriously affects patient-reported QoL over the first year following intervention.

Questions remain about quality of life after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

INTRODUCTION

Morbidity and mortality have traditionally been used as key markers of surgical outcome. However, as complication rates associated with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair decrease, subjective measures, such as quality of life (QOL), are increasingly recognized as important indicators of treatment efficacy and quality of care. This review presents the existing evidence relating to QOL changes in patients undergoing AAA repair by open repair (OR) and endovascular techniques (EVAR) and challenges current misconceptions about the relative effect of these two procedures.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed to identify studies relating to QOL or health status in AAA repair. Quality of included studies was assessed according to Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network methodology.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. Preoperative QOL in AAA patients has been previously suggested as being worse than that of the general population, that OR patients have a worse QOL in the early postoperative period, and that EVAR patients have a worse QOL in the longer term. None of these assertions is uniformly supported in the literature. From the existing evidence, no clear conclusions can be drawn about the relative QOL benefits of OR vs EVAR.

CONCLUSIONS

There are a paucity of good-quality data relating to health status and QOL in patients undergoing AAA repair. Little is known about the prevalence of preoperative or postoperative symptoms and the degree to which these influence patient well-being. Further investigation is needed to clarify health status and QOL changes in these patients and allow clinicians to make targeted improvements in practice.

The impact of using informative priors in a Bayesian cost-effectiveness analysis: an application of endovascular versus open surgical repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms in high-risk patients

BACKGROUND

Bayesian methods have been proposed as a way of synthesizing all available evidence to inform decision making. However, few practical applications of the use of Bayesian methods for combining patient-level data (i.e., trial) with additional evidence (e.g., literature) exist in the cost-effectiveness literature. The objective of this study was to compare a Bayesian cost-effectiveness analysis using informative priors to a standard non-Bayesian nonparametric method to assess the impact of incorporating additional information into a cost-effectiveness analysis.

METHODS

Patient-level data from a previously published nonrandomized study were analyzed using traditional nonparametric bootstrap techniques and bivariate normal Bayesian models with vague and informative priors. Two different types of informative priors were considered to reflect different valuations of the additional evidence relative to the patient-level data (i.e., "face value" and "skeptical"). The impact of using different distributions and valuations was assessed in a sensitivity analysis. Models were compared in terms of incremental net monetary benefit (INMB) and cost-effectiveness acceptability frontiers (CEAFs).

RESULTS

The bootstrapping and Bayesian analyses using vague priors provided similar results. The most pronounced impact of incorporating the informative priors was the increase in estimated life years in the control arm relative to what was observed in the patient-level data alone. Consequently, the incremental difference in life years originally observed in the patient-level data was reduced, and the INMB and CEAF changed accordingly.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study demonstrate the potential impact and importance of incorporating additional information into an analysis of patient-level data, suggesting this could alter decisions as to whether a treatment should be adopted and whether more information should be acquired.

Should endovascular repair be reimbursed for low risk abdominal aortic aneurysm patients? Evidence from ontario, Canada

Background. This paper presents unpublished clinical and economic data associated with open surgical repair (OSR) in low risk (LR) patients and how it compares with EVAR and OSR in high risk (HR) patients with an AAA > 5.5 cm. Design. Data from a 1-year prospective observational study was used to compare EVAR in HR patients versus OSR in HR and LR patients. Results. Between 2003 and 2005, 140 patients were treated with EVAR and 195 with OSR (HR: 52; LR: 143). The 1-year mortality rate with EVAR was statistically lower than HR OSR patients and comparable to LR OSR patients. One-year health-related quality of life was lower in the EVAR patients compared to OSR patients. EVAR was cost-effective compared to OSR HR but not when compared to OSR LR patients. Conclusions. Despite a similar clinical effectiveness, these results suggest that, at the current price, EVAR is more expensive than open repair for low risk patients.

Effects of study design and trends for EVAR versus OSR

Purpose:

To investigate if study design factors such as randomization, multi-center versus single center evidence, institutional surgical volume, and patient selection affect the outcomes for endovascular repair (EVAR) versus open surgical repair (OSR). Finally, we investigate trends over time in EVAR versus OSR outcomes.

Methods:

Search strategies for comparative studies were performed individually for: OVID’s MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, HAPI, and Evidence Based Medicine (EBM) Reviews (including Cochrane DSR, ACP Journal Club, DARE and CCTR), limited to 1990 and November 2006.

Results:

Identified literature: 84 comparative studies pertaining to 57,645 patients. These include 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), plus 2 RCTs with long-term follow-up. The other 78 comparative studies were nonrandomized with 75 reporting perioperative outcomes, of which 16 were multi-center, and 59 single-center studies. Of the single-center studies 31 were low-volume and 28 were high-volume centers. In addition, 5 studies had all patients anatomically eligible for EVAR, and 8 studies included high-risk patients only. Finally, 25 long term observational studies reported outcomes up to 3 years.

Outcomes:

Lower perioperative mortality and rates of complications for EVAR versus OSR varied across study designs and patient populations. EVAR adverse outcomes have decreased in recent times.

Conclusion:

EVAR highlights the problem of performing meta-analysis when the experience evolves over time.

The Durability of Evar — What are the Evidence and Implications on Follow-Up?

Background and Aims:

To investigate the durability of EVAR and to explore the evidence for follow-up investigations. Furthermore, to study the patients' impressions of follow-up investigations, and how complications and secondary procedures influence cost-effectiveness.

Material and Methods:

263 patients were treated by EVAR from february 1995-february 2007. The series is divided into two groups with the year 2000 as a cut-off point since a new generation of stent grafts was then introduced. Early and late complications and secondary procedures were recorded. A questionnaire study was performed to investigate the patients' views on the follow-up program.

Results:

There was a significant reduction of complications from period I to period II, which was also reflected in the reduction of secondary procedures. Freedom from secondary procedures were 47% and 93% at 5 years follow-up in the two periods, respectively. In phase II, 7.5% of the patients needed a secondary procedure. Limb extension and femoro-femoral bypass were the most common procedures. Since late complications still occur, and can be unpredictable, a follow-up program is necessary. The vast majority of the patients tolerated the follow-up program well.

Conclusions:

Although the number of complications following EVAR has decreased significantly over the years, a thorough follow-up program is still necessary. This follow-up regime is well tolerated by the patients. Reduction of secondary procedures is important to improve the cost-effectiveness of EVAR.

Sobrevida tardia de pacientes submetidos à correção aberta eletiva de aneurisma de aorta abdominal

CONTEXTO: Os autores fazem uma revisão dos pacientes operados em hospital privado para determinar a causa da mortalidade tardia, a evolução dos demais segmentos da aorta e as complicações relacionadas à prótese. OBJETIVOS: Relatar o seguimento tardio de uma série de 76 casos operados eletivamente para a correção de aneurisma de aorta abdominal, no período de março de 1995 a janeiro de 2007. MÉTODOS: Convocação dos pacientes para uma consulta de retorno e daqueles que não puderam comparecer pessoalmente através de contato telefônico. RESULTADOS: A mortalidade operatória em 30 dias foi de 5,3%. A sobrevida tardia obtida por curva atuarial foi de 95% em 1 ano, 88% em 3 anos e 72% em 8 anos. As doenças cardiovasculares foram a principal causa de mortalidade tardia, seguidas das neoplasias malignas. A dilatação de segmento de aorta proximal à correção cirúrgica ocorreu em 9,7% dos pacientes operados, e as complicações relacionadas à prótese ocorreram em quatro casos (5,3%), sendo uma infecção de prótese, um pseudo-aneurisma proximal, um pseudo-aneurisma em ilíaca e uma oclusão de ramo. CONCLUSÃO: A cirurgia aberta para correção do aneurisma de aorta abdominal apresenta bom resultado em longo prazo, semelhante ao da literatura nacional e internacional, sendo uma boa opção para o paciente que tenha um baixo risco cirúrgico.

Health-related quality of life in survivors of open ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: A matched, controlled cohort study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to document the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) for patients who survived operative repair of a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA) and to compare this with a matched group of patients who survived elective operative repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (EAAA).

METHODS

A matched, controlled cohort study of HRQOL was used to compare patients surviving RAAA with an EAAA control group. The study was conducted at two university-affiliated vascular tertiary care referral centers. Survivors of RAAA and EAAA during an 8.5-year period were identified and followed up. The RAAA and EAAA control patients were matched for age, serum creatinine concentration, gender, and duration of follow-up since surgery. HRQOL was measured with the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form-36 Health Survey (SF-36). Scores for the EAAA and RAAA cohorts were also compared with age-corrected SF-36 population scores.

RESULTS

Of 267 patients operated for RAAA during the study period, 130 (49%) survived to hospital discharge. Death after discharge was documented in 35 patients, leaving a potential study population of 95 RAAA survivors. Thirteen were lost to follow-up, seven refused to participate, and four patients were not able to participate. The SF-36 was completed by 71 RAAA patients (75% of surviving RAAA patients). The 71 RAAA survivors and 189 EAAA control patients were similar for seven of eight domains of the SF-36: Physical Function, Role-Physical, Bodily Pain, General Health, Vitality, Mental Health, and Role-Emotional. There was also no difference in the Physical Health Summary and Mental Health Summary scores. The social function component of the SF-36 demonstrated a statistically significant decline in the EAAA group. Both the EAAA and RAAA SF-36 individual and summary scores compared favorably with population norms that were adjusted only for age.

CONCLUSION

Long-term survivors of RAAA enjoy a HRQOL that does not differ significantly from EAAA survivors. Scores for both groups compare favorably with population scores adjusted only for age.

Open Versus Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in VA Hospitals

BACKGROUND

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR), when compared with conventional open surgical repair, has been shown to reduce perioperative morbidity and mortality. We performed a retrospective cohort study with prospectively collected data from the Department of Veterans Affairs to examine outcomes after elective aneurysm repair.

STUDY DESIGN

We studied 30-day mortality, 1-year survival, and postoperative complications in 1,904 patients who underwent elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR n=717 [37.7%]; open n=1,187 [62.3%]) at 123 Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals between May 1, 2001 and September 30, 2003. We investigated the influence of patient, operative, and hospital variables on outcomes.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing EVAR had significantly lower 30-day (3.1% versus 5.6%, p=0.01) and 1- year mortality rates (8.7% versus 12.1%, p=0.018) than patients having open repair. EVAR was associated with a decrease in 30-day postoperative mortality (adjusted odds ratio[OR]=0.59; 95% CI=0.36, 0.99; p=0.04). The risk of perioperative complications was much less after EVAR (15.5% versus 27.7%; p<0.001; unadjusted OR 0.48; 95% CI=0.38, 0.61; p<0.001). Patients operated on at low volume hospitals (25% of entire cohort) were more likely to have had open repair (31.3% compared with 15.9% EVAR; p<0.001) and a nearly two-fold increase in adjusted 30-day mortality risk (OR=1.9; 95% CI=1.19, 2.98; p=0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

In routine daily practice, veterans who undergo elective EVAR have substantially lower perioperative mortality and morbidity rates compared with patients having open repair. The benefits of a minimally invasive approach were readily apparent in this cohort, but we recommend using caution in choosing EVAR for all elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs until longer-term data on device durability are available.

Retroperitoneal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: Long-Term Follow-Up Regarding Wound Complications and Erectile Dysfunction

The long-term impact of retroperitoneal aortic exposure regarding wound complications in all patients and erectile dysfunction in men was studied in a consecutive group of 107 patients (81 males and 26 females). Postoperative wound complications were classified into the following groups: none, flank bulge, hernia, and chronic pain. Patient demographic features including body mass index (BMI) were statistically analyzed in relation to the incidence of long-term wound problems. Information regarding erectile dysfunction was obtained before surgery in all men and stratified into three groups after surgery: no change, inability to consistently obtain an erection, and retrograde ejaculation. Mean patient follow-up was 2.9 years (range 1-4.36, median 2.8). Flank bulge was the only long-term wound complication, and this was noted in nine patients (8%). The incidence of true hernia and chronic pain was 0%. BMI >28 was the only factor that positively impacted the incidence of wound complications (p < 0.0001). Erectile dysfunction prior to surgery was noted in 37 men (46%), while 44 (54%) reported normal erectile function. Erectile function improved after surgery in one patient but remained unchanged in the rest. Postoperative retrograde ejaculation occurred with a frequency of 9% (four of 45 patients). Retroperitoneal abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) exposure with incision based on the twelfth rib tip and rectus abdominis muscle sparing results in an overall low incidence of long-term wound complications. Postoperative flank bulge is associated with patient BMI >28. In addition, erectile function is not worsened by infrarenal autonomic nerve sparing rAAA exposure. However, a small percentage of potent men will experience postoperative retrograde ejaculation.

Factors Impacting Functional Health and Resource Utilization Following Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair by Open and Endovascular Techniques

We assessed the impact on patient outcomes of comorbidities and type of aneurysm repair, open vs. endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). Functional health status was measured prospectively using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) Health Survey. Length of stay (LOS) and need for postdischarge resources (nursing and rehabilitation) were compared between groups. We reviewed the records of 218 patients (126 open, 92 EVAR) who underwent intervention between 1998 and 2003. The SF-36 was completed preoperatively and at intervals ranging from 2 weeks to 1 year after intervention. To identify factors impacting outcome, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Overall mortality was 1.9%: 3.2% for open repair and 0% for EVAR (p = 0.13). Physical and mental health were higher during the 3 months following EVAR compared with open repair: physical function (PF) (65.2 +/- 4.1 vs. 54.0 +/- 4.1), vitality (VT) (55.5 +/- 2.5 vs. 44.9 +/- 3.4), and emotional role (ER) (74.9 +/- 5.0 vs. 51.4 +/- 6.7) (analysis of variance p < 0.05). Women following EVAR had decreased physical summary scores (PSS) (34.8 +/- 2.5 vs. 40.4 +/- 1.1, p < 0.05) compared with men postprocedure despite no difference preoperatively. Congestive heart failure (CHF) was an independent factor that negatively impacted PF, body pain (BP), and PSS. EVAR was associated with improved VT and ER. Differences among open repair and EVAR diminished over time. LOS (in days) was greater for open vs. EVAR (9.2 +/- 0.78 vs. 2.0 +/- 0.17) and in women following both open (11.8 +/- 1.5 vs. 8.0 +/- 0.9) and EVAR (3.2 +/- 0.9 vs. 1.8 +/- 0.1) procedures (p < 0.05). Factors that adversely affected LOS were open repair, age, renal insufficiency, pulmonary disease, CHF, and female gender. Following EVAR, patients were less likely to require home care or transfer to a rehabilitation facility than after open repair (14.1 vs. 36.0%, p < 0.05). Women were significantly more likely to require postdischarge care after open repair (48.7 vs. 30.1%) and EVAR (41.7 vs. 10.0%) (p < 0.05). Logistic regression identified female gender, open repair, advanced age, and pulmonary disease as independent predictors of need for postdischarge care. Those patients undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair by open technique (compared to EVAR) had significantly impaired functional health with regard to PF, VT, and ER in the first 3 months after surgery. CHF and hypertension also significantly impaired individual functional health scores. Of significance was that female gender was associated with increased LOS and increased utilization of postdischarge nursing and rehabilitation resources following both open and endovascular surgery for AAA.

Pain and Quality of Life Assessment after Endovascular Versus Open Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms in Patients at Low Risk

PURPOSE

To compare functional autonomy, quality of life (QOL), and pain control after endovascular and open repair (OR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty patients with a low surgical risk profile and anatomic compatibility for stent-graft therapy were randomized to receive OR or endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Technical and clinical success as well as mortality were assessed in both groups and compared by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Functional autonomy and QOL were assessed by Karnofsky score and Short Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire. Pain control was assessed by a numeric rating scale and Brief Pain Inventory questionnaire. QOL outcomes by means of the SF-36 and pain questionnaires were compared with use of mixed-effects models for repeated-measures analysis.

RESULTS

All procedures were technically successful in both groups. Three late clinical failures requiring surgical conversion or repeated intervention were observed in the EVAR group and one was observed in the OR group. There was no significant difference between groups in terms of functional autonomy or QOL. No difference in pain level was evident during the early postoperative period, whereas the pain level was lower in the OR group after 1 month. Opioid analgesic drug consumption was significantly greater in the OR group during the postoperative period. Mean hospitalization duration was shorter in the EVAR group than in the OR group (4.5 days +/- 2.4 vs 11.5 days +/- 8.1; P= .001).

CONCLUSION

EVAR has no advantage over OR in patients at low risk in terms of functional autonomy, QOL, and pain control. However, EVAR was associated with shorter hospitalization durations compared with OR.