Elective endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in octogenarians

Elective Endovascular vs Open Repair for Elective Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in Patients ≥80 years of Age: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To provide updated, pooled evidence on clinical outcomes among octogenarians (aged ≥80 years) with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) managed by elective endovascular repair, compared to conventional open repair.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases were systematically searched. Studies that were either observational or randomized controlled trials were considered for the review. Included studies were conducted in elderly subjects (≥80 years) with AAA, and clinical and mortality outcomes were compared between endovascular and open surgical repair. Those reporting on outcomes of patients with urgent repair were excluded. The primary outcomes of interest were mortality and risk of complications. The pooled effect sizes were reported as odds ratio (OR) for categorical outcomes and weighted mean difference (WMD) for continuous outcomes. STATA software was used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 15 studies. Compared to those undergoing open repair, patients receiving endovascular repair had significantly reduced risk of immediate post-operative mortality (OR .23, 95% CI: .20, .27), overall complication (OR .30, 95% CI: .20, .44), cardiac (OR .23, 95% CI: .16, .35), renal (OR .29, 95% CI: .18, .46), pulmonary (OR .14, 95% CI: .09, .21) and bleeding related (OR .59, 95% CI: .42, .83) complications. The risk of mortality at latest follow up (at 36 months and 60 months) was similar in the two groups. The total blood loss (ml) (WMD -1126.47, 95% CI: -1497.81, -755.13), operative time (min) (WMD -29.40, 95% CI: -56.19, -2.62), length of intensive care unit stay (days) (WMD -2.27, 95% CI: -3.43, -2.12) and overall hospital stay (days) (WMD -6.64, 95% CI: -7.60, -5.68) was significantly lower in those undergoing endovascular repair.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular repair appears to be better than open repair of AAA in this high-risk, frail population, with respect to short term outcomes. The benefits of reduced risk of short term mortality, complications, and better peri and post-operative outcomes may be considered when making a choice between these two surgical approaches. Randomized controlled trials are needed to provide reliable evidence on the effect of EVAR on long term survival.

Outcomes after Elective Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Octogenarians Compared to Younger Patients in Korea

BACKGROUND

Although the first choice of treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is endovascular aneurysm repair, especially in elderly patients, some patients require open surgical repair. The purpose of this study was to compare the mortality outcomes of open AAA repair between octogenarians and younger counterparts and to identify the risk factors associated with mortality.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who underwent elective open AAA repair due to degenerative etiology at a single tertiary medical center between 1996 and June 2020 were included in this retrospective review. Medical records and imaging studies were reviewed to collect the following information: demographics, comorbid medical conditions, clinical presentations, radiologic findings, surgical details, and morbidity and mortality rates. For analysis, patients were divided into two groups: older and younger than 80 years of age. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with mortality after elective open AAA repair.

RESULTS

Among a total of 650 patients who underwent elective open AAA repair due to degenerative AAA during the study period, 58 (8.9%) were octogenarians and 595 (91.1%) were non-octogenarians. Patients in the octogenarian group were predominantly female and more likely to have lower body weight and body mass index (BMI), hypertension, chronic kidney disease, and lower preoperative serum hemoglobin and albumin compared with patients in the non-octogenarian group. Maximal aneurysm diameter was larger in octogenarians. During the median follow-up duration of 34.4 months for 650 patients, the median length of total hospital and intensive care unit stay was longer in octogenarians. The 30-day (1.7% vs. 0.7%, P = 0.374) and 1-year (6.9% vs. 2.9%, P = 0.108) mortality rates were not statistically significantly different between the two groups. Multivariate analysis showed that low BMI was associated with increased 30-day (odds ratio [OR], 16.339; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.192-224.052; P = 0.037) and 1-year (OR, 8.236; CI, 2.301-29.477; P = 0.001) mortality in all patients.

CONCLUSION

Because the mortality rate of octogenarians after elective open AAA repair was not significantly different compared with their younger counterparts, being elderly is not a contraindication for open AAA repair. Low BMI might be associated with increased postoperative mortality.

Predictors of mortality in nonagenarians undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset

BACKGROUND

The present study used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset to identify the predictors of 30-day mortality for nonagenarians undergoing endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) or open surgical repair (OSR).

METHODS

Patients aged >90 years who had undergone abdominal aortic aneurysm repair from 2005 to 2017 were identified using procedure codes. Those with operative times <15 minutes were excluded. The demographics, preoperative comorbidities, and postoperative complications of those who had died by 30 days were compared with those of the patients alive at 30 days.

RESULTS

A total of 1356 nonagenarians met the criteria: 1229 (90.6%) had undergone EVAR and 127 (9.4%) had undergone OSR. The overall 30-day mortality was 10.4%. The patients who had died within 30 days were significantly more likely to have undergone OSR than EVAR (40.9% vs 7.2%; P < .001). They also had a greater incidence of dependent functional status (22.0% for those who had died vs 8.1% for those alive at 30 days; P < .001), American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classification of ≥4 (81.2% vs 18.8%; P < .001), perioperative blood transfusion (59.6% vs 20.3%; P < .001), postoperative pneumonia (12.1% vs 2.9%; P = .001), mechanical ventilation >48 hours (22.7% vs 2.6%; P < .001), and acute renal failure (12.1% vs 0.5%; P < .001). The EVAR group had a 30-day mortality rate of 2.6% in 1008 elective cases and 28.6% in 221 emergent cases. The OSR group had a 30-day mortality rate of 19.1% in 47 elective cases and 53.7% in 80 emergent cases. In the EVAR cohort, the 30-day mortality group had had a significantly greater incidence of dependent functional status (17% for those who had died vs 8% for those alive at 30 days; P = .004), ASA classification of ≥4 (76.4% vs 40.3%; P < .001), perioperative blood transfusion (57% vs 19%; P < .001), emergency surgery (71% vs 14%; P < .001), and longer operative times (150 vs 128 minutes; P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Nonagenarians had an incrementally increased, but acceptable, risk of 30-day mortality with EVAR in elective and emergent cases compared with that reported for octogenarians and cohorts of patients not selected for age. We found greater mortality for patients with dependent status, a higher ASA classification, emergent repair, and OSR. These preoperative risk factors could help identify the best surgical candidates. Given these results, consideration for EVAR or OSR might be reasonable for highly selected patients, especially for elective patients with a larger abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter for whom the risk of rupture is higher.

GRADE-Based Recommendations for Surgical Repair of Nonruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

The objective of this study was to provide evidence-based recommendations for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) versus open surgical repair (OSR) for patients with a nonruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement and adhered to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Both low- and high surgical risk patients treated with EVAR showed decreased 30-day mortality, but the low-risk group had no differences in 4-year mortality. Compared with friendly anatomy, patients with hostile anatomy had an increased risk of type I endoleak. Young patients may prefer OSR. Endovascular aneurysm repair was not cost-effective in Europe. Four conditional recommendations were formulated: (1) OSR for low-risk patients up to 80 years old, (2) EVAR for low-risk patients older than 80 years, (3) EVAR for high-risk patients as long as is anatomically feasible, and (4) OSR in patients in whom it is not anatomically feasible to perform EVAR. Based on GRADE criteria, either OSR or EVAR can be suggested to patients with nonruptured AAA taking into account their surgical risk, hostile anatomy, and age. Given the weakness of the recommendations, personal preferences are determinant.

Meta-analysis of long-term survival after elective endovascular or open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the preferred strategy for elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) for many patients. However, the superiority of the endovascular procedure has recently been challenged by reports of impaired long-term survival in patients who underwent EVAR. A systematic review of long-term survival following AAA repair was therefore undertaken.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Articles reporting short- and/or long-term mortality of EVAR and open surgical repair (OSR) of AAA were identified. Pooled overall survival estimates (hazard ratios (HRs) with corresponding 95 per cent c.i. for EVAR versus OSR) were calculated using a random-effects model. Possible confounding owing to age differences between patients receiving EVAR or OSR was addressed by estimating relative survival.

RESULTS

Some 53 studies were identified. The 30-day mortality rate was lower for EVAR compared with OSR: 1·16 (95 per cent c.i. 0·92 to 1·39) versus 3·27 (2·71 to 3·83) per cent. Long-term survival rates were similar for EVAR versus OSR (HRs 1·01, 1·00 and 0·98 for 3, 5 and 10 years respectively; P = 0·721, P = 0·912 and P = 0·777). Correction of age inequality by means of relative survival analysis showed equal long-term survival: 0·94, 0·91 and 0·76 at 3, 5 and 10 years for EVAR, and 0·96, 0·91 and 0·76 respectively for OSR.

CONCLUSION

Long-term overall survival rates were similar for EVAR and OSR. Available data do not allow extension beyond the 10-year survival window or analysis of specific subgroups.

Survival and Reintervention Risk by Patient Age and Preoperative Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Diameter after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the standard of care for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), but questions remain regarding the benefit in high-risk and elderly patients. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of age, preoperative AAA diameter, and their interaction on survival and reintervention rates after EVAR.

METHODS

Our integrated health system's AAA endograft registry was used to identify patients who underwent elective EVAR between 2010 and 2014. Of interest was the effect of patient age at the time of surgery (≤80 vs. >80 years old), preoperative AAA diameter (≤5.5 cm vs. >5.5 cm), and their interaction. Primary endpoints were all-cause mortality and reintervention. Between-within mixed-effects Cox models with propensity score weights were fit.

RESULTS

Of 1,967 patients undergoing EVAR, unadjusted rates for survival at 4 years after EVAR was 76.1%, and reintervention-free rate was 86.0%. For mortality, there was insufficient evidence for an interaction between age and AAA size (P = 0.309). Patient age >80 years was associated with 2.53-fold higher mortality risk (hazard ratios [HR] = 2.53; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 1.73-3.70; P < 0.001), whereas AAA > 5.5 cm was associated with 1.75-fold higher mortality risk (HR = 1.75; 95% CI, 1.26-2.45; P = 0.001). For reintervention risk, there were no significant interactions or main effects for age or AAA diameter.

CONCLUSIONS

Age and AAA diameter are independent predictors of reduced survival after EVAR, but the effect is not amplified when both are present. Age >80 years or AAA size >5.5 cm did not increase the risk of reintervention. No specific AAA size, patient age, or combination thereof was identified that would contraindicate AAA repair.

Understanding abdominal aortic aneurysm epidemiology: socioeconomic position affects outcome

Background

Low socioeconomic position (SEP) has been demonstrated to negatively influence outcome in several cardiovascular patient groups. The aim of this study was to analyse time trends of incidence of intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (iAAA) and ruptured AAA (rAAA), respectively, and to investigate whether SEP had any influence on the probability to present with rupture and, finally, to determine the impact of SEP on outcome.

Methods

Nationwide population-based study including all individuals with iAAA or rAAA in Sweden during 2001–2015.

Results

The number of individuals with an AAA was 41 222; the majority were identified as iAAA 33 254 (80.7%) and 7968 (19.3%) as rAAA. Time trends showed decreasing incidence of rAAA but increase in iAAA during the study period. Individuals with low income or low educational level were more likely to present with a rAAA rather than iAAA: OR 2.16 (95 % CI 1.98 to 2.36, p<0.001) and OR 1.33 (95 % CI 1.21 to 1.46, p<0.001), respectively. Low income was also associated with increased 90-day mortality and 1-year mortality after treatment for rAAA, OR 1.42 (95% CI 1.07 to 1.89, p=0.014) and OR 1.39 (95% CI 1.13 to 1.97, p=0.005).

Conclusion

This large nationwide study showed a decreasing incidence of rAAA. Individuals with low SEP were found to have an augmented risk of presenting with rAAA rather than iAAA and, in addition, to fare worse after repair. Consequently, SEP should be regarded as a relevant risk factor that should be included in considerations for improved care flow of patients with AAA.

Outcomes of endovascular and open surgical repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms in elderly patients

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is becoming the preferred treatment modality for patients with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA). Although the survival advantage of EVAR over open aortic repair (OAR) has been shown in some studies, it is unclear whether this benefit extends to elderly patients. We sought to evaluate the outcomes of rAAA repair in octogenarians.

METHODS

We reviewed the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) data set (2005-2014) to identify patients older than 80 years who were treated with EVAR and OAR for rAAA. Procedural trends were evaluated during the course of the study period. Perioperative outcomes including mortality, morbidity, and hospital length of stay (LOS) were compared. Multivariable regression models were used to identify predictors of perioperative mortality and morbidity.

RESULTS

Among 1048 elderly patients who underwent rAAA repair, 450 (43%) and 598 (57%) were treated with EVAR and OAR, respectively. The use of EVAR to treat rAAA had increased significantly in this population of patients (0% in 2005 vs 56% in 2014; P < .001). The overall 30-day mortality rate among octogenarians was 41%. The mortality rate was significantly higher among those treated with OAR compared with EVAR (47% vs 33%; P < .001). Pneumonia (21% vs 10%; P < .001), reintubation (14% vs 9%; P < .001), and >48-hour ventilator dependence (43% vs 21%; P < .001) were significantly higher in patients undergoing OAR. Hospital LOS (13 vs 10 days; P < .001) was also longer in the OAR cohort. Compared with EVAR, OAR was independently predictive of 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-2.2; P < .001), pneumonia (AOR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.7-3.6; P < .001), >48-hour ventilator dependence (AOR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.8-3.3; P < .001), and longer LOS (adjusted mean ratio, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2-1.6; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients have significant but acceptable perioperative mortality and morbidity after rAAA repair. Use of endovascular repair in the elderly population has increased and is associated with better perioperative survival and 30-day outcomes compared with traditional open repair in this study.

Characteristics of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in Japanese Patients Aged 50 Years or Younger

Objective: We investigated the characteristics and surgical outcomes of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), which typically occurs in elderly persons, in Japanese patients aged 50 years or younger.

Materials and Methods: Clinical records of 999 patients who underwent open or endovascular repair for AAA at our hospital between 2007 and 2015 were reviewed to identify the clinical characteristics and surgical outcomes of young patients with AAA. The cohort included 14 patients aged 50 years or younger (mean, 40.4 years; young group) and 985 patients aged older than 50 years (mean, 72.8 years; old group).

Results: Marfan syndrome, prior aortic dissection, and a history of aortic surgery were more prevalent in the young group, and 50% of the patients in the young group had dissecting aneurysms. All patients in the young group underwent open repair. Overall in-hospital mortality rates were 7.1% (1/14) and 1.9% (19/985) in the young and old groups, respectively (P=0.67). Seven-year survival and aortic event-free survival rates in the young group were 82.5%±11.5%, and 71.2±14.5%, respectively.

Conclusion: AAA in patients aged 50 years or younger tended to be associated with Marfan syndrome, a history of aortic surgery, and prior aortic dissection. Early outcomes of AAA among young patients are acceptable, but close postoperative monitoring is important.

Aortic aneurysm trials in octogenarians: Are we really measuring the outcomes that matter?

Purpose

This study is a systematic review to determine the types of outcomes reported in abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) studies of patients aged 80 and over. Specifically, it determines the types of patient-centered outcomes reported.

Method

MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from 2000 to 2014 for studies on AAA surgery with outcome data on patients aged 80 and over. Outcomes were categorized according to Donabedian’s framework for health quality indicators, with further classification as procedural, complication, resource or patient-centered outcome indicators.

Findings

Forty studies were reviewed. Patient-centered outcomes were infrequently reported (13%, n=5), with limited outcomes specifically relevant to older patients. No studies reported physical function, activities of daily living or cognition using validated assessment methods. Short-term mortality (95%, n=38) and complications (85%, n=34) were reported most frequently.

Conclusion

Reporting of aortic surgery outcomes in patients aged 80 and over requires a focus upon outcomes of primary importance to people of this age.

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

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.

Open versus Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in the Elective and Emergent Setting in a Pooled Population of 37,781 Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background. We evaluated the incidence of mortality and myocardial infarction (MI) in endovascular repair (EVAR) as compared to open aneurysm repair (OAR) in both elective and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA ) setting. Methods. We analyzed the rates of 30-day mortality, 30-day MI, and hospital length of stay (LOS) based on comparative observation and randomized control trials involving EVAR and OAR. Results. 41 trials compared EVAR to OAR with a total pooled population of 37,781 patients. Analysis of elective and ruptured AAA repair favored EVAR with respect to 30-day mortality with a pooled odds ratio of 0.19 (95% CI 0.17–0.20; I² = 88.9%; P < 0.001). There were a total of 1,835 30-day MI events reported in the EVAR group as compared to 2,483 events in the OAR group. The pooled odds ratio for elective AAA was 0.74 (95% CI 0.58–0.96; P = 0.02) in favor of EVAR. The average LOS was reduced by 296.75 hrs (95% CI 156.68–436.82 hrs; P < 0.001) in the EVAR population. Conclusions. EVAR has lower rates of 30-day mortality, 30-day MI, and LOS in both elective and ruptured AAA repair.

A limited and customized follow-up seems justified after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair in octogenarians

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine whether long-term follow-up after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is justified in octogenarians.

METHODS

Between September 1996 and October 2011, all patients, including octogenarians, treated for an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) by EVAR were included in a prospective database. Patients older than 80 years and with a nonruptured infrarenal aneurysm treated electively or urgently were included in the study (study group [SG]). Patients with ruptured aneurysms and patients who died during surgery or within the first postoperative month were excluded from further analysis. The control group (CG) consisted of patients younger than 80 years, matched for gender and AAA diameter. All patients were evaluated 4 to 8 weeks after EVAR and then annually thereafter. Follow-up data were complemented by review of the computerized hospital registry and charts and by contact of the patient's general practitioner or referring hospital. Primary outcomes were stent- or aneurysm-related complications and interventions. Secondary outcomes were additional surgical complications and patient survival.

RESULTS

A total number of 193 patients (SG, n = 97; CG, n = 96) were included for analysis. Median age was 80 years, and 88.6% were male. Median follow-up time was 33.6 months (interquartile range [IQR], 12.9-68.3). Stent- and procedure-related postoperative complications were comparable between groups (SG, 41.2%; CG, 39.6%; P = .82). Median time to complication was 2.3 months (IQR, 0.2-19.4) in the SG compared with 18.1 months (IQR, 6.8-50.5) in the CG. The 2-year complication-free survival rates were 58% (SG) and 60% (CG). Interventions were performed significantly less frequently in octogenarians (SG, 8.2%; CG, 19.8%; P < .05). Median time to intervention was 11.1 months (IQR, 2.0-31.0) in the SG compared with 54.3 months (IQR, 15.0-93.2) in the CG. The 2-year intervention-free survival rates were 90% (SG) and 92% (CG). During follow-up, 98 patients died (SG, n = 54; CG, n = 44); median time to death was 31.8 months (IQR, 13.3-66.0) in the SG compared with 44.4 months (IQR, 15.0-77.7) in the CG. One aneurysm-related death occurred in the CG. The 2- and 5-year survival rates were 71% and 32% for the SG compared with 77% and 66% for the CG (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Because of the low incidence of secondary procedures and AAA-related deaths in octogenarians, long-term and frequent follow-up after EVAR seems questionable. An adapted and shortened follow-up seems warranted in this patient group.

Elective treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm is reasonable in patients >85 years of age

BACKGROUND

The numbers of patients >85 years of age referred for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair have increased in recent decades. With the population aging, increased screening of AAA, and introduction of less invasive surgical techniques, vascular surgeons will be treating more elderly patients. Few data are available for estimating the risks and benefits of prophylactic repair among those with such an advanced age. The aim of this single-center study was to evaluate the short-term to midterm results after AAA repair in patients >85 years of age.

METHODS

Between 2004 and 2012, data of patients >85 years old who required an elective AAA repair at our institution were collected prospectively. According to the current guidelines, patients underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) each time the aortic anatomy was suitable. Open repair (OR) was performed in those patients with hostile proximal neck anatomy and/or severe iliac tortuosity. Type of repair (EVAR or OR) and perioperative and midterm outcomes were analyzed. Primary end points were 30-day mortality and midterm survival.

RESULTS

Among 1016 patients undergoing elective AAA repair during the study period, 59 (5.8%) were ≥85 years of age (54 men, mean age 87 ± 2 years), with a mean aneurysm diameter of 61.5 ± 20.3 mm. Thirty-three patients (56%) underwent EVAR and 26 (44%) had an OR. Thirty-day mortality was 6.7% (6% with EVAR and 7.6% with OR, P <0.05). Mean follow-up was 24.7 ± 18 months. Kaplan‒Meier analyses for survival were 85.5%, 64.5%, and 50% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. No aneurysm-related death was observed during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Elective repair may be proposed in patients >85 years of age in cases of threatening AAA, showing acceptable perioperative mortality and reasonable midterm survival results. Even if EVAR did not seem to offer significant benefits in perioperative mortality in our study, it appears reasonable to suggest this less invasive technique as first-line treatment in cases of suitable anatomy in such an advanced-age population.

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the geriatric population

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a relatively common pathology among the elderly. More people above the age of 80 will have to undergo treatment of an AAA in the future. This review aims to summarize the literature focusing on endovascular repair of AAA in the geriatric population. A systematic review of the literature was performed, including results from endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) registries and studies comparing open repair and EVAR in those above the age of 80. A total of 15 studies were identified. EVAR in this population is efficient with a success rate exceeding 90% in all cases, and safe, with early mortality and morbidity being superior among patients undergoing EVAR against open repair. Late survival can be as high as 95% after 5 years. Aneurysm-related death over long-term follow-up was low after EVAR, ranging from 0 to 3.4%. Endovascular repair can be offered safely in the geriatric population and seems to compare favourably with open repair in all studies in the literature to date.

Provider volume and long-term outcome after elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Background

Robust risk-adjusted analyses have demonstrated that a reduction in perioperative mortality is associated with the repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in centres with a high operative caseload (volume). However, the long-term impact of this volume-related effect on mortality remains unknown.

Methods

Demographic and clinical data were extracted from UK Hospital Episodes Statistics for patients undergoing elective repair of an infrarenal AAA from 1 April 2000 to 31 March 2005. The long-term mortality of this cohort was investigated through linkage to the UK Office for National Statistics (ONS) registry. Risk-adjusted survival was analysed using Cox proportional hazards modelling to identify the effect of hospital volume on long-term mortality.

Results

A total of 14 396 patients with mean age of 72 years, of whom 85·7 per cent were men, underwent elective repair of an infrarenal AAA in England. They were linked to follow-up using ONS data. Risk-adjusted analysis of all-cause mortality by Cox proportional hazards modelling demonstrated a significant effect of hospital volume across all quintiles up to 2 years (P = 0·013). Remodelling the data after excluding in-hospital mortality still demonstrated the significant effect of hospital volume on late outcome.

Conclusion

There is a long-term benefit to patients who undergo elective AAA repair in a high-volume hospital.

Elective endovascular vs. open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm in patients aged 80 years and older: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Endovascular treatment (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is thought to be of benefit, particularly in patients aged ≥80 years. This issue was investigated in the present meta-analysis.

DESIGN

The study design involved a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.

METHODS

Systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis of data on elective EVAR vs. open repair of AAA in patients aged ≥80 years were performed.

RESULTS

Six observational studies reporting on 13,419 patients were included in the present analysis. Pooled analysis showed higher immediate postoperative mortality after open repair compared with EVAR (risk ratio 3.87, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.19-4.68; risk difference, 6.2%, 95%CI 5.4-7.0%). The pooled immediate mortality rate after open repair was 8.6%, whereas it was 2.3% after EVAR. Open repair was associated with a significantly higher risk of postoperative cardiac, pulmonary and renal complications. Pooled analysis of three studies showed similar overall survival at 3 years after EVAR and open repair (risk ratio 1.10, 95%CI 0.77-1.57).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this meta-analysis suggest that elective EVAR in patients aged ≥80 years is associated with significantly lower immediate postoperative mortality and morbidity than open repair and should be considered the treatment of choice in these fragile patients. These results indicate also that, when EVAR is not feasible, open repair can be performed with acceptable immediate and late survival in patients at high risk of aneurysm rupture.

Effectiveness of treatment for octogenarians with acute abdominal aortic aneurysm

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether advanced age may be a reason to refrain from treatment in patients with an acute abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAAA).

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study that took place in a tertiary care university hospital with a 45-bed intensive care unit. Two hundred seventy-one patients with manifest AAAA, admitted and treated between January 2000 and February 2008, were included. Six patients died during operation and were included in the final analysis to ensure an intention-to-treat protocol, resulting in 234 men and 37 women with a mean age of 72 ± 7.8 years (range, 54-88 years). Forty-six patients (17%) were 80 years or older. Interventions involved open or endovascular AAAA repair.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 33 ± 30.4 months (including early deaths). Mean hospital length of stay was 16.9 ± 20 days for patients younger than 80 and 13 ± 16.7 days for patients older than 80 years of age. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed a significantly better survival for the younger patients (P < .05). Stratification based on urgency or type of treatment did not change the difference. Two-year actuarial survival was 70% for patients younger than 80 and 52% for those older than 80. At 5-year follow-up, these figures were 62% and 29%, respectively. Mean survival in patients older than 80 was 39.8 ± 6.8 months versus 64.5 ± 3.0 months in those younger than 80.

CONCLUSIONS

For octogenarians, our liberal strategy of treating patients with AAAA was associated with satisfactory short- and long-term outcome, with no difference with regard to disease- or procedure-related morbidity between the younger and older group. Assuming an integrated system for managing AAAA is in place, advanced age is not a reason to deny patients surgery.

Intermediate-term EVAR outcomes in octogenarians

OBJECTIVE

The utilization of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) in suitable patients has resulted in decreased perioperative morbidity and mortality. Octogenarians as a subgroup have been more readily offered EVAR, as it is less invasive, and therefore presumably better tolerated than conventional open aortic repair. The purpose of this study is to investigate periprocedural and late EVAR outcomes in octogenarians compared with patients less than 80 years of age.

METHODS

From January 2003 to May 2008, 322 patients underwent EVAR. A total of 117 octogenarians were compared with 205 patients less than 80 years of age. A retrospective review of the demographic data, aneurysm details, perioperative morbidity, mortality, and late outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

Octogenarians were significantly more likely to have a history of diabetes mellitus (51% vs 23%; P < .001), coronary artery disease (45% vs 32%; P = .0165), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (44% vs 30%; P = .0113), and renal insufficiency (57% vs 31%; P < .0001). There were no significant differences in the rates of perioperative myocardial infarction, stroke, death, intestinal, or arterial ischemic complications between the two groups. Octogenarians had a significant higher rate of pulmonary complications (5.1% vs 1%; P < .03) and access-site hematomas (12% vs 2.4%; P = .001) than younger patients. When all significant perioperative morbidity was combined, octogenarians were twice as likely to develop complications following EVAR than younger patients (27.4% vs 11.7%; P = .001). At 5-year follow-up, younger patients were twice as likely to develop type II endoleaks.

CONCLUSIONS

EVAR can be performed safely and effectively in octogenarians, and the incidence of major complications including myocardial infarction, stroke, and death is unchanged compared with younger patients. However, there is a significantly increased rate of access-site hematomas, pulmonary, and perioperative complications in octogenarians as a whole. Our findings suggest EVAR remains a suitable form of therapy in the elderly group provided there is an appropriate preoperative evaluation and perioperative monitoring following repair.

Open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm in a centenarian

We present the case of a 101-year-old female who was successfully operated for an open elective repair of a symptomatic 9 cm abdominal aortic aneurysm. This is the oldest case reported in the literature for elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair with successful outcome. This case raises an important ethical issue of human life expectancy and the appropriateness of high-risk surgery on a centenarian.

Analysis of outcome after using high-risk criteria selection to surgery versus endovascular repair in the modern era of abdominal aortic aneurysm treatment

INTRODUCTION

The concept of high-risk patients suggests that such patients will experience a higher rate of postoperative complications and worse short- and long-term outcomes, and should therefore benefit from the use of endovascular techniques for aortic abdominal aneurysm (AAA) repair. The primary goal of this study was to assess the relevance of the different high-risk criteria, defined by the French health agency Agence Française de Sécurité Sanitaire des Produits de Santé (AFSSAPS) in a single-centre continuous series. Secondary goals were to retrospectively compare the incidence of postoperative complications and short- and long-term survival in three groups of patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 1999 and December 2006, details of all the patients undergoing elective surgery for AAA in our hospital were recorded into a prospective registry (n=626). Three groups were considered according to the level of risk and type of repair defined by the AFSSAPS: endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) high-risk (HR) (at least one high-risk factor and EVAR, n=138), open HR (at least one high-risk factor and open repair, n=134) and open low-risk (LR) (no high-risk factors and open repair, n=344). None of the low-risk patients were treated using an endovascular approach. The demographics, preoperative risk factors, intra-, postoperative data and short- and long-term survival were compared between the groups. Interrelations among the set of high-risk criteria for mortality were calculated using multiple correspondence analysis (MCA).

RESULTS

The distribution of high-risk criteria was similar in both high-risk groups, except for age, heart failure and hostile abdomen, which were significantly more frequent in EVAR HR. Operation time, blood loss and length of stay in an intensive care unit and hospital were significantly lower in the EVAR HR group. The 30-day mortality and survival rates at 5 years were 5.4 and 59.4% for EVAR HR, 3.7 and 70.4% for open HR and 2.3 and 83.7% for open LR, respectively, with no significant difference between the three groups for the mortality, but a significant higher survival at 5 years for the open LR versus both high-risk groups.

CONCLUSION

The high-risk AFSSAPS criteria were not predictive of postoperative mortality and should not be used to determine the choice of treatment technique. Other criteria therefore need to be established to determine whether open or EVAR repair should be used.

Improved Long-Term Survival After Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Background— Treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has changed significantly over the past 2 decades. In this perspective, time trends in long-term survival were studied.

Methods and Results— We identified 8663 primary intact and 4171 ruptured AAA repairs in the Swedish Vascular Registry from 1987 to 2005. Mortality was obtained from the national population registry. Crude survival was analyzed, including all mortality. To analyze the long-term outcome among those surviving the AAA repair, relative survival, which denotes the survival rate of patients compared with that of the general population adjusted for age, sex, and calendar year, was calculated, excluding 90-day mortality. In a comparison of AAA repairs from 1987 to 1999 and 2000 to 2005, age (71.4 versus 72.5 years; P <0.001), patients with comorbidities (65.0% versus 68.5%; P <0.001), and endovascular repair (1.6% versus 17.0%; P <0.001) increased. After intact AAA repair, crude 5-year survival was 69.0% (99% confidence interval [CI], 67.7 to 70.4), and relative 5-year survival excluding 90-day mortality was 90.3% (99% CI, 88.6 to 92.0). Relative 5-year survival was better for those operated on from 2000 to 2005 compared with 1987 to 1999 (difference, 4.7%; 99% CI, 1.3 to 8.1), for men versus women (4.6%; 99% CI, 0.4 to 8.8), and for octogenarians versus patients <80 years of age (10.2%; 99% CI, 1.5 to 18.8); no difference was observed between open and endovascular repair (6.0%; 99% CI, −1.5 to 13.4). After ruptured AAA repair, crude 5-year survival was 41.7% (99% CI, 39.6 to 43.7) and relative 5-year survival was 87.1% (99% CI, 83.9 to 90.3). No significant differences in relative 5-year survival were observed between time periods, sex, or age groups.

Conclusions— Long-term survival improved over time after intact AAA repair despite a change in case mix toward older patients with more comorbidities. Long-term survival was stable after ruptured AAA repair.

Age-related trends in utilization and outcome of open and endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm in the United States, 2001-2006

OBJECTIVE

This study used a large national administrative in-hospital database to compare utilization and age-specific outcomes between open repair (OAR) and endovascular (EVAR) repair for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).

METHODS

Discharges with the principal International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) procedure codes for EVAR and OAR and principal diagnosis code of intact AAAs were selected from the 2001 to 2006 Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS). Weighted least-square regression was used to test the trend of utilization by age. Multiple linear and logistic regression analyses were used to assess the risk-adjusted outcomes.

RESULTS

Nationally, the estimated number of elective AAAs treated with EVAR increased from 11,171 in 2001 to 21,725 in 2006 (P = .003). The number of elective AAAs treated with OAR declined from 17,784 to 8451 during the same period (P < .001). By 2006, EVAR was more frequently used than OAR for patients of all ages. Compared with the younger age groups, patients aged >or=85 years had a significant increase in the total number of asymptomatic AAA repairs, driven almost entirely by an increase in the use of EVAR. Compared with open patients, EVAR patients had a significantly shorter length of hospitalization (adjusted mean, 2.99 days [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.97-3.01] vs 8.78 days [95% CI, 8.53-8.57]), less in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.23; 95% CI, 0.19-0.28), fewer in-hospital complications (OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.25-0.28), and a higher likelihood of being discharged to home (OR, 3.95; 95% CI, 3.62-4.31). The reduction of complications from the use of EVAR versus OAR was most dramatic for the oldest patients.

CONCLUSIONS

As short-term surgical outcomes are consistently improving for patients undergoing AAA repair, elective EVAR has replaced OAR as the more common method of repair in the United States. The introduction of this technology has been rapidly adopted, particularly for the oldest-old surgical patients, aged >or=85 years, who previously may not have been offered surgical intervention for asymptomatic AAA. Further investigation is necessary to examine whether this trend improves the long-term survival and quality of life for this elderly population.

Laparoscopic abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in octogenarians

OBJECTIVE

Open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in octogenarians is considered to have higher risks of mortality and systemic complications compared with younger patients. The purpose of our work is to present our experience with total laparoscopic repair for AAA in this subset of patients.

METHODS

From February 2002 to February 2008, 29 octogenarian patients underwent total laparoscopic AAA repair. Median age was 82 years (range, 80-85 years). Median aneurysm size was 52 mm (range, 40-85 mm). Disease was classified as American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) class II in 12 patients and class III in 17 patients. Ten patients presented with past medical history of myocardial infarct (34.5%).

RESULTS

We implanted 12 tube grafts and 17 bifurcated grafts. Twenty-six procedures were totally laparoscopic (89.6 %). Median operative time and aortic clamping time were 280 min (range, 160-480 min) and 75 min (range, 22-125 min), respectively. Two patients with juxtarenal AAA underwent suprarenal clamping. Median blood loss was 1100 cc (range, 600-3000 cc). Four patients (13.8%) needed adjunctive vascular procedures because of intraoperative complications. Two patients died in the postoperative course (6.9%). Four patients developed severe systemic non-lethal complications (14.8%, pneumopathies). Mild or moderate systemic complications were observed in 14 patients (51.8%) including transient renal insufficiencies without dialysis (13) and cardiac arrhythmia (1). Postoperative creatinine levels returned to baseline before discharge in all patients. Liquid diet was reintroduced after a median duration of 2 days (range, 1-10 days) and most patients were ambulatory by day four (range, 3-30 days). Median stays in intensive care unit and hospital were 72 hours (range, 12-1368 hours) and 11 days (range, 6-74 days), respectively. Sixteen patients (59.2%) were discharged directly to home with complete recovery. After a median follow-up of 24 months (range, 2-48 months), 23 patients are still alive and regained their baseline status. Four patients died after hospital discharge of non-vascular etiologies.

CONCLUSION

Total laparoscopic AAA repair is a worthwhile but challenging procedure in octogenarians. Laparoscopy is complementary to open surgery and EVAR in this subset. These results encourage us to offer laparoscopic AAA repair in good surgical risk octogenarians.