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

Outcomes of EVAR Conversion in Octogenarians Treated at a High-Volume Aorta Center

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair(EVAR) is the dominant treatment strategy for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms(AAA) but is especially preferred among octogenarian(age ≥80-years) patients due to concerns surrounding comorbidity severity and physiological frailty. Correspondingly, EVAR failure resulting in subsequent open conversion(EVAR-c) has been increasingly reported in older patients but there is a paucity of literature focusing on outcomes in this subgroup. The purpose of this analysis was to evaluate our experience with EVAR-c in octogenarians(≥80-years) compared to younger patients(age <80-years).

METHODS

A retrospective review of all non-mycotic EVAR-c procedures(2002-2020) at a single high-volume academic hospital with a dedicated aorta center(https://www.uf-health-aortic-disease-center) was performed. Patients(n=162) were categorized into octogenarian(age ≥80; n=43) and non-octogenarian(age<80; n=119) cohorts and subsequently compared. The primary end-point was 30-day mortality. Secondary end-points included complications, 90-day mortality, and overall survival. Cox regression determined effects of selected covariates on mortality risk. Kaplan-Meier methodology estimated survival.

RESULTS

No difference in pre-admission EVAR re-intervention rates was present(octogenerians-42% vs. non-octogenerians-43%;p=1) although time to first re-intervention was greater in octogenarians(41 vs. non-octogenarians, 15-months;p=.01). Concordantly, time to EVAR-c was significantly longer among octogenarian patients(61 vs. non-octogenarians, 39-months;p<.01). No difference in rupture presentation was evident(14% vs. 10%;p=.6); however, elective EVAR-c occurred less frequently(octogenerians-42% vs. non-octogenerians-59%;p=.07). AAA diameter was significantly larger for elective octogenarian EVAR-c(7.8±1.9cm vs. non-octogenarians, 7.0±1.5cm;p=.02) and type 1a endoleak was the most common indication overall(58%;n=91). Among all presentations, a trend in higher 30-day mortality was evident for octogenarian patients(16% vs. non-octogenarians, 7%;p=.06). Similarly 90-day mortality was greater among octogenarians(26% vs. non-octogenarians, 10%;p=.02). However, incidence of any complication(56% vs. 49%;p=.5), readmission(12% vs. 6%;p=.3), unplanned re-operation(10% vs. 5%;p=.5) and LOS(11 vs. 9 days;p=.3) was not significantly different. Age ≥80 was predictive of short-term mortality after non-elective but not elective cases; however, increasing comorbidity number, non-elective admission and renal/mesenteric revascularization had the strongest association with mortality risk. One- and three-year survival was not different between groups when comparing all patients after the first 90-days postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Although higher unadjusted peri-operative mortality occurred among octogenarian patients, risk-adjusted elective outcomes were comparable to younger EVAR-c subjects when treated at a high-volume aortic surgery center. This underscores the importance of appropriate patient selection and modulation of operative complexity when feasible to achieve optimal results. Providers caring for octogenarian patients with EVAR failure should consider timely elective referral to high-volume aorta centers to reduce resource utilization and frequency of non-elective presentations.

Longer follow-up intervals following EVAR are safe and appropriate after marked aneurysm sac regression

BACKGROUND

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) shrinkage after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a surrogate marker for successful exclusion. Our study characterized aneurysm sac remodeling after EVAR to identify a pattern that may be associated with benign AAA behavior and would safely allow a less rigorous follow-up regimen after EVAR.

METHODS

Elective infrarenal EVARs performed between 2008 and 2011 at our institution were retrospectively reviewed. AAA sac diameters using the minor axis measurement from ultrasound imaging or computer tomography angiogram imaging were compared with the baseline diameter from the 1-month postoperative computer tomography angiogram. The primary outcome was a composite of freedom from postoperative reintervention or rupture. We compared those with AAA sacs who regressed to predefined minimum diameter thresholds with those who did not. Outcomes were plotted with Kaplan-Meier curves and compared using log-rank testing and Fine-Gray regression using death as a competing risk, clustered on graft type. For patients whose AAA reached the minimum sac diameter, landmark analysis evaluated ongoing size changes including further regression and sac re-expansion.

RESULTS

A total of 540 patients (aged 75.1 ± 8.2 years; 82.0% male) underwent EVAR with an average preoperative AAA size of 55.2 ± 11.5 mm. The median postoperative follow-up was 5.3 years (interquartile range, 1.4-8.7 years) during which 64 patients underwent reintervention and 4 ruptured. AAA sac regression to ≤40 mm in diameter was associated with improved freedom from reintervention or rupture overall (log-rank, P < .01), which was maintained after controlling for the competing risk of death (P < .01). In 376 patients (70%) whose aneurysm sac remained >40 mm, 99 reinterventions were performed on 63 patients. Of 166 (31%) patients whose sac regressed to ≤40 mm, only 1 patient required a reintervention, and no one ruptured. The mean time to a diameter of ≤40 mm was 2.3 ± 1.9 years. Only eight patients (5%) developed sac re-expansion to >45 mm; all but two occurred at least 3 years after initially regressing to ≤40 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

In long-term follow-up, patients whose minimum AAA sac diameter regressed ≤40 mm after EVAR experienced a very low rate of reintervention, rupture, or sac re-expansion. Most sac re-expansion occurred at least 3 years after reaching this threshold and did not result in clinical events. Increasing follow-up frequency up to 3-year intervals once the AAA sac regresses to 40 mm would carry minimal risk of aneurysm-related morbidity.

Outcome of elective endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in octogenarians

AIM

The need to adjust the indications of elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair among patients with a limited life-span deserves a specific evaluation for octogenarians. The aim of this study was to compare the postoperative results and the long-term survival after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic and/or iliac aneurysms (EVAR) in octogenarians compared with patients under 80 years of age.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of 241 consecutive patients who underwent an elective EVAR between 2000 and 2017. EVAR was not considered among patients with clear life-limiting conditions. Patients receiving other than commercially standard infra-renal endoprostheses were excluded.

RESULTS

Seventy patients (29.0%) were octogenarians. They had a lower rate of active smoking (10.0% vs. 30.4%, P < 0.001) and a higher prevalence of previous cerebrovascular disease (21.4% vs. 11.7%, P = 0.055) than younger patients. Thirty-day/in-hospital complication and mortality rates were not significantly higher among octogenarians when compared with younger patients (24.3% vs. 16.9% and 2.9% vs. 2.4%, respectively). Octogenarians had a lower long-term survival at 1, 3 and 5 years (92.6% vs. 93.3%, 67.7% vs. 78.0% and 39.3% vs. 60.6%, P = 0.039) in the bivariate analysis. However, an age ≥ 80 years per se was not an independent predictor of survival after adjustment for confounding factors.

CONCLUSION

An age above 80 years was not associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications or long-term mortality. Our results suggest that EVAR can be considered in elderly patients without a clear life-limiting condition and with a suitable aneurysm anatomy. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2021; 21: 392-397.

Analysis of Midterm Outcomes of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in Octogenarians From the ENGAGE Registry

PURPOSE

To assess periprocedural results and secondary endovascular procedure outcomes over 5 years in patients aged ≥80 vs <80 years undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from the Endurant Stent Graft Natural Selection Global post-market registry (ENGAGE) were used for the analyses. A total of 1263 consecutive patients were enrolled in the prospective, observational, single-arm registry and divided into 2 groups according to age: ≥80 years (290, 22.9%) and <80 years (973, 77.1%). Baseline patient characteristics, risk scores according to the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) reporting standards, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, quality of life assessments [EuroQol 5 (EQ5D) index], and treatment outcomes, including all-cause mortality, aneurysm-related mortality, major adverse events, secondary endovascular procedures, and endoleaks were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Octogenarians were classified into the highest category of the SVS risk stratification system; however, this did not result in a significant difference in the 30-day mortality [1.4% (4/290) vs 1.2% (12/973) for controls; p=0.85] or major adverse event rates [5.2% (15/290) vs 3.6% (35/973), p=0.23]. Multivariable analysis confirmed that age ≥80 years, pulmonary disease, large aneurysm diameter, and renal insufficiency were significantly associated with all-cause mortality, whereas diameter was the only parameter associated with increased aneurysm-related mortality. The differences in freedom from secondary endovascular procedures over 5 years between octogenarians and controls did not reach statistical significance (88.5% vs 83.2%, p=0.07).

CONCLUSION

EVAR can be performed in individuals aged ≥80 years with no statistically significant difference in midterm aneurysm-related deaths compared with younger patients. The findings in this elderly patient cohort show that EVAR can be safely performed with acceptable morbidity rates in octogenarians.

Perioperative Exercise Therapy in Bariatric Surgery: Improving Patient Outcomes

Nowadays, obesity and related comorbidities like type 2 diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidaemia and obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome are considered one of the medical challenges of the 21st century. Even with the rise of bariatric and metabolic surgery, obesity and metabolic syndrome are reaching endemic proportions. Even in 2020, obesity is still a growing problem. There is increasing evidence that next to bariatric surgery, exercise interventions in the perioperative period could give extra beneficial effects. In this regard, effects on anthropometrics, cardiovascular risk factors and physical fitness. The aim of this review is to summarise effects of preoperative and postoperative exercise, tools for screening and directions for future research and implementations.

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.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in octogenarians is associated with higher mortality compared with nonoctogenarians

OBJECTIVE

Age is a well-known independent risk factor for death after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. However, there is significant debate about the utility of AAA repair in older patients. In this study, mortality outcomes after endovascular AAA repair (EVAR) and open AAA repair (OAR) in octogenarians (aged ≥80 years) were compared with younger patients (aged <80 years).

METHODS

All patients recorded in the Vascular Quality Initiative database (2002-2012) who underwent infrarenal AAA repair were included. Univariable and multivariable statistics were used to compare perioperative (30-day) and 1-year mortality outcomes between octogenarians vs nonoctogenarians for OAR and EVAR.

RESULTS

During the study period, 21,874 patients underwent AAA repair (OAR, 5765; EVAR, 16,109), including 4839 octogenarians (OAR, 765; EVAR, 4074) and 17,035 nonoctogenarians (OAR, 5000; EVAR, 12,035). Octogenarians (mean age, 83.0 ± 0.1 years) were less frequently male (66% vs 75%) and had a higher prevalence of congestive heart failure (9.9% vs 7.1%), chronic renal insufficiency (12.2% vs 7.5%), and a history of aortic surgery (14.3% vs 7.7%) compared with nonoctogenarians (P < .01 for all). Intraoperative use of blood transfusions and vasopressors was more common in octogenarians for OAR (blood: 3.3 ± 4.4 vs 1.8 ± 3.7 units; vasopressors: 45.2% vs 32.8%) and EVAR (blood: 0.43 ± 1.7 vs 0.31 ± 1.6 units; vasopressors: 7.6% vs 5.7%; P < .01 for all). Contrast dye volumes used during EVAR were similar in octogenarians and nonoctogenarians (108 ± 71 vs 107 ± 68 mL; P = .18). Perioperative mortality after OAR was 20.1% in octogenarians compared with 7.1% in nonoctogenarians (P < .01). Perioperative mortality after EVAR was 3.8% in the octogenarians compared with 1.6% in nonoctogenarians (P < .01). One-year mortality among octogenarians vs nonoctogenarians was 26% vs 9.7% for OAR and 8.9% vs 4.3% for EVAR (log-rank test, P < .01 for both). Multivariable analysis controlling for baseline and intraoperative differences between groups demonstrated that age ≥80 years increased the risk of 30-day and 1-year mortality after AAA repair by 223% and 187%, respectively (P < .01 for both).

CONCLUSIONS

AAA repair should be approached with extreme caution in octogenarians. Perioperative and 1-year mortality rates after OAR are particularly high in the older population, suggesting that the appropriate aneurysm size threshold for OAR might be larger due to the greater operative risk in octogenarian patients.

Compliance of postendovascular aortic aneurysm repair imaging surveillance

OBJECTIVE

Imaging surveillance after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is critical. In this study we analyzed compliance with imaging surveillance after EVAR and its effect on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of 565 EVAR patients (August 2001-November 2013), who were followed using duplex ultrasound and/or computed tomography angiography. Patients were considered noncompliant (NC) if they did not have any follow-up imaging for 2 years and/or missed their first post-EVAR imaging over 6 months. A Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare compliance rates in EVAR patients with hostile neck (HN) vs favorable neck (FN) anatomy (according to instructions for use). A multivariate analysis was also done to correlate compliance and comorbidities.

RESULTS

Forty-three percent were compliant (7% had no follow-up imaging) and 57% were NC. The mean follow-up for compliant patients was 25.4 months (0-119 months) vs 31.4 months for NC (0-140 months). The mean number of imaging was 3.5 for compliant vs 2.6 for NC (P < .0001). Sixty-four percent were NC for HN patients vs 50% for FN patients (P = .0007). The rates of compliance at 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 years for all patients were 78%, 63%, 55%, 45%, and 32%; and 84%, 68%, 61%, 54%, and 40% for FN patients; and 73%, 57%, 48%, 37%, and 25% for HN patients (P = .009). The NC rate for patients with late endoleak and/or sac expansion was 58% vs 54% for patients with no endoleak (P = .51). The NC rate for patients with late reintervention was 70% vs 53% for patients with no reintervention (P = .1254). Univariate and multivariate analyses showed that patients with peripheral arterial disease had an odds ratio of 1.9 (P = .0331), patients with carotid disease had an odds ratio of 2 (P = .0305), and HN patients had an odds ratio of 1.8 (P = .0007) for NC. Age and residential locations were not factors in compliance.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, compliance of imaging surveillance after EVAR was low, particularly in HN EVAR patients, and additional studies are needed to determine if strict post-EVAR surveillance is necessary, and its effect on long-term clinical outcome.

Validity of the Postoperative Morbidity Survey after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair-a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is no standardised tool used to capture morbidity following abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. The aim of this prospective observational study was to validate the Postoperative Morbidity Survey (POMS) according to its two guiding principles: to only capture morbidity substantial enough to delay discharge from hospital and to be a rapid, simple screening tool.

METHODS

A total of 64 adult patients undergoing elective infrarenal AAA repair participated in the study. Following surgery, the POMS was recorded daily, by trained research staff with the clinical teams blinded, until hospital discharge or death. We modelled the data using Cox regression, accounting for the competing risk of death, with POMS as a binary time-dependent (repeated measures) internal covariate. For each day for each patient, 'discharged' (yes/no) was the event, with the elapsed number of days post-surgery as the time variable. We derived the hazard ratio for any POMS morbidity (score 1-9) vs. no morbidity (zero), adjusted for type of repair (endovascular versus open), age and aneurysm size.

RESULTS

The hazard ratio for alive discharge with any POMS-recorded morbidity versus no morbidity was 0.130 (95 % confidence interval 0.070 to 0.243). The median time-to-discharge was 13 days after recording any POMS morbidity vs. 2 days after scoring zero for POMS morbidity. Compliance with POMS completion was 99.5 %.

CONCLUSIONS

The POMS is a valid tool for capturing short-term postoperative morbidity following elective infrarenal AAA repair that is substantial enough to delay discharge from hospital. Daily POMS measurement is recommended to fully capture morbidity and allow robust analysis. The survey could be a valuable outcome measure for use in quality improvement programmes and future research.