The impact of endovascular repair on specialties performing abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Editor's Choice -- European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-Iliac Artery Aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

The European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) has developed clinical practice guidelines for the care of patients with aneurysms of the abdominal aorta and iliac arteries in succession to the 2011 and 2019 versions, with the aim of assisting physicians and patients in selecting the best management strategy.

METHODS

The guideline is based on scientific evidence completed with expert opinion on the matter. By summarising and evaluating the best available evidence, recommendations for the evaluation and treatment of patients have been formulated. The recommendations are graded according to a modified European Society of Cardiology grading system, where the strength (class) of each recommendation is graded from I to III and the letters A to C mark the level of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 160 recommendations have been issued on the following topics: Service standards, including surgical volume and training; Epidemiology, diagnosis, and screening; Management of patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), including surveillance, cardiovascular risk reduction, and indication for repair; Elective AAA repair, including operative risk assessment, open and endovascular repair, and early complications; Ruptured and symptomatic AAA, including peri-operative management, such as permissive hypotension and use of aortic occlusion balloon, open and endovascular repair, and early complications, such as abdominal compartment syndrome and colonic ischaemia; Long term outcome and follow up after AAA repair, including graft infection, endoleaks and follow up routines; Management of complex AAA, including open and endovascular repair; Management of iliac artery aneurysm, including indication for repair and open and endovascular repair; and Miscellaneous aortic problems, including mycotic, inflammatory, and saccular aortic aneurysm. In addition, Shared decision making is being addressed, with supporting information for patients, and Unresolved issues are discussed.

CONCLUSION

The ESVS Clinical Practice Guidelines provide the most comprehensive, up to date, and unbiased advice to clinicians and patients on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms.

Treatment Outcomes of Patients With Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) is a serious complication of abdominal aortic aneurysm associated with high operative mortality and morbidity rates. The present study evaluated the perioperative and long-term outcomes of Korean patients with rAAA based on national health insurance claims data.

METHODS

The National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database was searched retrospectively to identify patients with rAAA who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) from 2009 to 2018. Perioperative (≤ 30 days), early postoperative (≤ 3 month), and long-term (> 3 month) survival, reinterventions, and complications were assessed.

RESULTS

The search identified 1,034 patients with rAAA, including 594 who underwent EVAR and 440 who underwent OSR. When the study period was divided into two, the total numbers of patients with rAAA, patients who underwent EVAR, and octogenarians were higher during the second half. The perioperative mortality rate was 29.8% in the EVAR and 35.0% in the OSR group (P = 0.028). Hartmann's procedure for bowel infarction was performed more frequently in the OSR than in the EVAR group (adjusted odds ratio, 6.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.33-21.84; P = 0.001), but other complication rates did not differ significantly. All-cause mortality during the entire observation period did not differ significantly in the EVAR and OSR groups (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.98-1.41; P = 0.087). Abdominal aortic aneurysm-related reintervention rate was significantly lower in the OSR group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14-0.70; P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Although EVAR showed somewhat superior perioperative outcomes for rAAA, the long-term outcomes of EVAR after excluding initial 3 months were significantly worse than OSR. When anatomically feasible for both treatments, the perioperative mortality risk and reasonable prospects of long-term survival should be considered in rAAA.

The Impact of Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms on Vascular Surgery Training in Open Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

Since the introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in 1992, the number of open AAA repair (OAR) cases continue to decline. The consequence of reduced OAR cases raises valid concerns related to patient safety and the future training of vascular surgeons that need to be appropriately addressed. Our objective is to analyze trends in OAR and EVAR cases and to assess their implications on the quality of vascular surgery training.

METHODS

We analyzed the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) case log database for total clinical experience in OAR and EVAR for graduating vascular surgery fellows (VSFs) finishing 5 + 2 programs between 2002 and 2019 and vascular surgery integrated residents (VSRs) between 2013 and 2019. VSF case totals were calculated by combining average total cases of open and endovascular supra- and infrarenal AAA repair during fellowship years combined with total cases performed during their general surgery residency. VSR case totals included only the cases performed during the 5-year residency period. Isolated Iliac and thoracic aortic aneurysms were excluded from our analysis.

RESULTS

The average number of OAR cases per trainee has decreased by 60% (from 36.9 to 14.7) with a rate of 1.4 cases per year (P < 0.001) for VSF. Meanwhile, EVAR average cases have increased by 102% (from 22 to 44.4). However, there were 2 different trends exhibited with EVAR over the study period. Between 2002 and 2007, EVAR cases tended to increase by 5.9 cases per year (P < 0.001). Whereas, between 2007 and 2019, there was a slightly decreased trend in EVAR cases by 0.3 cases per year (P = 0.01). For VSR, while no significant trend was observed in the mean number of OAR cases (Coef. -0.3, P = 0.2) due to the limited time frame, the proportion of open cases was significantly lower compared to endovascular cases. Additionally, there were 2 different trends exhibited with EVAR over the study period. Between 2013 and 2015, EVAR cases tended to increase by 1.7 cases per year (P = 0.1). Whereas, between 2015 and 2019, there was a slightly decreased trend in EVAR cases by 0.2 cases per year (P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

A significant reduction in average OAR cases and an increase in EVAR cases were observed over the study period. Vascular surgery training programs may need to introduce further training programs in open surgical repair to ensure vascular surgery trainees have the required technical skills and expertize to perform such a high-risk procedure safely and independently.

Characterizing endovascular aortic intervention outcomes for nonruptured aortic aneurysms by physician specialty

BACKGROUND

Evaluate patient outcomes after endovascular aortic interventions performed for nonruptured aortic aneurysms by physician specialties.

METHODS

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), fenestrated or branched repair (F-BEVAR), and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) procedures were obtained from the Illinois Hospital Association Comparative Health Care and Hospital Data Reporting Services database from 2016 to 2019. Logistic and Poisson regression were used to determine outcomes by patient, physician, and hospital characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 4,935 procedures, 3,666 (74.3%) EVAR, 567 (11.5%) F-BEVAR, and 702 (14.2%) TEVAR were performed by vascular surgeons, interventional radiologists, interventional cardiologists, and cardiac surgeons. Vascular surgeons performed interventions equally between hospital types while interventional radiologists primarily performed interventions in teaching hospitals (68.1%) and interventional cardiologists and cardiac surgeons typically performed interventions in community hospitals (91.8% and 82.1%, respectively; P < .001). No differences in inpatient mortality were noted between specialties. Patients treated by interventional radiologists had increased odds of staying in the hospital ≥8 days (odd ration [OR] 1.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.19-3.19) and patients treated by interventional cardiologists had lower odds of being admitted to the intensive care unit [ICU] (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.18-0.95).

CONCLUSION

Differences in practice patterns among specialties performing endovascular aortic aneurysm repair for nonruptured aneurysms suggest opportunities for collaboration to optimize quality of care.

Thresholds for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in Canada and United States

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated significant geographic variations in the management of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) despite standard guidelines. Differences in patient selection, operative technique, and outcomes for AAA repair in Canada versus United States were assessed.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative was used to identify all patients who underwent elective endovascular or open AAA repair between 2010 and 2019 in Canada and the United States. Demographic, clinical, and procedural characteristics were recorded and differences between countries were assessed using independent t test and χ² test. The primary outcome was the percentage of AAA repaired below recommended diameter thresholds (men, <5.5 cm; women, <5.0 cm). The secondary outcomes were in-hospital and 1-year mortality rates. Associations between region and outcomes were assessed using univariate/multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards analysis.

RESULTS

There were 51,455 US patients and 1451 Canadian patients who underwent AAA repair in Vascular Quality Initiative sites during the study period. There was a higher proportion of endovascular repairs in the United States (83.7% vs 68.4%; odds ratio [OR], 2.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.13-2.63; P < .001). US patients had more comorbidities, including hypertension, congestive heart failure, chronic kidney disease, and prior revascularization. The percentage of AAA repaired below recommended thresholds was significantly higher in the United States (38.8% vs 15.2%; OR, 3.57; 95% CI, 3.03-4.17; P < .001). This difference persisted after controlling for demographic, clinical, and procedural characteristics (adjusted OR, 3.57; 95% CI, 2.63-4.17; P < .001). Factors that predicted AAA repair below recommended thresholds were US region (adjusted OR, 3.57; 95% CI, 3.03-4.17), male sex (adjusted OR, 2.89; 95% CI, 2.72-3.07), and endovascular repair (adjusted OR, 2.08; 95% CI, 1.95-2.21). The in-hospital mortality rate was low (1.0% vs 0.8%) and the 1-year rate mortality was similar between countries (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.70-1.31; P = .79).

CONCLUSIONS

There are significant variations in AAA management between Canada and the United States. A greater proportion of US patients underwent AAA repair below the recommended diameter thresholds. This finding is partly driven by a higher percentage of endovascular repairs. Despite these differences, the perioperative and 1-year mortality rates are similar. Future studies should investigate reasons for these variations and quality improvement projects are needed to standardize care.

A population-based study of post-endovascular aortic repair rupture during 15 years

OBJECTIVE

The devastating event of a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) in patients who have survived a previous AAA repair, either elective or urgent, is a feared and quite uncommon event. It has been suggested to partly explain the loss of the early survival benefit for endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) vs open surgical repair (OSR). The main objective of this study was to report the national incidence rate, risk factors and outcome of post-EVAR ruptures. Secondarily, the national incidence rate of ruptures after OSR (post-OSR ruptures) was investigated.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide, population-based, retrospective cohort study using the inpatient and outpatient entries for all patients >40 years of age, receiving their first (index) surgical procedure for AAA, from 2001 to 2015. Only patients surviving their index procedure were included. The primary outcome was rAAA, registered after discharge from the index procedure (EVAR or OSR), identified in the Swedish National Patient Registry and the Cause of Death Registry.

RESULTS

In total, 14,859 patients survived their primary (index) AAA procedure. There were 6470 EVAR procedures, 5893 for intact AAA (iAAA) and 577 for rAAA. Of the 6470 EVAR patients, 86 cases of post-EVAR rupture were identified, corresponding with a cumulative incidence of 1.3% over a mean follow-up time of 3.9 years. The incidence rate was 3.4 (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.7-4.2)/1000 person-years. The independent risk factors identified for post-EVAR rupture were rAAA at index surgery HR 2.4 (95% CI, 1.4-4.1, p 0.002) and age (hazard ratio, 1.1; 95% CI, 1.0-1.1; P < .001). Freedom from post-EVAR rupture was 99%, 98%, and 96% at 3, 5, and 10 years, respectively. Total and postoperative mortality after post-EVAR rupture were 42% and 17% (30 days), 45% and 22% (90 days), and 53% and 33% (1 year). The incidence rate of post-OSR rupture was 0.9/1000 person-years (95% CI, 0.7-1.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Post-EVAR rupture is a rare complication that can occur at any time after the index EVAR procedure. This finding may have implications for the discussion of limited follow-up programs and for the choice of procedure in patients with an AAA with a long life expectancy. An rAAA as the indication for the index surgery and age were identified as risk factors for post-EVAR rupture. The mortality associated with post-EVAR rupture is high, but lower than that of primary rAAA. The much lower risk of post-OSR rupture was confirmed, but must not be neglected as a possible late complication.

Secondary Interventions and Long-term Follow-up after Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND

Early morbidity and mortality are low after endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair (EVAR), but secondary interventions and late complications are common. The aim of the present multicenter cohort study is to detail the frequency and indication for interventions after EVAR and the impact on long-term survival.

METHODS

A retrospective multicenter cohort study of secondary interventions after elective EVAR for an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm was conducted. Consecutive patients (n = 349) undergoing EVAR between January 2007 and January 2012 were analyzed, with long-term follow-up until December 2018. Those requiring intervention were classified in accordance with the indications and specific nature of the intervention and treatment. The primary study end point was overall survival classified for patients with and without intervention. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate overall survival for those who did and who did not undergo secondary interventions. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression were performed to identify independent variables associated with mortality.

RESULTS

Some 56 patients (16%) underwent 72 secondary interventions after EVAR during a median (interquartile range) follow-up period of 53.2 months (60.1). Some 45 patients (80.4%) underwent one intervention. Indications for intervention included mainly endograft kinking/outflow obstruction and type II endoleak. An endovascular technique was used in 40.3% of interventions. Median time to secondary intervention was 24.1 months. In 93 patients with abnormalities on imaging, no intervention was performed mainly because the abnormality had disappeared on follow-up imaging (43%). Kaplan-Meier curves showed no difference in survival for patients with and without secondary interventions (P = 0.153). Age (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.089, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.063-1.116), ASA classification (ASA III, IV HR: 1.517, 95% CI: 1.056-2.178) were significantly related to mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Secondary intervention rates are still considerable after EVAR. Endograft kinking/outflow obstruction and endoleak type II are the most common indications for a secondary intervention. Secondary interventions did not adversely affect long-term overall survival after EVAR.

A comparison of administrative data and quality improvement registries for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Databases are essential in evaluating surgical outcomes and gauging the implementation of new techniques. However, there are important differences in how data from administrative databases and surgical quality improvement (QI) registries are collected and interpreted. Therefore, we aimed to compare trends, demographics, and outcomes of open and endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in an administrative database and two QI registries.

METHODS

We identified patients undergoing open and endovascular repair of intact and ruptured AAAs between 2012 and 2015 within the National Inpatient Sample (NIS), the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP), and the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI). We described the differences and trends in overall AAA repairs for each data set. Moreover, patient demographics, comorbidities, mortality, and complications were compared between the data sets using Pearson χ² test.

RESULTS

A total of 140,240 NIS patients, 10,898 NSQIP patients, and 26,794 VQI patients were included. Ruptured repairs composed 8.7% of NIS, 11% of NSQIP, and 7.9% of VQI. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) rates for intact repair (range, 83%-84%) and ruptured repair (range, 51%-59%) were similar in the three databases. In general, rates of comorbidities were lower in NIS than in the QI registries. After intact EVAR, in-hospital mortality rates were similar in all three databases (NIS 0.8%, NSQIP 1.0%, and VQI 0.8%; P = .06). However, after intact open repair and ruptured repair, in-hospital mortality was highest in NIS and lowest in VQI (intact open: NIS 5.4%, NSQIP 4.7%, and VQI 3.5% [P < .001]; ruptured EVAR: NIS 24%, NSQIP 20%, and VQI 16% [P < .001]; ruptured open: NIS 36%, NSQIP 31%, and VQI 26% [P < .001]). After stratification by intact and ruptured presentation and repair strategy, several discrepancies in morbidity rates remained between the databases. Overall, the number of cases in NSQIP represents 7% to 8% of the repairs in NIS, and the number of cases in VQI grew from 12% in 2012 to represent 23% of the national sample in 2015.

CONCLUSIONS

NIS had the largest number of patients as it represents the nationwide experience and is an essential tool to evaluate trends over time. The lower in-hospital mortality seen in NSQIP and VQI questions the generalizability of the studies that use these QI registries. However, with a growing number of hospitals engaging in granular QI initiatives, these QI registries provide a valuable resource to potentially improve the quality of care provided to all patients.

Renal Dysfunction Following Elective Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a degenerative disease of the aortic wall with potentially fatal complications. Open repair (OR) was considered the gold standard, until the emergence of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), which is less invasive and equally (if not more) effective. As the popularity of endovascular procedures grows, related complications become more evident, with kidney damage being one of them. Although acute kidney injury (AKI) following EVAR is relatively common, its true incidence is still uncertain. Also, there is insufficient data concerning long-term renal outcomes after EVAR, especially with repeated contrast agent exposure. Despite the lack of firm evidence on the effectiveness of individual strategies, it is evident that prevention of AKI following EVAR requires a multifactorial approach. This review focuses on recent findings based on human studies regarding the current evidence of renal impairment after EVAR, its quantification and strategies for its prevention.

Platelets reflect the fate of type II endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

The management of type II endoleak (T2E) remains controversial because of the heterogeneous outcome. For blood-based screening to detect malignant T2E, we focused on platelets after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and compared them with the prognosis of T2Es.

METHODS

From 2007 to 2015, there were 249 patients treated with EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm who were evaluated retrospectively. The mean follow-up period was 3.5 ± 0.2 years. T2Es that had aneurysm sac enlargement or converted to type I or type III endoleak were defined as malignant; the other T2Es were considered benign. Cases without any complications, including T2E, were defined as completed. We compared the platelet count on postoperative days (PODs) 1 to 7 with preoperative baseline values among the three groups. Sequentially, we calculated the cutoff of the platelet ratio on POD 7 to the baseline value in relation to malignant T2E using receiver operating characteristic analysis, and the cutoff ratio was 113% (sensitivity, 79%; specificity, 58%). We then reclassified T2E patients into T2E-high platelet (T2E-HP; ≥113%) or T2E-low platelet (T2E-LP; <113%) groups. The influence of platelets on T2E was evaluated with reintervention rate and cumulative aneurysm sac enlargement rate using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

T2Es were found in 70 patients (28%), and 179 patients were assigned to the completed group. Malignant and benign T2Es were found in 33 and 37 patients, respectively. No difference was found in the preoperative baseline values. On POD 7, the platelet count in the malignant T2E group was significantly lower than that in the completed and benign T2E groups (168 × 10³/μL vs 207 × 10³/μL and 201 × 10³/μL; P = .0124). Then, 27 and 43 patients were assigned to the T2E-HP and T2E-LP groups, respectively. The reintervention-free survival rate in the T2E-LP group was lower than that in the completed group (at 3 years, 66.4% ± 8.0% vs 71.9% ± 4.0%; P = .0031). Among T2E patients, the cumulative aneurysm sac enlargement rates in the T2E-LP group were significantly higher than those in the T2E-HP group (at 3 years, 34.6% ± 8.2% vs 20.6% ± 8.2%; P = .0105). Univariate Cox proportional hazards analysis for the cumulative aneurysm sac enlargement rates among T2E patients showed that sex, dual antiplatelet therapy, and lower platelet ratio (<113%) were significant predictors; multivariate analysis showed that T2E-LP was the only significant predictor (hazard ratio, 2.60; P = .0355).

CONCLUSIONS

The platelet count of patients with malignant T2Es on POD 7 was definitively lower than that of patients with completed EVAR or with benign T2Es. The lower platelet count on POD 7 could be a risk factor for aneurysm sac enlargement among patients with T2Es.

Factors Associated with Wound Complications after Open Femoral Artery Exposure for Elective Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

We identified factors that would lead to wound complications after open femoral exposure for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (oEVAR). Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset (2005-2014), we examined the patients who underwent oEVAR. Patients were stratified on whether they developed postoperative wound complications. Comparisons were made between group with wound complications and those without and adjusted analyses performed to identify variables that independently increased the risk of wound complications. There were 14,868 patients in the study cohort and 2.6% (384 patients) developed wound complications after EVAR. Among those with wound complications, 94% (360 patients) of patients had superficial and deep surgical site infection. Patients who had wound complication were likely to be younger (72.6 vs. 73.7 years old ( p  = 0.02), functionally dependent (5.4 vs. 2.5%) ( p  < 0.05), smoker (3 vs. 2.4%, p =0.03), female (4 vs. 2.2%), with significantly higher body mass index (31 vs. 28), and more commonly had diabetes (4 vs. 2.4%, p  < 0.001) or renal failure (12 vs. 3%, p  < 0.001). Although perioperative survival was similar, patients who had wound complications had significantly longer hospital length of stay (LOS) (7.3 ± 12 vs. 3.4 ± 5 days, p  < 0.001). Up to 3% patients developed wound complications after open femoral exposure during EVAR with significantly higher LOS and therefore cost utilization.

Incidence, Treatment and Mortality in Patients with Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

Aim of this study was to analyze hospital incidence, type of treatment, and hospital mortality rates of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in Germany from 2005 to 2014.

METHODS

Microdata of the diagnosis-related group (DRG) statistics compiled by the German Federal Statistical Office for the years 2005-2014 were analyzed. Patients who were hospitalized for a ruptured AAA (rAAA, ICD-10 code I71.3, treated either surgically or conservatively) or received surgical treatment for an unruptured AAA (nrAAA, ICD-10-Code I71.4, treated either with open surgery or an endovascular procedure) were included in the analysis. The "European Standard Population 2013" was used for direct standardization of the hospital incidences. In-hospital mortality was calculated with standardization for age and risk.

RESULTS

The standardized overall hospital incidence of AAA was 27.9 and 3.3 cases per 100 000 people for men and women, respectively; over the period of the study, the incidence of rAAA fell by 30% in both sexes and that of nrAAA rose by 16% in men and 42% in women. The percentage of patients receiving endovascular treatment rose from 29% to 75% in patients with nrAAA and from 8% to 36% in patients with rAAA. The age- and risk-standardized in-hospital mortality of nrAAA was 3.3% in men and 5.3% in women. The in-hospital mortality of surgically treated rAAA was 39% in men and 48% in women.

CONCLUSION

The hospital incidence of AAA rose from 2005 to 2014, while that of rAAA fell. Endovascular treatment became more common for nrAAA as well as rAAA, and in-hospital mortality fell for both.

Modern Fixed Imaging Systems Reduce Radiation Exposure to Patients and Providers

High-definition fluoroscopic imaging is required to perform endovascular procedures safely and precisely, especially in complex cases, resulting in longer procedures and increased radiation exposure. This is of importance for training institutions as trainees, even with sound instruction in as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) principles, tend to have high radiation exposures. Recently, there was an upgrade in the imaging system allowing for comparison of radiation exposure to patients and providers. We performed an analysis of consecutive endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and superficial femoral artery (SFA) interventions in the years 2013 to 2014. We recorded body mass index (BMI) and fluoroscopy time (FT) and subsequently matched 1:1 based on BMI, FT, or both. We determined radiation dose using air kerma (AK) and also recorded individual surgeons’ badge readings. Allura Xper FD20 was upgraded to AlluraClarity with ClarityIQ. We identified a total of 77 EVARs (52 pre and 25 post) and 134 SFA interventions (99 pre and 35 post). Unmatched results for EVAR were BMI pre 26.2 versus post 25.8 (kg/m2, P = .325), FT 28.1 versus 21.2 (minutes, P = .051), and AK 1178.5 versus 581 (mGy, P < .001), respectively. After matching, there was a 53.2% reduction in AK (846.1 vs 395.9 mGy; P = .004) for EVAR. Unmatched results for SFA interventions were BMI pre 28.1 versus post 26.6 ( P = .327), FT 18.7 versus 16.2 ( P = .282), and AK 285.6 versus 106.0 ( P < .001), respectively. After matching, there was a 57.0% reduction in AK (305.0 vs 131.3, P < .001). The total deep dose equivalent from surgeons’ badge readings decreased from 39.5 to 17 mrem ( P = .029). Aortic and peripheral endovascular interventions can be performed with reduced radiation exposure to patients and providers, employing modern fixed imaging systems with advanced dose reduction technology. This is of particular importance in the light of the increasing volume and complexity of endovascular and hybrid procedures as well as the prospect of decades of radiation exposure during training and practice.