Prospective assessment of health-related quality of life after endovascular repair of pararenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms using fenestrated-branched endografts

Health Related Quality of Life Following Intervention for Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis

BACKGROUND

Thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA) pose significant risks of morbidity and mortality. Considering the evolving techniques for TAAA intervention and the growing interest in quality of life (QoL) outcomes for decision-making, we aimed to evaluate the impact of patient and perioperative characteristics on short-term, medium-term, and long-term postoperative QoL in TAAA repair patients.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in CINAHL, APA PsycINFO, EMBASE, Medline and Cochrane to identify primary research studies evaluating QoL post TAAA surgery, published in English or Swedish between January 01, 2012 and September 26, 2022. A narrative synthesis was reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program and Joanna Briggs Institute checklists.

RESULTS

Eight studies of low or moderate quality with 455 patients were included. Preoperative QoL in TAAA patients was lower compared to the general population. While there is an initial short-term improvement in postoperative QoL, patients fail to reach baseline levels even after 7 years, with physical activity and functioning domains being particularly affected. Experiencing postoperative complications, including paraplegia and cardiovascular events, negatively impacts postoperative QoL. Patients with uncomplicated postoperative status had improved QoL. Prolonged hospital stay negatively affects physical functioning.

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with TAAA are likely to have lower baseline QoL compared to the general population. Following TAAA repair, postoperative QoL may remain lower than baseline levels, persisting over the long-term. Comorbidities, postoperative complications, and hospitalization duration appear to exert adverse effects on postoperative QoL.

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.

Patients' health and quality of life after complex endovascular aortic repair: A prospective cohort study

RATIONALE

Complex endovascular aortic repair often involves multiple major procedures over time with a high risk of complications and little time for recovery. This exposes patients to great stress, both physically and mentally, with potentially long-lasting effects. There is limited knowledge about these effects and who is most at risk - information on this could help vascular nurses and other healthcare professionals anticipate and meet care needs.

AIM

To investigate the health and quality of life effects of complex endovascular aortic repair, in relation to patients' demographic and health characteristics.

DESIGN

A prospective cohort study.

METHODS

Patients undergoing elective complex endovascular aortic repair were consecutively recruited from one university hospital during one year (n=25). Self-report questionnaires on health disability (WHODAS 2.0), quality of life (WHOQoL-BREF) and symptoms of anxiety and depression (HADS) were filled out preoperatively and repeated one and six months postoperatively. Prospective changes in health and quality of life, and associations with patient demographics and preoperative health characteristics, were assessed. Ethical approval was obtained prior to study performance.

RESULTS

Overall, patients had significantly greater health disability at one month (WHODAS 2.0 score median 31.5, range 1.1-63.0) than preoperatively (median 13.6, range 0.0-41.3) (n=22, p=.017); the majority had recovered at six months (median 11.4, range 3.3-58.7) (n=18, p=.042). No significant effects were seen in quality of life and symptoms of anxiety and depression (p>.05). However, the participants showed heterogeneity, with certain individuals not recovered at six months (n=8). Factors associated with worse six-month outcomes were being female, age < 70 years, postoperative complications, and history of anxiety or depression.

CONCLUSIONS

Complex endovascular aortic repair have limited long-term negative effects on patients' health and quality of life. However, some patients are not recovered at six months postoperatively, which could be explained by individual characteristics. To improve recovery outcomes, vascular nurses and other health care professionals should be aware of the possible recovery trajectories and factors associated with impaired recovery, and use them to anticipate and meet the patients' individual care needs.

Debranching abdominal aortic hybrid surgery for aortic diseases involving the visceral arteries

Objective

Aortic diseases involving branches of the visceral arteries mainly include thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (TAAA), aortic dissection (AD) and abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). The focus of treatment is to reconstruct the splanchnic arteries and restore blood supply to the organs. Commonly used methods include thoracoabdominal aortic replacement, thoracic endovascular aortic repair and hybrid approaches. Hybrid surgery for aortic disease involving the visceral arteries, consisting of visceral aortic debranching with retrograde revascularization of the celiac trunk and renal arteries and using stent grafts, has been previously described and may be considered particularly appealing in high-risk patients. This study retrospectively analyzed recorded data of patients and contrasted the outcomes with those of a similar group of patients who underwent conventional open repair surgery.

Methods

Between 2019 and 2022, 72 patients (52 men) with an average age of 61.57 ± 8.66 years (range, 36-79 years) underwent one-stage debranching abdominal aortic hybrid surgery. These patients, the hybrid group, underwent preoperative Computed Tomographic Angiography (CTA) and had been diagnosed with aortic disease (aneurysm or dissection) involving the visceral arteries and were at high risk for open repair. The criteria used to define these patients as high-risk group who are in the need of hybrid treatment were American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class 3 or 4. In all cases, we accomplished total visceral aortic debranching through a previous visceral artery retrograde revascularization with synthetic grafts (customized Y or four-bifurcated grafts), and aortic endovascular repair with one of two different commercially produced stent grafts (Medtronic® and Lifetech®). In some cases, we chose to connect the renal artery to the artificial vessel with a stent graft (Viabahn) and partly or totally anastomosed. We analyzed the results and compared the outcomes of the hybrid group with those of a similar group of 46 patients (36 men) with an average age 54.15 ± 12.12 years (range, 32-76). These 46 patients, the conventional open group, were selected for having had thoracoabdominal aortic replacement between 2019 and 2022.

Results

In the hybrid group, 72 visceral bypasses were completed, and endovascular repair was successful in all cases. No intraoperative deaths occurred. Perioperative mortality was 2.78%, and perioperative morbidity was 9.72% (renal insufficiency in 1, unilateral renal infarction in 5, Intestinal ischemia in 1). At 1-month postoperative CTA showed 2 endoleaks, one of which was intervened. At follow-up, there were unplanned reoperation rate of 4.29% and 5 (7.14%) deaths. The remaining patients' grafts were patent at postoperative CTA and no endoleak or stent graft migration had occurred. In the conventional open group, 1 died intraoperatively, 4 died perioperatively, perioperative mortality was 10.87% and complications were respiratory failure in 5, intestinal paralysis/necrosis in 4, renal insufficiency in 17, and paraplegia in 2. At follow-up, 5 (12.20%) patients presented with synthetic grafts hematoma 4 (9.76%) patient died, and 6 (14.63%) patients required unplanned reoperation intervention.

Conclusion

Hybrid surgery is technically feasible in selected cases. For aortic diseases involving the visceral arteries, the application of hybrid abdominal aorta debranching can simplify the operation process, decrease the risks of mortality and morbidity in high-risk and high-age populations and decrease the incidence of various complications while achieving ideal early clinical efficacy. However, a larger series is required for valid statistical comparisons, and longer follow-ups are necessary to evaluate the long-term efficacy of hybrid surgery.

Characterization of Secondary Interventions After Fenestrated-branched Endovascular Repair of Complex Aortic Aneurysms and Its Effect on Quality of Life and Patient Survival

OBJECTIVE

To assess the impact of secondary intervention (SI) on health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) after fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

BACKGROUND

The effect of SI after FB-EVAR on physical and mental HR-QOL has not been described.

METHODS

A cohort of 430 consecutive patients enrolled in a prospective, nonrandomized study to evaluate FB-EVAR (2013-2020) was assessed with 1325 short-form 36 HR-QOL questionnaires preoperatively and during follow-up visits. SIs were classified as major or minor procedures. Endpoints included patient survival, freedom from aortic-related mortality (ARM), freedom from SIs, and changes in HR-QOL physical component score (PCS) and mental component score.

RESULTS

There were 302 male with mean age 74±8 years treated by FB-EVAR for 133 complex abdominal aortic aneurysms and 297 thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. After a mean follow up of 26±20 months, 97 patients (23%) required 137 SIs. At 5 years, freedom from any SI was 64%±4%, including freedom from minor SIs of 77%±4% and major SIs of 87%±3%. There was no difference in patient survival and freedom from ARM at same interval. On adjusted analysis, minor SIs correlated with improved survival. SIs had a negative correlation with PCS ( r =-0.8). There were no significant changes in mental component score with SIs. Predictors for SIs were fluoroscopy time, graft design, and aneurysm sac change.

CONCLUSION

SIs were needed in nearly 1 out of 4 patients treated by FB-EVAR with no effect on patient survival or ARM. SI resulted in decline in PCS.

Long-Term Survival and Quality of Life After Fenestrated Endovascular Repair for Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

OBJECTIVES

Fenestrated endovascular repair (FEVAR) has become a widely used treatment option for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) but long-term survival and quality of life (QoL) outcomes are scarce. This single center cohort study aims to evaluate both long-term survival and QoL after FEVAR.

METHODS

All juxtarenal and suprarenal AAA patients treated with FEVAR in a single-center between 2002 and 2016 were included. QoL scores, measured by the RAND 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36), were compared with baseline data of the SF-36 provided by RAND.

RESULTS

A total of 172 patients were included at a median follow-up of 5.9 years (IQR 3.0-8.8). Follow-up at 5 and 10 years post-FEVAR yielded survival rates of 59.9% and 18%, respectively. Younger patient age at surgery had a positive influence on 10-year survival and most patients died due to cardiovascular pathology. Emotional well-being was better in the research group as compared to baseline RAND SF-36 1.0 data (79.2 ± 12.4 vs 70.4 ± 22.0; P < 0.001). Physical functioning (50 (IQR 30-85) vs 70.6 ± 27.4; P = 0.007) and health change (51.6 ± 17.0 vs 59.1 ± 23.1; P = 0.020) were worse in the research group as compared to reference values.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term survival was 60% at 5-years follow-up, which is lower than reported in recent literature. An adjusted positive influence of younger age at surgery was found on long-term survival. This could have consequences for future treatment indication in complex AAA surgery but further large-scale validation is necessary.

Reintervention Does Not Impact Long-term Survival After Fenestrated Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

OBJECTIVES

Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) is increasingly used in the treatment of juxtarenal aortic aneurysms and short-neck infrarenal aneurysms. Reinterventions (REIs) occur frequently, contributing to patient morbidity and resource utilization. We sought to determine if REIs impact long-term survival after FEVAR.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective review of all Cook ZFEN repairs was performed. Patients with ≥6 months follow-up and without adjunctive branch modifications were included. REI was defined as any aneurysm, device, target branch, or access-related intervention after the index procedure. REIs were categorized by early (<30 days) or late (≥30 days), indication (branch, endoleak, limb, access-related, or other), and target branch/device component. Patients were stratified into REI vs No REI and Branch REI vs Non-Branch REI.

RESULTS

Of 219 consecutive ZFEN from 2012-2021, 158 patients met inclusion criteria. Forty-one (26%) patients underwent a total of 51 REIs (10 early, 41 late) over a mean follow-up of 33.9 months. The most common indication for REI was branch-related 61% (31/51), with the renal arteries most frequently affected 51% (26/51). The only differences found in baseline, aneurysm, or device characteristics were a higher mean SVS comorbidity score (9.6 vs 7.9, P=.04) and larger suprarenal neck angle (23.3 vs 17.1 degrees, P=.04) in No REI, while REI had larger mean proximal seal zone diameter (26.3 vs 25.1 mm, P=.03) and device diameter (31.9 vs 30.0 mm, P=.002) than No REI. Technical success and operative characteristics were similar between groups, except for longer mean fluoroscopy time (74.9 vs 60.8 min, P=.01) and longer median length of stay (2 vs 2 days, P=.006) in REI. While the rate of early major adverse events (<30 days) was higher in REI (24.4% vs 6.0%, P=.001), 30-day mortality was not statistically different (4.9% vs 0.9%, P=.10). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, freedom from REI at 1- and 5-years was 85.7% and 62.6%, respectively, in the overall cohort. There was no difference in estimated 5-year survival between REI and No REI (62.8% vs 63.5%, log-rank P=.87) and Branch REI and Non-Branch REI (71.8% vs 49.9%, log-rank P=.16). In multivariate analysis, REI did not predict mortality; age, the SVS comorbidity score, and preoperative maximum aneurysm diameter each increased the hazard of death (HR 1.07 95% CI 1.02-1.12, P=.007; HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01-1.18, P=.02; HR 1.05, 95% CI 1.02-1.08, P=.003 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Following ZFEN, 26% of patients required a total of 51 REIs with most occurring ≥30 days and 61% being branch-related, with no influence on 5-year survival. Age, comorbidity, and baseline aneurysm diameter independently predicted mortality. FEVAR mandates lifelong surveillance and protocols to maintain branch patency. Despite their relative frequency, REIs do not influence 5-year post-procedural survival.

Endovascular repair for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms: current status and future challenges

Open surgical repair has been the gold standard for treatment of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAA). Currently, open surgical repair has been reserved mostly for young and fit patients with connective tissue disorders, using separate branch vessel reconstructions instead of 'island' patches, and distal perfusion instead of a 'clamp and go' technique. Endovascular repair has gained widespread acceptance because of its potential to significantly decrease morbidity and mortality. Several large aortic centers have developed dedicated clinical programs to advance techniques of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) using patient-specific and off-the-shelf devices, which offers a less-invasive alternative to open repair. Although FB-EVAR was initially considered an option for older and frail patients, many centers have expanded its indications to any patient with suitable anatomy and no evidence of connective tissue disorders, independent of their clinical risk. In this article, we review current techniques and outcomes of endovascular TAAA repair.

Functional Performance After Complex Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study

Purpose

Complex endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) procedures provide a treatment option for patients with aortic aneurysms involving visceral branches. Good technical results and short-term outcomes have been reported. Whether complex EVAR provides acceptable functional outcomes is not clear. The current study aims to describe postoperative functional outcomes in complex EVAR patients—an older and relatively frail patient group.

Materials and Methods

A single-center retrospective cohort study was performed, using data from a computerized database of consecutive patients who underwent complex EVAR in the Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC, The Netherlands) between July 2013 and September 2020. As of May 2017, patients scheduled for complex EVAR were referred to a geriatric care pathway to determine (Instrumental) Activities of Daily Living ((I)ADL) scores at baseline and, if informed consent was given, after 12 months. For the total patient group, adverse functional performance outcomes were: discharge to a nursing home and 12-month mortality. For the patients included in geriatric follow-up, the additional outcome was the incidence of functional decline (defined by a ≥2 point increase in (I)ADL-score) at 12-month follow-up

Results

Eighty-two patients underwent complex EVAR, of which 68 (82.9%) were male. Mean age was 73.3 years (SD=6.3). Within 30 days postsurgery, 6 patients (7.3%) died. Mortality within 12 months for the total patient group was 14.6% (n=12). After surgery, no patients had to be discharged to a nursing home. Fifteen patients (18.3%) were discharged to a rehabilitation center. Twenty-three patients gave informed consent and were included in geriatric follow-up. Five patients (21.7%) presented functional decline 12 months postsurgery and 4 patients had died (17.4%) by that time. This means that 39.1% of the patients in the care pathway suffered an adverse outcome.

Conclusion

To our knowledge, this is the only study that examined functional performance after complex EVAR, using a prospectively maintained database. No patients were newly discharged to a nursing home and functional performance results at 12 months are promising. Future multidisciplinary research should focus on determining which patients are most prone to deterioration of function, so that efforts can be directed toward preventing postoperative functional decline.

Psoas muscle area and attenuation are highly predictive of complications and mortality after complex endovascular aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

The present study evaluated the psoas muscle area and attenuation (radiodensity), quantified by computed tomography, together with clinical risk assessment, as predictors of outcomes after fenestrated and branched endovascular aortic repair (FBEVAR).

METHODS

The present single-center study included 504 patients who had undergone elective FBEVAR for pararenal or thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms. The clinical risk assessment included age, sex, comorbidities, body mass index, glomerular filtration rate, aneurysm size and extent, cardiac stress test results, ejection fraction, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score. Preoperative computed tomography was used to measure the psoas muscle area and attenuation at the L3 level. The lean psoas muscle area (LPMA; area in cm² multiplied by attenuation in Hounsfield units [HU]) was calculated by multiplying the area by the attenuation. The risk factors for 90-day mortality, major adverse events (MAEs), and long-term mortality were determined using multivariable analysis. MAEs included 30-day or in-hospital death, acute kidney injury, myocardial infarction, respiratory failure, paraplegia, stroke, and bowel ischemia. A novel risk stratification method was proposed according to the strongest predictors of mortality and MAEs on multivariable analysis.

RESULTS

The 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, and MAE rates were 2.0%, 5.6%, and 20%, respectively. The independent predictors of 90-day mortality were chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, ASA score, and LPMA. The independent predictors of MAEs were aneurysm diameter, glomerular filtration rate, and LPMA. For long-term mortality, the independent predictors were chronic kidney disease, congestive heart failure, extent I-III thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms, ASA score, and LPMA. The patients were stratified into three groups according to the ASA score and LPMA: low risk, ASA score II or LPMA >350 cm²HU (n = 290); medium risk, ASA score III and LPMA ≤350 cm²HU (n = 181); and high risk, ASA score IV and LPMA ≤350 cm²HU (n = 33). The 90-day mortality and MAE rates were 1.7% and 16% in the low-, 7.2% and 24% in the medium-, and 30% and 33% in the high-risk patients, respectively (P < .001 and P = .02, respectively). Patients with ASA score IV and LPMA <200 cm²HU, indicating sarcopenia (n = 14) had a 43% risk of death within 90 days. The 3-year survival estimates were 80% ± 3% for the low-, 70% ± 4% for the medium-, and 35% ± 9% for the high-risk patients (P < .001). The mean follow-up time was 3.1 ± 2.3 years.

CONCLUSIONS

LPMA was a strong predictor of outcomes and the only independent predictor of both mortality and MAEs after FBEVAR. A high muscle mass was protective against complications, regardless of the ASA score. Risk stratification based on the ASA score and LPMA can be used to identify patients at excessively high operative risk.

Effect of obesity on radiation exposure, quality of life scores, and outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair of pararenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND

The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of obesity on procedural metrics, radiation exposure, quality of life (QOL), and clinical outcomes of fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) of pararenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms.

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical data from 334 patients (236 men; mean age, 75 ± 8 years) enrolled in a prospective nonrandomized study to evaluate FB-EVAR from 2013 to 2019. The patients were classified using the body mass index (BMI) as obese (BMI ≥30 kg/m²) or nonobese (BMI <30 kg/m²). QOL questionnaires (short-form 36-item questionnaire) and imaging studies were obtained preoperatively and at 2 months and 6 months postoperatively, and annually thereafter. The procedures were performed using two different fixed imaging systems. The end points included procedural metrics (ie, total operative time, fluoroscopic time, contrast volume), radiation exposure, technical success, 30-day mortality, and major adverse events, QOL changes, freedom from target vessel instability, freedom from reintervention, and patient survival.

RESULTS

The aneurysm extent was a pararenal aortic aneurysm in 117 patients (35%) and a thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm in 217 patients (65%). Both groups had similar demographics, cardiovascular risk factors, and aneurysm extent, except for a greater incidence of hyperlipidemia and diabetes among the obese patients (P < .05). No significant differences were found in the procedural metrics or intraprocedural complications between the groups, except that the obese patients had greater radiation exposure than the nonobese patients (mean, 2.5 vs 1.6 Gy; P < .001), with the highest radiation exposure in those obese patients who had undergone the procedure using system 1 (fusion alone) instead of system 2 (fusion and digital zoom; mean, 4.1 vs 1.5 Gy; P < .001). Three patients had died within 30 days (0.8%), with no difference in mortality or major adverse events between the groups. The mental QOL scores had improved in the obese group at 2 and 12 months compared with the nonobese patients, with persistently higher scores up to 3 years. At 3 years, the obese and nonobese patients had a similar incidence of freedom from target vessel instability (74% ± 6% vs 80% ± 3%; P = .99, log-rank test), freedom from reintervention (66% ± 6% vs 73% ± 4%; P = .77, log-rank test), and patient survival (83% ± 5% vs 75% ± 4%; P = .16, log-rank test).

CONCLUSIONS

FB-EVAR was performed with high technical success and low mortality and morbidity, with no significant differences between the obese and nonobese patients. The procedural metrics and outcomes were similar, with the exception of greater radiation exposure among obese patients, especially for the procedures performed using system 1 with fusion alone compared with system 2 (fusion and digital zoom). Obese patients had higher QOL mental scores at 2 and 12 months, with a similar reintervention rate, target vessel outcomes, and survival compared with nonobese patients.

Reporting standards for endovascular aortic repair of aneurysms involving the renal-mesenteric arteries

Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair of complex aortic aneurysms requires incorporation of side branches using specially designed aortic stent grafts with fenestrations, directional branches, or parallel stent grafts. These techniques have been increasingly used and reported in the literature. The purpose of this document is to clarify and to update terminology, classification systems, measurement techniques, and end point definitions that are recommended for reports dealing with endovascular repair of complex abdominal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms involving the renal and mesenteric arteries.

A scoping review of the rationale and evidence for cost-effectiveness analysis of fenestrated-branched endovascular repair for intact complex aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND

Cost-effectiveness analysis of new interventions is increasingly required by policymakers. For intact complex aortic aneurysms (CAAs), fenestrated-branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F/B-EVAR) offers a minimally invasive alternative option for patients who are physically ineligible for open surgical repair (OSR). Thus, F/B-EVAR is increasingly used, but whether it represents a cost-effective treatment option remains unknown.

METHODS

A scoping review of the literature was conducted from the PubMed, Ovid Embase, and Scopus databases. They were searched to identify relevant English-language articles published from inception to December 31, 2019. All costs in the identified literature were transformed to U.S. dollar values by the following exchange rate: 1 GBP = 1.3 USD; 1 EUR = 1.1 USD.

RESULTS

At this literature search, no randomized clinical trials assessing cost-effectiveness of F/B-EVAR vs OSR for intact CAAs were found. Also, no health economic evaluation studies were found regarding use of F/B-EVAR in patients unfit for OSR. A Markov model analysis based on seven observational center- or registry-based studies published from 2006 to 2014 found that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for F/B-EVAR vs OSR was $96,954/quality-adjusted life-year. In the multicenter French Medical and Economical Evaluation of Fenestrated and Branched Stent-grafts to Treat Complex Aortic Aneurysms (WINDOW) registry (2010-2012), F/B-EVAR had a higher cost than OSR for a similar clinical outcome and was therefore economically dominated. At 2 years, costs were higher with F/B-EVAR for juxtarenal/pararenal aneurysms and infradiaphragmatic thoracoabdominal aneurysms but similar for supradiaphragmatic thoracoabdominal aneurysms. The higher costs were related to a $24,278 cost difference of the initial admission (95% of the difference at 2 years) due to stent graft costs. Both these studies, however, included a highly varying center experience with complex endovascular aortic repair, and their retrospective design is subject to selection bias for chosen treatment, which could affect the studied outcome. In contrast, in a more recent U.S. database analysis (879 thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repairs, 45% OSRs), the unadjusted total hospitalization cost of OSR was significantly higher compared with F/B-EVAR (median, $44,355 vs $36,612; P = .004). In-hospital mortality as well as major complications were two to three times higher after OSR, indicating that endovascular repair might be the economically dominant strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

The literature regarding cost-effectiveness analysis of F/B-EVAR for intact CAAs is scarce and ambiguous. Based on the limited nonrandomized available evidence, stent grafts are the main driver for F/B-EVAR expenses, whereas cost-effectiveness in relation to OSR may vary by health care setting and selection of patients.