Comparative analysis of open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair outcomes across national registries

Preoperative Evaluation and Cardiac Risk Assessment in Vascular Surgery

We summarize epidemiologic trends, outcomes, and preoperative guidelines for vascular surgery patients from 2010 to 2022. Vascular surgery continues to evolve in technology and engineering to treat a surgical population that suffers from a high prevalence of comorbidities. Preoperative optimization seeks to characterize the burden of disease and to achieve medical control in the timeline available before surgery. Risk assessment, evaluation, optimization, and prediction of major adverse cardiac events is an evolving science where the Vascular Surgery Quality Initiative has made an impact. Ongoing investigation may demonstrate value for preoperative echocardiography, functional capacity, frailty, and mobility assessments.

Contemporary Indications for Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in the Endovascular Era

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Despite the emergence of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) as the most common approach to abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, open aneurysm repair (OAR) remains an important option. This study seeks to define the indications for OAR in the EVAR era and how these indications effect outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed of all OAR at a single institution from 2004 to 2019. Pre-operative computed tomography scans and operative records were assessed to determine the indication for OAR. These reasons were categorized into anatomical contraindications; systemic factors (connective tissue disorders, contraindication to contrast dye); and patient/surgeon preference (patients who were candidates for both EVAR and OAR). Perioperative and long-term outcomes were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

370 patients were included in the analysis; 71.6% (265/370) had at least one anatomic contraindication to EVAR; 36% had two or more contraindications. The most common anatomic contraindications were short aortic neck length (51.6%), inadequate distal seal zone (19.2%), and inadequate access vessels (15.7%). The major perioperative complication rate was 18.1% and the 30-day mortality was 3.0%. No single anatomic factor was identified as a predictor of perioperative complications. Sixty-one patients (16.5%) had OAR based on patient/surgeon preference; these patients were younger; had lower incidences of coronary artery disease and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; and they were less likely to require suprarenal cross clamping compared with patients who had anatomic and/or systemic contraindications to EVAR. The patient/surgeon preference group had a lower incidence of perioperative major complications (8.2% versus 20.1%, p=0.034), shorter length of stay (6 versus 8 days, p<0.001) and zero 30-day mortalities. The multivariable adjusted risk for 15-year mortality was lower for patient/surgeon preference patients (adjusted hazard ratio 0.44 [95% confidence interval 0.24-0.80], p=0.007) compared to those anatomic/systemic contraindications.

CONCLUSIONS

Within a population of patients who did not meet instruction for use (IFU) criteria for EVAR, no single anatomic contraindication was a marker for worse outcomes with OAR. Patients who were candidates for both aortic repair approaches but elected to have open surgical repair due to patient/surgeon preference have very low 30-day mortality and morbidity, and superior long-term survival rates compared with those patients who had OAR due to anatomic and/or systemic contraindications to EVAR.