Long-term implications of elective evar that is non-compliant with clinical practice guideline diameter thresholds

Appropriate management of the small abdominal aortic aneurysm

There is variation in the management of small aneurysms in the United States today, with some surgeons moving forward with elective repair and others practice ongoing surveillance. Literature exists to suggest that small aneurysms are repaired at a higher rate than should be considered acceptable, and this represents a deviation from current standards of care. To best understand the optimal care of this patient population, this article aims to evaluate the current management of small aneurysms, review contemporary guidelines and the literature behind them, and assess the appropriateness of surgical management of small aneurysms.

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.

Long-Term Outcomes of Simple Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Based on the Initial Aortic Diameter

PURPOSE

We aimed to investigate the effects of initial abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) diameter on aneurysmal sac expansion/shrinkage, endoleaks, and reintervention postelective simple endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

Overall, 228 patients monitored for >1 year after EVAR were analyzed. Male and female participants with initial AAA diameters <55 mm and <50 mm, respectively, composed the small group (group S), while those with initial AAA diameters ≥55 mm (men) and ≥50 mm (women) composed the large group (group L). Aneurysmal sac expansion of 10 mm and/or reintervention during follow-up (composite event) and its related factors were evaluated.

RESULTS

The 5-year freedom from composite event rate was significantly higher in group S (92.4 ± 2.8%) than that in group L (79.1 ± 4.9%; P <0.01). Multivariate analysis revealed AAA diameters before EVAR in group S (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.81; P = 0.01) and type II endoleak (T2EL) at discharge (hazard ratio, 2.83; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-6.20; P <0.01) as factors associated with the composite event. The freedom from composite event rate decreased to 51 ± 13% at 5 years in group L with T2EL.

CONCLUSIONS

Group S had high freedom from composite event rate; in group L, the rate decreased to 51% at 5 years with T2EL at discharge.

Incidence, reintervention, and survival associated with type II endoleak at hospital discharge after elective endovascular aneurysm repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative

BACKGROUND

The longitudinal clinical significance of type II endoleaks (T2ELs) remains controversial. Specifically, the real-world incidence, need for reintervention, and associated mortality referable to T2ELs remain unknown. Moreover, current professional society clinical practice guidelines recommend differing aneurysm sac growth thresholds to prompt intervention. Therefore, the purpose of this analysis was to better quantify the prevalence of early T2ELs after infrarenal endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and determine its association with reintervention and survival.

METHODS

All elective EVARs from the Vascular Quality Initiative (2010-2020) were examined to identify patients with isolated T2ELs vs no endoleak (NONE) at discharge. Procedures with a type I or III endoleak were excluded. A subgroup analysis was performed on patients surviving beyond the first postoperative year with follow-up data available on endoleaks. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included perioperative mortality and reinterventions. Outcomes were assessed by multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression to adjust for covariates.

RESULTS

We identified 53,697 patients who underwent EVAR. The overall incidence of isolated T2ELs at discharge was 16%. In-hospital mortality was lower for those with isolated T2ELs vs NONE (0.8% vs 1.9%, odds ratio: 0.6, 95% confidence interval: 0.5-0.8, P < .0001). Unadjusted overall survival was marginally higher at 5 years for patients with T2ELs vs NONE (84% vs 82%); however, after risk adjustment, survival was similar (hazard ratio: 0.95, 95% confidence interval: 0.9-1.0). Among 44,345 patients with 1-year follow-up, 66% had data on endoleak status for assessment. Survival was similar regardless of endoleak status (NONE, at discharge only, at follow-up only, or at both time points). Among patients with documented T2ELs during follow-up, 6.1% and 2.5% had abdominal aortic aneurysm sac diameter growth ≥5 mm and ≥10 mm, respectively. Reinterventions occurred in 12%. Rupture (1%) and any open reintervention (4%) were rare among patients with 1-year follow-up. For patients with T2ELs, 5-year survival was similar between those with and without reintervention by 1 year (89% vs 91%, log-rank P = .06).

CONCLUSIONS

T2ELs remain common after EVAR within the Vascular Quality Initiative and are not associated with long-term mortality. Reinterventions for T2ELs were not associated with improved overall survival among patients with T2ELs. Although additional data surrounding the appropriate role of reintervention for T2ELs remain necessary, it appears that the natural history of T2ELs is benign.