The endovascular management of ruptured abdominal aortic 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.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the use of resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta in the management of major exsanguination

BACKGROUND

Circulatory collapse is a leading cause of mortality among traumatic major exsanguination and in ruptured aortic aneurysm patients. Approximately 40% of patients die before hemorrhage control is achieved. Resuscitative endovascular balloon occlusion of the aorta (REBOA) is an adjunct designed to sustain the circulation until definitive surgical or endovascular repair. A systematic review was conducted for the current clinical use of REBOA in patients with hemodynamic instability and to discuss its potential role in improving prehospital and in-hospital outcome.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis (1900-2017) using MEDLINE, Cochrane, EMBASE, Web of Science and Central and Emcare using the keywords "aortic balloon occlusion", "aortic balloon tamponade", "REBOA", and "Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion" in combination with hemorrhage control, hemorrhage, resuscitation, shock, ruptured abdominal or thoracic aorta, endovascular repair, and open repair. Original published studies on human subjects were considered.

RESULTS

A total of 490 studies were identified; 89 met criteria for inclusion. Of the 1436 patients, overall reported mortality was 49.2% (613/1246) with significant differences (p < 0.001) between clinical indications. Hemodynamic shock was evident in 79.3%, values between clinical indications showed significant difference (p < 0.001). REBOA was favored as treatment in trauma patients in terms of mortality. Pooled analysis demonstrated an increase in mean systolic pressure by almost 50 mmHg following REBOA use.

CONCLUSION

REBOA has been used in trauma patients and ruptured aortic aneurysm patients with improvement of hemodynamic parameters and outcomes for several decades. Formal, prospective study is warranted to clarify the role of this adjunct in all hemodynamic unstable patients.

Mortality rates and risk factors for emergent open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in the endovascular era

The background of this paper is to report the mortality at 30 and 90 days and at mean follow-up after open abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) emergent repair and to identify predictive risk factors for 30- and 90-day mortality. Between 1997 and 2002, 104 patients underwent emergent AAA open surgery. Symptomatic and ruptured AAAs were observed, respectively, in 21 and 79% of cases. Mean patient age was 70 (SD 9.2) years. Mean aneurysm maximal diameter was 7.4 (SD 1.6) cm. Primary endpoints were 30- and 90-day mortality. Significant mortality-related risk factor identification was the secondary endpoint. Open repair trend and its related perioperative mortality with a per-year analysis and a correlation subanalysis to identify predictive mortality factor were performed. Mean follow-up time was 23 (SD 23) months. Overall, 30-day mortality was 30%. Significant mortality-related risk factors were the use of computed tomography (CT) as a preoperative diagnostic tool, AAA rupture, preoperative shock, intraoperative cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), use of aortic balloon occlusion, intraoperative massive blood transfusion (MBT), and development of abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS). Previous abdominal surgery was identified as a protective risk factor. The mortality rate at 90 days was 44%. Significant mortality-related risk factors were AAA rupture, aortocaval fistula, peripheral artery disease (PAD), preoperative shock, CPR, MBT, and ACS. The mortality rate at follow-up was 45%. Correlation analysis showed that MBT, shock, and ACS are the most relevant predictive mortality factor at 30 and 90 days. During the transition period from open to endovascular repair, open repair mortality outcomes remained comparable with other contemporary data despite a selection bias for higher risk patients. MBT, shock, and ACS are the most pronounced predictive mortality risk factors.

Management of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Decade of Progress

Since the world was first introduced to the concept of endovascular aneurysm repair by Parodi's landmark procedures in 1990, stent-grafts have assumed a prominent role in the management of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Most modern systems are trackable, accurate, and secure. The resulting endovascular procedure is safe, durable, effective, and versatile. Perhaps the most significant increment in the applicability of the endovascular technique was achieved by the development of bifurcated stent-grafts, which dispensed with inadequate distal aortic implantation sites. Additional branches and fenestrations now permit endovascular repair in cases of thoracoabdominal, pararenal, juxtarenal, and bilateral iliac aneurysms. These advances in device performance have been accompanied by a rapid dissemination of necessary skills, leading to the development of a new superspecialty of vascular therapy, with elements of vascular surgery, interventional radiology, and interventional cardiology.

Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: Endovascular Repair Does Not Confer Any Long-term Survival Advantage Over Open Repair

Recent studies have suggested that endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) may reduce the perioperative mortality of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Whether EVAR confers any long-term survival advantage over published results for open repair of ruptured AAA has not been established. We conducted a single-center retrospective study over a 10-year period (1994–2004) examining the long-term outcome of patients who have undergone endovascular repair of ruptured AAA. Fifty-four patients underwent endovascular repair of a ruptured AAA. The median age was 75 years (interquartile range 69.5–79.5 years); 42 (78%) patients were male. The perioperative mortality rate was 37%. During a median follow-up of 32 months (range 14–48 months), there were 5 aneurysm-related and 13 non-aneurysm-related deaths. Overall, the 3- and 5-year survival rates were 36% and 26%, respectively. EVAR does not appear to confer any overall survival advantage in the mid- to long term compared with the published results for open repair. The reasons for this remain unclear. Further, larger studies are required to confirm these results.

Amsterdam Acute Aneurysm Trial: Background, Design, and Methods

The objective of the Amsterdam Acute Aneurysm Trial is to study the combined outcome of conventional emergency surgery versus endovascular treatment for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms. The design used was a multicenter randomized clinical trial conducted in two university hospitals and one teaching hospital in the Amsterdam region. The study included all patients with a ruptured abdominal aneurysm who were eligible for endovascular and conventional surgery. The primary end points were combined mortality and severe morbidity. The secondary end points were quality of life and cost-effectiveness. The background, design, and methods of this trial are presented, and the ethical and legal issues of this type of research are discussed.

Endovascular versus open repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms

Although major improvement has occurred to make elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms a safe procedure, the incidence of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms and mortality rates are still disappointing. Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair has produced quantum changes in aneurysm treatment. The successful application of the endovascular approach for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms in the elective setting has prompted a strong interest regarding its possible use in dealing with the long-standing challenge of a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Since the first report, several centers have reported results and a wide spectrum of opinion regarding its application, with special consideration to logistical and practical barriers for appropriate utilization. The purpose of this article is to review all the available literature on the endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms and to analyze the most recent trends in their management, with special consideration given to comparing results of conventional and endovascular approaches.

Endovascular treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms: aorto-uni-iliac or bifurcated endograft?

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the safety and technical and clinical success rates of positioning endovascular endografts (EG) in ruptured abdominal aneurysms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm confirmed by contrast-enhanced computed tomography angiography (CTA) were eligible for the analysis. Of 67 patients, 42 (62.7%) were treated with EG. Thirteen patients (30.9%) received an aorto-uni-iliac EG (group A) and 29 a bifurcated EG (group B). Patients were divided for comparative analysis according to the configuration of the EG implanted.

RESULTS

The primary technical success rate was 100%; the primary clinical success rate was 95% (40/42). There were two intraoperative deaths (4.7%) related to intractable shock. No patient required conversion to open repair. Overall, 12 patients (28.5%) died within 30 days. The in-hospital death rate was 30.9% (13/42). Hospital mortality rate was statistically higher in group A; the type of EG and intensive care unit admission were the only independent predictors of hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, a higher mortality rate was observed for the aorto-uni-iliac configuration; shock at admission was confirmed as the most important factor for postoperative survival.

Propensity scored analysis of outcomes after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm

Background

This study examined the population outcome of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) in England, the role of endovascular repair (EVAR), and the relationship between outcome and hospital workload.

Methods

Data were retrieved from Hospital Episode Statistics between 1 April 2003 and 31 March 2008. Propensity scoring was used to compare the outcomes of stratified patients undergoing EVAR and open repair. The relationship between workload and outcome was determined.

Results

Some 3725 urgent and 4414 rAAA repairs were included. Mortality rates were 21·3 per cent for urgent repair and 46·3 per cent for rAAA repair. EVAR was employed for 16·3 and 7·6 per cent of urgent and rAAA repairs respectively. EVAR was associated with significantly reduced mortality for urgent repair (odds ratio (OR) 0·531, 95 per cent confidence interval 0·415 to 0·680; P &lt; 0·001) and rAAA repair (OR 0·527, 0·416 to 0·668; P &lt; 0·001). A propensity scored analysis confirmed the benefit of EVAR for rAAA repair (P &lt; 0·001). Repair of rAAA at hospitals with a higher elective aneurysm workload was associated with lower mortality rates irrespective of the mode of treatment (P &lt; 0·001). Higher-volume hospitals were more likely to operate on rAAA (P = 0·033).

Conclusion

EVAR offered a survival advantage over open repair for non-elective aneurysm procedures. Services for the treatment of rAAA should incorporate access to EVAR and would benefit from being based in units with a high elective caseload.

Endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: A strategy in need of definitive evidence

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular strategies have been increasingly used to manage patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in an attempt to improve patient survival. We analyzed the evidence to support such an approach.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature review of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of ruptured AAA from 1994 to 2009. The literature analyzed included systematic reviews and population-based studies of ruptured AAA.

RESULTS

Seven systematic reviews were identified, all demonstrating from published data that patients with EVAR of ruptured AAA had significantly reduced mortality compared with controls. Six recently published population-based studies from the United States demonstrated low mortality rates associated with EVAR; however, only a small proportion of ruptured AAAs were treated by EVAR. Systematic reviews and population-based studies both raised concerns about patient selection and publication bias. Two randomized trials are in progress, and one is due to commence 2009.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcome of EVAR in a nonselected patient population remains unknown. One or more definitive randomized trials could provide the level I evidence to resolve these issues.

Endovascular Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair (EVRAR): A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

To review evidence supporting the use of endovascular ruptured aneurysm repair (EVRAR) for treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA).

METHODS

A systematic review of the medical literature was performed for relevant studies. We searched a number of electronic databases and hand-searched relevant journals until November 2006 to identify studies for inclusion. We considered studies in which patients with a confirmed ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm were treated with EVRAR, which reported endpoints of mortality and major complications.

RESULTS

There was 1 randomised controlled trial (RCT), 33 non-randomised case series (24 retrospective and 9 prospective) reports were identified comparing EVRAR (n=891) with conventional open surgical repair for the treatment of RAAA. Whilst no benefit in the primary outcome of mortality was noted in the only RCT, evidence from non-randomised studies suggest that EVRAR is feasible in selected patients, where it may be associated with a trend towards reductions in blood loss, duration of intensive care treatment, early complications, and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

For the treatment of symptomatic or ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm, emergency endovascular repair (EVRAR) is feasible in selected patients, with early outcomes comparable to best conventional open surgical repair for the treatment of RAAA.

The Amsterdam Acute Aneurysm Trial: Suitability and Application Rate for Endovascular Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

PURPOSE

To evaluate anatomical suitability and application rate for endovascular repair of patients with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA).

METHODS

The Amsterdam Acute Aneurysm trial is a multicenter randomised trial comparing open with endovascular treatment in patients with a RAAA (International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) 66212637). Between April 2004 and January 2006, all consecutive patients with clinical suspicion of a RAAA at presentation were assessed prospectively. Anatomical suitability for endovascular repair was based on use of an aorto-uni-iliac endovascular graft and assessed in patients with a proven aortic rupture on CT angiography (CTA).

RESULTS

In 128/256 patients, presenting with clinical suspicion of a ruptured aneurysm, RAAA was diagnosed. 105 patients were brought to a trial center and CTA confirmed RAAA in 83 patients. In 38 of 83 patients (45.8%) with positive CTA, the anatomy of the aorta and iliac arteries was considered suitable for endovascular repair. Exclusion from endovascular repair was due to unsuitable infrarenal neck or iliac anatomy (37 and 8 patients respectively). Overall, endovascular treatment was applicable in 38/128 patients (29.7%) with a RAAA in the Amsterdam region and in 38 out of 105 patients (35.5%) admitted to the trial centers.

CONCLUSION

In this prospective cohort of all patients with a RAAA in the Amsterdam Acute Aneurysm Trial region, the suitability for endovascular repair in patients with a RAAA confirmed on CTA is 45.8%, but the application rate was lower.

Endovascular treatment for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm

BACKGROUND

An abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) (the pathological enlargement of the aorta) can develop in both men and women as they grow older. It is most commonly seen in men over the age of 65 years. Progressive aneurysm enlargement can lead to rupture and massive internal bleeding, a fatal event unless timely repair can be achieved. Despite improvements in perioperative care, mortality remains high (approximately 50%) after conventional open surgical repair. A newer minimally invasive technique, endovascular repair, has been shown to reduce early morbidity and mortality, as compared to conventional open surgery, for planned AAA repair. Emergency endovascular repair (eEVAR) has been used successfully to treat ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA), proving that it is feasible in selected patients. However, it is not yet known if eEVAR will lead to significant improvements in outcomes for these patients or indeed if it can replace conventional open repair as the preferred treatment for this lethal condition.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the advantages and disadvantages of eEVAR in comparison with conventional open surgical repair for the treatment of RAAA.

SEARCH STRATEGY

The Cochrane Peripheral Vascular Diseases Group searched their trials register (last searched October 2006) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) database (last searched Issue 4, 2006). We searched a number of electronic databases and handsearched relevant journals until March 2006 to identify studies for inclusion.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in which patients with a confirmed ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm were randomly allocated to eEVAR, or conventional open surgical repair.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies identified for potential inclusion were independently assessed for eligibility by at least two reviewers, with excluded studies further checked by the agreed arbitrators. As no randomised controlled trials were identified at present no tests of heterogeneity or sensitivity analysis were performed.

MAIN RESULTS

There were no randomised controlled trials identified at present comparing eEVAR with conventional open surgical repair for the treatment of RAAA.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no high quality evidence to support the use of eEVAR in the treatment of RAAA. However, evidence from prospective controlled studies without randomisation, prospective studies, and retrospective case series suggest that eEVAR is feasible in selected patients, with outcomes comparable to best conventional open surgical repair for the treatment of RAAA . Furthermore, endovascular repair in selected patients may be associated with a trend towards reductions in blood loss, duration of intensive care treatment, and mortality.

A single-center experience in open and endovascular treatment of hemodynamically unstable and stable patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

To retrospectively compare a single center's immediate and mid-term outcomes of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm open and endovascular repair (EVAR) for two patient groups-hemodynamically stable and unstable patients-in the same time period.

METHODS

Patients presenting at our center with confirmed rupture of an abdominal aortic aneurysm between December 1999 and April 2006 were considered according to an intention-to-treat model with EVAR. Patients with symptomatic or acute (but not ruptured) AAAs were not included in this study. Thirty-three patients underwent EVAR, and 91 underwent open repair. Seventy-two patients (EVAR, 45%; open, 63%) were classified as hemodynamically unstable at arrival, and 52 were classified as stable (EVAR, 55%; open, 37%). Ninety-seven percent of EVAR procedures commenced under local anesthesia, and 100% of open repairs occurred with general anesthesia. Overall successful graft deployment, 30-day mortality, overall reintervention rate, and complications were the study primary end points.

RESULTS

Overall successful graft deployment for EVAR was 91%; for open repair, it was 96%. Overall 30-day mortality for EVAR was 30% (unstable, 53%; stable, 11%), and the rate was 46% for open repair (unstable, 61%; stable, 21%). The EVAR postoperative reintervention rate (within 30 days) was 15% (unstable, 20%; stable, 11%), and for open repair it was 10% (unstable, 9%; stable, 15%). We recorded a 27% severe complication rate for EVAR patients (unstable, 40%; stable, 17%), and for patients treated with open repair, it was 33% (unstable, 35%; stable, 29%). Our overall EVAR eligibility rate was 52%, and our overall EVAR treatment rate was 27%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study's overall results for EVAR remain encouraging when compared with those of conventional repair, but large randomized trials are required to confirm the efficacy of the procedure.

Successful endovascular treatment of infrarenal aortic rupture after chemotherapy of a mesenchymal periaortic tumor

PURPOSE

To report the first successful endovascular repair of a non-aneurysmal aortic rupture due to periaortic tumour regression.

CASE REPORT

A 58-year-old man developed spontaneous infrarenal aortic rupture following chemotherapy which led to regression of a periaortic mesothelioma that had been diagnosed during explorative laparotomy 11 months earlier. Stent-graft placement was performed with intentional conversion of a bifurcated (Zenith, COOK) into an aorto-uni-iliac system. No complications were encountered during a 40 months follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Endovascular repair should be considered as a treatment option in non-aneurysmal aortic rupture.

A Randomised Trial of Endovascular and Open Surgery for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm – Results of a Pilot Study and Lessons Learned for Future Studies

INTRODUCTION

EVAR has the potential to improve outcome after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Published series have been based upon selected populations.

METHODS

An interim analysis of a single centre prospective randomised controlled trial comparing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with open aneurysm repair (OAR) in patients with ruptured AAA was performed. Patients who had a ruptured AAA and who were considered fit for open repair were randomised to EVAR or OAR after consent had been obtained. Those in the EVAR group had pre-operative spiral computed tomographic angiography (CTA). The primary endpoint was operative (30-day) mortality and secondary endpoints were moderate or severe operative complications, hospital stay and time between diagnosis and operation. A power study calculation required 100 patients to be recruited.

RESULTS

Between September 2002 and December 2004, 103 patients were admitted with suspected ruptured AAA. Only 32 patients were recruited to the study. Of these, four patients died before receiving surgical treatment. On an intention to treat basis the 30-day mortality rate was 53% in the EVAR group and 53% in the OAR group. Moderate or severe operative complications occurred in 77% in the EVAR group and in 80% in the OAR group. Median total hospital stay in the EVAR group was 10 days (inter-quartile range 6-28) and 12 days (4-52) in the OAR group. Median time between diagnosis and operation was 75 minutes (64-126) in the EVAR group and 100 minutes (48-138) in the OAR group.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the relative high operative mortality in the EVAR group, these preliminary results show that it is possible to recruit patients to a randomised trial of OAR and EVAR in patients with ruptured AAA. CT scanning does not delay treatment.

Is emergency endovascular aneurysm repair associated with higher secondary intervention risk at mid-term follow-up?

OBJECTIVE

The study assessed mid-term outcome of emergency endovascular repair for acute infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms, with special attention to secondary interventions.

METHODS

Between May 1998 and August 2005, 56 patients underwent emergent endovascular repair for a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (n = 34) or an acute nonruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (n = 22). During the same period, 322 consecutive patients underwent elective endovascular aneurysm repair and were used as control group. Five types of stent grafts were used: Vanguard, Talent, Excluder, Zenith, and Quantum. Follow-up included abdominal radiograph, duplex ultrasound scanning, and computed tomographic angiography. Outcome measures included all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality, complications, and secondary interventions.

RESULTS

Mortality at 30 days was 18%, 5%, and 1% in the ruptured, acute nonruptured, and elective aneurysm groups, respectively. Overall mean follow-up was 38 +/- 26 months. In the ruptured aneurysm group, survival was 67.8% +/- 8.6% at 1 year and 62.1% +/- 9.5% at 2 and 3 years. Seven secondary interventions (4 early and 3 late) were required in five patients (15%), with a cumulative risk of 9.2% +/- 5.1% at 1 year and 16.2% +/- 8.2% at 2 and 3 years. In the acute nonruptured aneurysm group, survival was 90.9% +/- 6.1% at 1 year, 84.8% +/- 8.2% at 2 years, and 76.4% +/- 10.9% at 3 years. Four secondary interventions (1 early and 3 late) were required in four patients (18%), with a cumulative risk of 9.6% +/- 6.5% at 1 and 2 years and 20.9% +/- 12.0% at 3 years. In the elective aneurysm (control) group, survival was 95.2% +/- 1.2% at 1 year, 89.9% +/- 1.8% at 2 years, and 86.2% +/- 2.1% at 3 years. A total of 51 secondary interventions (4 early, 47 late) were required in 38 patients (12%), with a cumulative risk of 4.2% +/- 1.1% at 1 year, 7.6% +/- 1.6% at 2 years, and 12.9% +/- 2.2% at 3 years.

CONCLUSIONS

To our surprise, emergency endovascular aneurysm repair did not present with higher secondary intervention rate at mid-term follow-up.

An intention-to-treat by endovascular repair policy may reduce overall mortality in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm

OBJECTIVE

The use of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) has been restricted to a small number of specialized units on a selected group of patients. The aim of this study is to assess if the overall mortality in these patients with ruptured AAA may be reduced in a unit where all patients with ruptured AAA are considered first for EVAR.

METHODS

During a 24-month period beginning in July 2002, 51 patients admitted with ruptured AAA were considered for EVAR as the treatment of choice and comprised the study group. EVAR was performed in 17 patients. Open repair was performed in 34 patients: 13 patients had hemodynamic instability and 16 patients had an unsuitable aortic neck anatomy. The study group was compared with a historical control group of 41 patients with ruptured AAA who were treated by open repair from July 2000 to June 2002.

RESULTS

Mortality rate was 39% in the study group compared with 59% in the control group (P = .065). The duration of stay in the intensive care unit was significantly lower in the study group than in the control group (P = .01), although the total in-hospital stay was similar (17 days vs 14 days, P = .83). Within the study group, EVAR patients had a mortality rate of 24% compared with 47% in the open group (P = .14).

CONCLUSION

Although the number of patients was small, offering EVAR to as many patients as possible with ruptured AAA has resulted in a 20% reduction in mortality, albeit statistically insignificant. However, it is in the unstable patients that EVAR will need to improve survival before it may be hailed to supersede the conventional approach.

Techniques in occluding the aorta during endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms

Among various methods to achieve rapid occlusion of the aorta during endovascular repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm, particular emphasis is placed on two techniques that have been incorporated into our endovascular repair practice. The sheath-over-balloon technique (the Loan SOB technique) facilitates hemodynamic stability by transfemoral endovascular placement of an aortic occlusion balloon catheter to the infrarenal abdominal aorta. The balloon-ahead-of-graft technique (the Hornsby BAG technique) allows suprarenal hemodynamic control using a stent-graft system with a built-in balloon. The two techniques are simple, quick, and effective in achieving hemodynamic stability.

Endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: feasibility and impact on early outcome

PURPOSE

Open repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) still has a high associated mortality rate. The impact of the introduction of endovascular treatment on the early outcomes of ruptured AAAs was examined at a single institution. The suitability of acute endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in patients with ruptured AAAs was also assessed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective review was conducted in 39 consecutive patients treated for ruptured AAA from 2001 to 2004. The patients were divided into 15 who underwent open repair from 2001 to 2002 (group I) and 24 who were treated with open repair (n=13; 54%) or endovascular repair (n=11; 46%) from 2003 to 2004 (group II). Hospital charts and computed tomographic scans were reviewed to evaluate the feasibility of EVAR.

RESULTS

Age, sex, and aneurysm size were similar between the two groups. The 30-day mortality rates were 53% in group I and 8% in group II (P=.003). Median procedure times were shorter in the patients who underwent EVAR. Intensive care unit stay and hospital stay were 22.0 days+/-29.6 and 29.7 days+/-33.8, respectively, in group I, and 5.6 days+/-4.4 and 16.1 days+/-10.9, respectively, in group II (P<<.03). Eleven patients were found ineligible for EVAR as a result of an unsuitable neck (n=5) or iliac arteries (n=3) or both (n=3). No graft failure was detected during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

After introduction of acute EVAR, a total of 46% of patients with ruptured AAAs were treated with the procedure. Potentially, 54% of patients could have been suitable for EVAR. Endovascular stent-graft implantation has significantly improved outcomes in ruptured AAAs and may therefore be beneficial in the overall treatment strategy in these patients.

Emergency Endovascular Treatment of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Feasibility and Results

PURPOSE

To assess the feasibility and effectiveness of emergency endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs).

METHODS

During 36 months we treated, on an emergency basis, 30 AAAs with endovascular exclusion. In 21 hemodynamically stable patients preoperative CT angiography (CTA) was performed to confirm the diagnosis and to plan the treatment; 9 patients with hemorrhagic shock were evaluated with angiography performed in the operating room. Twenty-two Excluder (Gore) and 8 Zenith (Cook) stent-grafts (25 bifurcated and 5 aorto-uni-iliac) were used. The follow-up was performed by CTA at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in 100% of cases with a 10% mortality rate. The total complication rate was 23% (5 increases in serum creatinine level and 2 wound infections). During the follow-up, performed in 27 patients (1-36 months, mean 15.2 months), 4 secondary endoleaks (15%) (3 type II, 2 spontaneously thrombosed and 1 under observation, and 1 type III treated by iliac extender insertion) and 1 iliac leg occlusion (treated with femoro-femoral bypass) occurred. We observed a shrinkage of the aneurysmal sac in 8 of 27 cases and stability in 19 of 27 cases; we did not observe any endotension.

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular repair is a good option for emergency treatment of AAAs. The team's experience allows correct planning of the procedure in emergency situations also, with technical results comparable with elective repair. In our experience the bifurcated stent-graft is the device of choice in patients with suitable anatomy because the procedure is less time-consuming than aorto-uni-iliac stent-grafting with surgical crossover, allowing faster aneurysm exclusion. However, further studies are required to demonstrate the long-term efficacy of endovascular repair compared with surgical treatment.

Factors associated with abdominal compartment syndrome complicating endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND

Endovascular treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (r-AAAs) has the potential to offer improved outcomes. As our experience with endovascular repair of r-AAA evolved, we recognized that the development of abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) led to an increase in morbidity and mortality. We therefore reviewed our experience to identify risk factors associated with the development of ACS.

METHODS

From January 2002 to December 2004, 30 patients underwent emergent endovascular repair of r-AAA by using commercially available stent grafts. All patients who developed ACS underwent emergent laparotomy. Physiological and clinical parameters were analyzed between patients with and without ACS after endovascular r-AAA repair.

RESULTS

Over the past 3 years, 30 patients underwent endovascular r-AAA repair, and 6 (20%) patients developed ACS. Patients with ACS had a higher incidence of the need for aortic occlusion balloon (67% vs 12%; P = .01), a markedly longer activated partial thromboplastin time (128 +/- 84 seconds vs 49 +/- 31 seconds; P = .01), a greater need for blood transfusion (8 +/- 2.5 units vs 1.8 +/- 1.7 units; P = .08), and a higher incidence of conversion to aortouni-iliac devices because of ongoing hemodynamic instability and an inability to expeditiously cannulate the contralateral gate (67% vs 8%) when compared with patients without ACS. The mortality was significantly higher in the patients with ACS (67%; 4 of 6) compared with patients without ACS (13%; 3 of 24; P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

ACS is a potential complication of endovascular repair of r-AAA and negatively affects survival. Factors associated with the development of ACS include (1) use of an aortic occlusion balloon, (2) coagulopathy, (3) massive transfusion requirements, and (4) conversion of bifurcated stent grafts into aortouni-iliac devices. We recommend that, after endovascular repair of r-AAA, these patients undergo vigilant monitoring for the development of ACS.

Challenges, Controversies, and Advances in Aortic Catastrophes

Emergency physicians (EPs) are commonly faced with life-threatening entities. Particularly challenging are the aortic catastrophes, such as penetrating aortic ulcers (PAUs), intramural hematomas (IMHs), and atypical presentations of acute aortic dissections and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms. Several factors account for this: (1) the rapidly evolving knowledge (particularly in the pathogenesis and precursors of aortic dissection [AD]), (2) the lack of comfort caused by infrequent exposure, (3) the misconceptions about the work up and treatment, (4) the lack of emergent vascular surgery back up in the community, and finally (5) the high short-term mortality and missed rates. Finally, the media has publicized cases of celebrities and other patients who experienced fatal outcomes when their aortic catastrophes went undiagnosed. Practitioners of emergency care should, therefore, understand the challenges, be aware of the recent advances, and help limit the controversies in the evaluation and management of these patients.

Endovascular management of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms: 6-year experience from a Greek center

OBJECTIVE

To report our early experience with endovascular treatment of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (RAAAs).

METHODS

Between March 1998 and October 2004, 40 consecutive patients with an RAAA presented to our unit; 38 underwent assessment by computed tomography, whereas 2 died on arrival before any assessment and treatment was possible. Twenty-three patients (61%) were suitable for stent grafting, and all proceeded to endovascular repair. Of these, 17 underwent operation with local anesthesia, 1 did so under general anesthesia, and a further 5 procedures were commenced under local anesthesia and converted to general anesthesia. A total of 14 bifurcated and 10 aortouni-iliac stent grafts were implanted; in 1 patient, the bifurcated graft was converted to an aortouni-iliac repair during surgery because of technical difficulties.

RESULTS

Stent-graft deployment in the intended location without a type I or III endoleak was technically successful in 22 of the 23 patients. There were no conversions to open surgery. The 30-day mortality was 39%. Six patients died immediately or soon after the procedure because of severe hypovolemic shock, and three died within 30 days from cardiac causes. After surgery, 13 complications were encountered in 10 patients (3 cardiac, 4 respiratory, 5 renal, and 1 implant related). Two patients required reintervention--one for a type I endoleak and one for limb occlusion. There were 14 survivors. During a median follow-up of 410 days (range, 90-1650 days), 2 more patients died from myocardial infarction, and 9 remain well; 3 patients were lost to follow-up. There were three secondary interventions (two for type I endoleak and one for stent-graft thrombosis).

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular treatment of RAAAs is feasible, and the early experience is promising. More experience and evidence from randomized trials are needed to determine whether such an approach is superior to open surgery.

Endovascular Treatment of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms:A Shift of the Paradigm?

PURPOSE

To compare endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA) to the results with open surgery.

METHODS

Between May 2001 and January 2004, 50 patients were diagnosed with rAAA. Fifteen (30%) patients (14 men; median age 73 years, range 58-85) underwent EVAR, while 26 (52%) patients (23 men; median age 75 years, range 60-84) had open surgery. Nine (18%) patients (5 men; median age 86 years, range 77-91) were not operated upon. Circulatory shock was defined as systolic blood pressure<80 mmHg. Mortality was defined as death within 30 days after operation; in cases where hospital stay exceeded 30 days, in-hospital mortality was registered. Five risk factors (age>76 years, loss of consciousness, hemoglobin<90 g/L, creatinine>190 micromol/L, and electrocardiographic ischemia) were analyzed.

RESULTS

In the EVAR group, 93% (14/15) of the aneurysms were excluded from the bloodstream; there were 2 (13%) conversions: 1 intraoperatively for stent-graft migration and another owing to dissection prior to hospital discharge. Mortality after open surgery was 46% (12/26) versus 13% (2/15) in the EVAR group (p>0.05). Univariate analysis without considering variables other than mortality resulted in OR 5.4 (95% CI 0.9 to 58; p=0.07). Considering risk factors and shock, multivariate analysis resulted in OR 6.5 (95% CI 0.8 to 96; p=0.08). In the EVAR group, 60% (9/15) had complications; in the group with open surgery, the complication rate was 85% (22/26; p=0.13).

CONCLUSIONS

It is possible to treat rAAA with EVAR. Hypotensive patients can, at least initially, be operated under local anesthesia to stabilize blood pressure utilizing a percutaneously inserted occlusion balloon. There was a trend in our study for reduced mortality and morbidity with EVAR, but further studies are required to conclude whether EVAR significantly increases survival and reduces complications.

Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta During Endovascular Repair of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

PURPOSE

To describe a technique of aortic clamping during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) and circulatory collapse.

TECHNIQUE

A balloon catheter is inserted percutaneously from the femoral artery and inflated in the suprarenal aorta. An introducer sheath must support the balloon. The stent-graft is passed from the contralateral groin and deployed beneath the balloon. The sheath makes it possible to retrieve the balloon after the endograft has been deployed. Carbon dioxide facilitates angiography while the aortic blood flow is arrested.

CONCLUSIONS

The aortic stent-graft can be deployed while the aorta is continuously "clamped" from a transfemoral approach. This may allow EVAR in patients with circulatory collapse due to aneurysm rupture.

Endovascular Treatment of Acute Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm with a Bifurcated Stentgraft

OBJECTIVES

To analyse the results of emergency endovascular aneurysm repair (eEVAR) for acute abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), in comparison to open repair, and to evaluate suitability and application rate.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients treated for an acute AAA between January 1998 and August 2004 were included. The primary outcome measure was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcome measures were procedure time, intra-operative blood loss, transfusion requirement, intensive care unit, and hospital length of stay. Suitability and application rate for eEVAR were assessed in a subgroup of patients, from January 2003.

RESULTS

A total of 253 patients were treated. eEVAR was performed in 40 patients, 5 (13%) died in-hospital. Open repair was performed in 213 patients, 64 (30%) died in-hospital. Secondary outcome measures were all significantly improved in the eEVAR subgroup. From January 2003, 56 patients were treated. Of the 44 (79%) patients who were evaluated for eEVAR, 16 (36%) patients were anatomically suitable. Eventually, 15 out of the 56 (27%) patients were treated by eEVAR.

CONCLUSION

The results of eEVAR in a selected group of patients are promising, but suitability and application rate were low.

Midterm outcome of endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms

PURPOSE

We sought to analyze the clinical and morphologic outcomes of bifurcated stent grafts in patients with ruptured aortoiliac aneurysms at midterm follow-up.

METHODS

Thirty-seven patients (4 women; mean age, 73 years; mean abdominal aortic aneurysm [AAA] diameter, 77 mm) underwent endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair between June 1997 and July 2003 for ruptured AAA. Devices inserted were as follows: Vanguard (Boston Scientific, Natick, Mass; n = 7), Excluder (W.L. Gore, Flagstaff, Ariz; n = 25), Talent (Medtronic Vascular, Santa Rosa, Calif; n = 2), and Zenith (Cook Inc, Bloomington, Ind; n = 3). Except for the adjunct postimplantation computed tomographic scanning, the imaging follow-up was the same as for nonruptured AAAs.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up period was 24 months (range, 1-59) months. Thirty-day mortality was 10.8%. Three patients died during the follow-up of non-AAA-related causes. One patient was converted early for presumed renal overstenting. The late conversion rate was 9% because of stent graft migration (n = 2) or infection (n = 1). Freedom from endoleak was 57% +/- 8.5% and 48.8% +/- 9% at 2 and 4 years, respectively. Seventeen secondary interventions were performed during the follow-up period, 41% of these within 1 month of stent graft placement. Endoleaks, primary or secondary, were responsible for 58.8% of these interventions. The cumulative risk of a secondary intervention was 35.3% +/- 9% at 2 years and 44.6% +/- 11% at 3 years. Aneurysmal sac shrinkage was observed in 30.8% +/- 9.1% and sac enlargement was observed in 15.3% +/- 10.8% at 2 years.

CONCLUSION

Endoluminal devices are able to convert the acute life-threatening situation of ruptured AAA to a controlled situation that results in good patient survival at midterm follow-up.

Existing Delays Following the Presentation of Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Allow Sufficient Time to Assess Patients for Endovascular Repair

OBJECTIVES

The greatest benefit of endovascular AAA repair (EVAR) may be in the management of rupture (RAAA). However, the detailed anatomical assessment required for EVAR has lead to concerns of surgical delay and death during cross-sectional imaging. In this study, we prospectively assessed patients with RAAA and correlated time of hospital arrival with time of surgery or death to ascertain whether these concerns are justified.

METHODS

All patients presenting with RAAA between October 2000 and December 2002 were included. The hospital arrival time, onset of surgery or time of death, were recorded, as were demographic and physiological parameters.

RESULTS

One hundred consecutive patients were studied, median age 75 years (range 54-94). Seventy-nine patients underwent attempted conventional surgical repair and 21 were palliated. The median delay from arrival to operation was 159 min (range 16-1450 min). Mortality in the surgical group was not affected by the length of delay (p = 1.0) or by CT scanning (p = 0.34). The median time from arrival to death in the non-surgical group was 435 min (15 min-6 days).

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients who present with ruptured AAA experience a significant delay prior to surgery. This study suggests it is safe to assess the majority of RAAA patients for EVAR.