Treatment of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms With an Endovascular Stent-Graft Prosthesis in 96 High-Risk Patients

Editor's Choice - Endovascular Aneurysm Repair in High Risk Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in high risk patients.

METHODS

Bibliographic sources (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and CENTRAL) were searched using combinations of thesaurus and free text terms. The review protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021287207) and reported according to PRISMA 2020. Pooled estimates were calculated using odds ratio (OR) or hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) applying the Mantel-Haenszel or inverse variance method. EVAR peri-operative mortality in high risk patients over time was examined with mixed effects meta-regression. The GRADE framework was used to rate the certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

The pooled peri-operative mortality in 18 416 high risk patients who underwent EVAR was 3% (95% CI 2.3 - 4%) and has significantly reduced over time (year of publication p = .003; median study point p = .023). The peri-operative mortality was significantly lower in high risk patients treated with EVAR compared with open repair (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.45 - 0.92), but no significant difference was found in overall (HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.76 - 1.49) or aneurysm related mortality (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.21 - 1.55). No significant difference was found in overall mortality between high risk patients treated with EVAR vs. no intervention (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.14 - 1.26), but the aneurysm related mortality was significantly lower in the former (HR 0.30; 95% CI 0.14 - 0.63). The peri-operative mortality was higher in high risk than normal risk patients treated with EVAR (OR 2.33; 95% CI 1.75 - 3.10), as was the overall mortality (HR 3.50; 95% CI 2.55 - 4.80). The certainty of evidence was very low for EVAR vs. open surgery or no intervention and low for high vs. normal risk patients.

CONCLUSION

The EVAR peri-operative mortality in high risk patients has improved over time. Even though the aneurysm related mortality of EVAR is lower compared with no intervention, EVAR may confer no overall survival benefit.

Tratamento endovascular do aneurisma da aorta abdominal infrarrenal em pacientes com anatomia favorável para o procedimento: experiência inicial em um serviço universitário

CONTEXTO: Desde sua introdução, em 1991, o reparo endovascular do aneurisma da aorta abdominal infrarrenal tem se tornado uma alternativa atraente para o tratamento dessa doença. Avaliar nossos resultados iniciais quanto à segurança e eficácia dessa técnica nos levou à realização deste estudo. OBJETIVOS: Analisar a mortalidade perioperatória, a sobrevida tardia, as reoperações, as taxas de perviedade e o comportamento do saco aneurismático em pacientes com anatomia favorável para a realização do procedimento. MÉTODOS: Trata-se de um estudo longitudinal, observacional e retrospectivo realizado entre outubro de 2004 e janeiro de 2009 com 41 pacientes que foram submetidos à correção endovascular do aneurisma de aorta abdominal infrarrenal por apresentarem anatomia favorável para o procedimento. Foram analisados os achados dos exames diagnósticos, o tratamento e o seguimento em todos os pacientes. RESULTADOS: Foram implantadas, com sucesso, 31 (75,6%) próteses bifurcadas e 10 (24,5%) monoilíacas, de 5 diferentes marcas. O diâmetro médio dos aneurismas fusiformes era de 62 mm. A mortalidade perioperatória foi de 4,8% e a sobrevida tardia, 90,2%. Durante o acompanhamento médio de 30 meses, 2 (4,8%) pacientes necessitaram de reintervenção, um por migração da endoprótese e outro por vazamento tipo II. Dois (4,8%) pacientes apresentaram oclusão de ramo da prótese. Oito (19,5%) vazamentos foram diagnosticados e não houve nenhuma rotura dos aneurismas. CONCLUSÃO: Apesar do pequeno número de pacientes, os resultados observados parecem justificar a realização do procedimento endovascular nos pacientes com anatomia favorável.

Analysis of outcome after using high-risk criteria selection to surgery versus endovascular repair in the modern era of abdominal aortic aneurysm treatment

INTRODUCTION

The concept of high-risk patients suggests that such patients will experience a higher rate of postoperative complications and worse short- and long-term outcomes, and should therefore benefit from the use of endovascular techniques for aortic abdominal aneurysm (AAA) repair. The primary goal of this study was to assess the relevance of the different high-risk criteria, defined by the French health agency Agence Française de Sécurité Sanitaire des Produits de Santé (AFSSAPS) in a single-centre continuous series. Secondary goals were to retrospectively compare the incidence of postoperative complications and short- and long-term survival in three groups of patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 1999 and December 2006, details of all the patients undergoing elective surgery for AAA in our hospital were recorded into a prospective registry (n=626). Three groups were considered according to the level of risk and type of repair defined by the AFSSAPS: endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) high-risk (HR) (at least one high-risk factor and EVAR, n=138), open HR (at least one high-risk factor and open repair, n=134) and open low-risk (LR) (no high-risk factors and open repair, n=344). None of the low-risk patients were treated using an endovascular approach. The demographics, preoperative risk factors, intra-, postoperative data and short- and long-term survival were compared between the groups. Interrelations among the set of high-risk criteria for mortality were calculated using multiple correspondence analysis (MCA).

RESULTS

The distribution of high-risk criteria was similar in both high-risk groups, except for age, heart failure and hostile abdomen, which were significantly more frequent in EVAR HR. Operation time, blood loss and length of stay in an intensive care unit and hospital were significantly lower in the EVAR HR group. The 30-day mortality and survival rates at 5 years were 5.4 and 59.4% for EVAR HR, 3.7 and 70.4% for open HR and 2.3 and 83.7% for open LR, respectively, with no significant difference between the three groups for the mortality, but a significant higher survival at 5 years for the open LR versus both high-risk groups.

CONCLUSION

The high-risk AFSSAPS criteria were not predictive of postoperative mortality and should not be used to determine the choice of treatment technique. Other criteria therefore need to be established to determine whether open or EVAR repair should be used.

Endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms in high-surgical-risk patients

Background: Following the publication of a prospective randomized trial (Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Trial 2 - EVAR2) that questioned the benefits of endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) in high-surgical-risk patients, we decided to analyze our initial and long-term results with endovascular AAA repair in this patient population. Objective: To evaluate the operative mortality, long-term survival, frequency of secondary operations, outcome of the aneurysm sac, primary and secondary patency rates, and rupture rate after aortic stent-graft placement in high-surgical-risk patients. Methods: From April 2002 to February 2008, 40 high-surgical and anesthetic risk patients with an AAA managed by a bifurcated aortic endograft were entered in a prospective registry. Data concerning diagnosis, operative risk, treatment and follow-up were analyzed in all patients Results: Twenty-four Excluder® and 16 Zenith® stent-grafts were successfully implanted. Thirty patients (75%) were classed ASA III and 10 (25%) were ASA IV. Mean aneurysm diameter was 64 mm. Operative mortality was 2.5%. Two patients required reintervention during the mean follow-up of 28.5 months. Survival rate at 3 years was 95%. There were four endoleaks, one case of endotension, and one endograft limb occlusion. Primary and secondary patency rates at 3 years were 97.5 and 100%, respectively. There were no ruptures. Conclusions: Initial and long-term results with endovascular treatment of AAA in high-surgical-risk patients were satisfactory, and appear to justify such approach for this patient population.

Endovascular Repair of Infrarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms in High-Risk-Surgical Patients

PURPOSE

Following the publication of a prospective randomized trial (EVAR2) that questioned the benefit of endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) for high-surgical-risk patients, we evaluated our own initial and long-term results with endovascular AAA repair for this patient population.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between January 2000 and December 2005, 115 patients with an AAA managed by an aortic endograft were entered in a registry. Data concerning diagnosis, operative risk, treatment, and follow-up were analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis for all patients considered to be poor candidates for surgery. Patients with a ruptured AAA and those who were good surgical candidates were excluded from analysis. The main goal was evaluation of the operative mortality and the long-term survival of these patients. Secondary goals were determination of the frequency of secondary operations, the outcome of the aneurysm sac, and primary and secondary patency rates after aortic endograft placement.

RESULTS

A total of 92 high-surgical-risk patients treated by an endograft were entered in this study. Sixty-seven patients (73%) were classed ASA III and 18 (20%) were ASA IV (20%). Mean aneurysm diameter was 58 mm+/-9 mm. The technical success rate was 99%. Operative mortality was 4.3% (4 cases). Four patients required re-intervention during the mean follow-up of 18 months. The survival rate at 3 yr was 85%. One type I endoleak (1%) and 9 type II endoleaks (9.7%) occurred during the follow-up period. Primary and secondary patency rates at 3 yr were respectively 96% and 100%.

CONCLUSION

Our initial and long-term results with endograft repair of AAA in high-surgical-risk patients were satisfactory. These results appear to justify endovascular repair for this patient population.