Population risk factor estimates for abdominal aortic aneurysm from electronic medical records: a case control study

BACKGROUND

Using abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) as a model, this case-control study used electronic medical record (EMR) data to assess known risk factors and identify new associations.

METHODS

The study population consisted of cases with AAA (n =888) and controls (n =10,523) from the Geisinger Health System EMR in Central and Northeastern Pennsylvania. We extracted all clinical and diagnostic data for these patients from January 2004 to December 2009 from the EMR. From this sample set, bootstrap replication procedures were used to randomly generate 2,500 iterations of data sets, each with 500 cases and 2000 controls. Estimates of risk factor effect sizes were obtained by stepwise logistic regression followed by bootstrap aggregation. Variables were ranked using the number of inclusions in iterations and P values.

RESULTS

The benign neoplasm diagnosis was negatively associated with AAA, a novel finding. Similarly, type 2 diabetes, diastolic blood pressure, weight and myelogenous neoplasms were negatively associated with AAA. Peripheral artery disease, smoking, age, coronary stenosis, systolic blood pressure, age, height, male sex, pulmonary disease and hypertension were associated with an increased risk for AAA.

CONCLUSIONS

This study utilized EMR data, retrospectively, for risk factor assessment of a complex disease. Known risk factors for AAA were replicated in magnitude and direction. A novel negative association of benign neoplasms was identified. EMRs allow researchers to rapidly and inexpensively use clinical data to expand cohort size and derive better risk estimates for AAA as well as other complex diseases.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm screening: how many life years lost from underuse of the medicare screening benefit?

BACKGROUND

Since 2007, Medicare has provided one-time abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening for men with smoking history, and men and women with a family history of AAA as part of its Welcome to Medicare visit.

OBJECTIVE

We examined utilization of the new AAA screening benefit and estimated how increased utilization could influence population health as measured by life years gained. Additionally, we explored the impact of expanding screening to women with smoking history.

DESIGN

Analysis of Medicare claims and a simulation model to estimate the effects of screening, using published data for parameter estimates.

SETTING

AAA screening in the primary care setting.

PATIENTS

Newly-enrolled Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years, with smoking history or family history of AAA.

MAIN MEASURES

Life expectancy, 10-year survival rates.

KEY RESULTS

Medicare data revealed low utilization of AAA screening, under 1% among those eligible. We estimate that screening could increase life expectancy per individual invited to screening for men with smoking history (0.11 years), with family history of AAA (0.17 years), and women with family history (0.08 years), and smoking history (0.09 years). Average gains of 131 life years per 1,000 persons screened for AAA compare favorably with the grade B United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation for breast cancer screening, which yields 95-128 life years per 1,000 women screened. These findings were robust over a range of scenarios.

LIMITATIONS

The simulation results reflect assumptions regarding AAA prevalence, treatment, and outcomes in specific populations based on published research and US survey data. Published data on women were limited.

CONCLUSIONS

The Welcome to Medicare and AAA screening benefits have been underutilized. Increasing utilization of AAA screening would yield substantial gains in life expectancy. Expanding screening to women with smoking history also has the potential for substantial health benefits.

Relative importance of aneurysm diameter and body size for predicting abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture in men and women

OBJECTIVE

Women have been shown to have up to a fourfold higher risk of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture at any given aneurysm diameter compared with men, leading to recommendations to offer repair to women at lower diameter thresholds. Although this higher risk of rupture may simply reflect greater relative aortic dilatation in women who have smaller aortas to begin with, this has never been quantified. Our objective was therefore to quantify the relationship between rupture and aneurysm diameter relative to body size and determine whether a differential association between aneurysm diameter, body size, and rupture risk exists for men and women.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of all patients in the Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE) database who underwent endovascular or open AAA repair. Height and weight were used to calculate each patient's body mass index and body surface area (BSA). Next, indices of each measure of body size (height, weight, body mass index, BSA) relative to aneurysm diameter were calculated for each patient. To generate these indices, we divided aneurysm diameter (in cm) by the measure of body size; for example, aortic size index (ASI) = aneurysm diameter (cm)/BSA (m(2)). Along with other relevant clinical variables, we used these indices to construct different age-adjusted and multivariable-adjusted logistic regression models to determine predictors of ruptured repair vs elective repair. Models for men and women were developed separately, and different models were compared using the area under the curve.

RESULTS

We identified 4045 patients (78% male) who underwent AAA repair (53% endovascular aortic aneurysm repairs). Women had significantly smaller diameter aneurysms, lower BSA, and higher BSA indices than men. For men, the variable that increased the odds of rupture the most was aneurysm diameter (area under the curve = 0.82). Men exhibited an increased rupture risk with increasing aneurysm diameter (<5.5 cm: odds ratio [OR], 1.0; 5.5-6.4 cm: OR, 0.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5-1.7; P = .771; 6.5-7.4 cm: OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.9-1.0; P < .001; ≥ 7.5 cm: OR, 11.3; 95% CI, 4.9-25.8; P < .001). In contrast, the variable most predictive of rupture in women was ASI (area under the curve = 0.81), with higher odds of rupture at a higher ASI (ASI >3.5-3.9: OR, 6.4; 95% CI, 1.7-24.1; P = .006; ASI ≥ 4.0: OR, 9.5; 95% CI, 2.3-39.4; P = .002). For women, aneurysm diameter was not a significant predictor of rupture after adjusting for ASI.

CONCLUSIONS

Aneurysm diameter indexed to body size is the most important determinant of rupture for women, whereas aneurysm diameter alone is most predictive of rupture for men. Women with the largest diameter aneurysms and the smallest body sizes are at the greatest risk of rupture.

Is the abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture rate decreasing?

Decreased smoking has likely had the most significant impact on reducing the prevalence of AAAs. In a review of public data in England and Wales, Anjum and colleagues illustrated a reduction of AAA rupture from 1997 to2009 across all ages attributed to a concurrent decrease in prevalence of smoking. This trend has also been noted in a meta-analysis from Sweeting and colleagues and attributed to a reduction in the prevalence of smoking since the mid-1970s along with an enhanced awareness of cardiovascular risk factor reduction and selective aneurysm screening. Along with an effort to reduce AAA progression and rupture, tools to predict patient-specific risk of AAA rupture are evolving with refined models that incorporate both aneurysm wall stress and wall strength likely to provide the most promising approach. Although the role of statins, ACE inhibitors, beta-blockers, and aspirin in preventing or slowing aneurysmal rupture remains unresolved, their proven benefit in reducing long-term cardiovascular mortality suggests that these medications should be considered in any patient with a small AAA. Currently, randomized trials do not show any survival benefit for open or endovascular repair for small aneurysms in the range of 4.0 to 5.4 cm. AAA repair, whether through an endovascular or open approach, is not without potential complication. Even at centers of excellence, the 30-day mortality rate for conventional AAA surgery is 3% to 5%, with rates of major morbidityranging from 15% to 40%. The Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines recommends surveillance for patients with a fusiform AAA of 4.0 to 5.4 cm. The risk of AAA rupture appears to be decreasing through heightened public awareness, advanced technology for AAA detection, screening and surveillance, improved understanding of biomechanics and natural progression in AAA rupture, along with the availability of a wide range of medical therapies for risk factor reduction and minimally invasive options for AAA repair.

Abdominal aortic aneurysm: an often asymptomatic and fatal men's health issue

Men are more likely than women to develop an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), a disease that is often asymptomatic and has up to a 90% risk of mortality if the aneurysm ruptures. What many men do not know is that an AAA can easily be identified through an ultrasound screening, and if the aneurysm is >5.5 cm, it can be surgically repaired to prevent a life-threatening rupture. Although current AAA screening recommendations focus on men between the ages of 65 and 75 years, who have ever smoked, recent evidence suggest many men of ages 50 to 80 years, regardless of smoking status, may also be at risk for developing an AAA. This article presents a comprehensive overview of AAA disease and summarizes current evidence-based diagnostic and treatment guidelines, the importance of educating men about this health issue, and the need for more widespread AAA ultrasound screening opportunities.