Endovascular Aortic Repair in Patients of Advanced Age

The Effect of EndoAnchors on Aneurysm Sac Regression for Patients Treated With Infrarenal Endovascular Repair With Hostile Neck Anatomies: A Propensity Scored Analysis

PURPOSE

To analyze sac evolution patterns in matched patients with hostile neck anatomy (HNA) treated with standard endovascular aneurysm repair (sEVAR) and endosutured aneurysm repair (ESAR).

METHODS

Observational retrospective study using prospectively collected data between June 2010 and December 2019. ESAR group data were extracted from the primary arm of the PERU registry with an assigned identifier (NCT04100499) at 8 centers and those from the sEVAR came from 4 centers. Suitability for inclusion required: no proximal endograft adjuncts (besides EndoAnchor use), ≤15 mm neck length and minimum of 12-months follow-up imaging. Bubble-shaped neck (noncylindrical short neck with discontinuous seal) aspect was analyzed. Both groups were analyzed using propensity score matching (PSM) for aortic neck length, width, angulation, and device fixation type. Main outcome assessed was sac evolution patterns (sac expansion and regression were defined as >5mm increase or decrease, of the maximum sac diameter respectively; all AAAs within this ±5 mm range in diameter change were considered stable) and secondary outcomes were type-Ia endoleaks; other endoleaks and mortality. A power analysis calculation >80% was confirmed for sac regression evaluation.

RESULTS

After exclusions, PSM resulted in 96 ESAR and 96 sEVAR patients. Mean imaging follow-up (months) was 44.4±21.3 versus 43.0±19.6 (p=0.643), respectively. The overall number of patients achieving sac regression was higher in the ESAR group (n=57, 59.4% vs n=31, 32.3%; p<0.001) and the cumulative sac regression achieved at 5 years was 65% versus 38% (p=0.003) in favor of the ESAR group. There were no statistically significant differences in type-Ia endoleak and/or other endoleaks. Univariate analysis for sac regression patients in the sEVAR and ESAR group individually showed the bubble-shape neck as a predictor of sac regression failure. There were no statistical differences in overall and aneurysm-related mortality.

CONCLUSION

Endosutured aneurysm repair provided improved rates of sac regression for patients with AAA and HNA when compared with sEVAR at midterm and up to 5 years, despite similar rates of type-Ia endoleaks, and the need to consider some important limitations. The presence of bubble-shaped neck was a predictor of sac regression failure for both groups equally.

CLINICAL IMPACT

The use of EndoAnchors aids and improves EVAR treatment in hostile neck anatomies by an increased rate of sac regression when compared to EVAR treatment alone in up to 5 year analysis. Moreover, a trend to reduced number of type Ia endoleaks is also achieved, although not significant in the present study. This data, adds to current and growing evidence on the usefulness of EndoAnchors for AAA endovascular treatment.

Selection criterion for endovascular aortic repair in those with chronic kidney disease

OBJECTIVE

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is the preferred method of repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). However, patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) are a high-risk group, and it is unknown which patients with CKD benefit from EVAR vs continued surveillance. The purpose of this study was to identify which patients with advanced CKD may benefit from EVAR.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative Database was utilized to identify elective EVARs for AAAs. Patients were excluded if they underwent urgent or emergent repairs. CKD stages were categorized based on preoperative estimated glomular filtration rate (eGFR) and dialysis status. Predicted 1-year mortality of untreated AAAs was calculated by modifying a validated comorbidity score that predicts 1-year mortality (Gagne Index) without repair. The primary outcome was actual 1-year mortality, which was compared with the predicted 1-year mortality without repair.

RESULTS

A total of 34,926 patient met study criteria. There were differences in Gagne Indices among the varying classes of CKD. Patients with CKD 4 and CKD 5 had the highest 1-year mortality rates, followed by CKD 3b, which was significantly higher than those with CKD 1 and CKD 2. Patients with CKD 4 had no differences between actual 1-year mortality with EVAR and predicted 1-year survival without EVAR across all AAA sizes. Those with CKD 5 had worse actual 1-year survival with EVAR than predicted 1-year survival without EVAR for AAAs <5.5 cm. Patients with CKD 5 only experienced an actual mortality benefit with EVAR compared with predicted 1-year mortality without EVAR for AAAs ≥7.0 cm.

CONCLUSION

The current data suggest that patients with CKD 3b, 4, and 5 represent a high-risk group who may not benefit from elective EVAR utilizing traditional size criteria. Patients with CKD 4 and 5 with AAAs <5.5 cm do not benefit from elective EVAR. In patients with CKD 5, elective EVAR may need to be reserved for AAAs ≥7.0 cm unless there are other concerning anatomic characteristics.

Predictive factors for major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events in octogenarians after elective endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to identify risk factors of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) in octogenarians who received elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).

METHODS

Consecutive patients aged ≥ 80 years undergoing elective EVAR from 2009 to 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. The primary outcome was long-term MACCE. All independent risk factors for outcomes were determined by multivariate logistic analysis or Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 163 patients were enrolled in this study. The median age was 81 (interquartile range, IQR, 80-84) years and 85.9% (140/163) of them were male. MACCE happened in 2.5% (4/163) patients within 30 days. With median follow-up of 28 (IQR, 15-46) months, the incidence of long-term MACCE was 26.4% (43/163). Arrythmia was significantly associated with long-term MACCE (hazard ratio, HR = 2.64, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.16-6.03, P = .021). Carotid artery disease was found a significant association with 2-year MACCE (odd ratio, OR = 6.50, 95% CI, 1.07-39.51, P = .042). Besides, we found that arrythmia and congestive heart failure (CHF) were predictors for overall survival (arrythmia, HR = 2.56, 95% CI, 1.05-6.28, P = .039; CHF, HR = 8.96, 95% CI, 2.12-37.79, P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

EVAR in octogenarians had acceptable perioperative risk and long-term outcome. Considering high risk of 2-year MACCE, intervention strategy should be more cautious for patients with carotid artery disease. Octogenarians with arrythmia and CHF should receive stricter postoperative management in case of MACCE.