Endovascular Repair for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms has Improved Outcomes Compared to Open Surgical Repair

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.

Time-to-event data meta-analysis of late outcomes of endovascular versus open repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms

OBJECTIVE

We investigated whether the well-documented perioperative survival advantage of emergency endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open repair would be sustained during follow-up.

METHODS

A systematic review conforming to the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) statement standards was conducted to identify studies that had reported the follow-up outcomes of endovascular vs open repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms. Electronic bibliographic sources (MEDLINE [medical literature analysis and retrieval system online], Embase [Excerpta Medica database], CINAHL [cumulative index to nursing and allied health literature], and CENTRAL [Cochrane central register of controlled trials]) were interrogated using the Healthcare Databases Advanced Search interface (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, London, United Kingdom). A time-to-event data meta-analysis was performed using the inverse variance method, and the results were reported as summary hazard ratios (HRs) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Mixed effects regression was applied to investigate the outcome changes over time. The quality of the body of evidence was appraised using the GRADE (grades of recommendation, assessment, development, and evaluation) system.

RESULTS

Three randomized controlled trials and 22 observational studies reporting a total of 31,383 patients were included in the quantitative synthesis. The mean follow-up duration across the studies ranged from 232 days to 4.9 years. The overall all-cause mortality was significantly lower after EVAR than after open repair (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.73-0.86). However, the postdischarge all-cause mortality was not significantly different (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.85-1.43). The aneurysm-related mortality, which was reported by one randomized controlled trial, was not significantly different between EVAR and open repair (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.69-1.15). Meta-regression showed the mortality difference in favor of EVAR was more pronounced in more recent studies (P = .069) and recently treated patients (P = .062). The certainty for the body of evidence for overall and postdischarge all-cause mortality was judged to be low and that for aneurysm-related mortality to be high.

CONCLUSIONS

EVAR showed a sustained mortality benefit during follow-up compared with open repair. A wider adoption of an endovascular-first strategy is justified.

Endovascular repair versus open repair in the treatment of ruptured aortic aneurysms: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Rupture of abdominal aortic aneurysm remains a fatal event in up to 65% of cases and emergency open surgery (ruptured open aneurysm repair or rOAR) has a great intraoperative mortality of about 30-50%. The introduction of endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (ruptured endovascular aneurysm repair or rEVAR) has rapidly challenged the conventional approach to this catastrophic event. The purpose of this systematic review is to compare the outcomes of open surgical repair and endovascular interventions.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A literature search was performed using Medline, Scopus, and Science Direct from August 2010 to March 2017 using keywords identified and agreed by the authors. Randomized trials, cohort studies, and case-report series were contemplated to give a breadth of clinical data.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Ninety-three studies were included in the final analysis. Thirty-five (50.7%) of the listed studies evaluating the within 30 days mortality rates deposed in favor of rEVAR, while the others (comprising all four included RCTs) failed detecting any difference. Late mortality rates were found to be lower in rEVAR group in seven on twenty-seven studies (25.9%), while one (3.7%) reported higher mortality rates following rEVAR performed before 2005, one found lower incidence of mortality at 6 months in the endovascular group but higher rates in the same population at 8 years of follow-up, and the remaining (66.7%) (including all three RCTs) failed finding any benefit of rEVAR on rOAR. A lower incidence of complications was reported by thirteen groups (46.4%), while other thirteen studies did not find any difference between rEVAR and rOAR. Each of these two conclusions was corroborated by one RCTs. Other two studies (7.2%) found higher rates of tracheostomies, myocardial infarction, and acute tubular necrosis or respiratory, urinary complications, and acute renal failure respectively in rOAR group. The majority of studies (59.0%, 72.7%, and 89.3%, respectively) and all RCTs found significantly lower rates of length of hospitalization, intensive care unit transfer, and blood loss with or without transfusion need in rEVAR group. The large majority of the studies did not specified neither the type nor the brands of employed stent grafts.

CONCLUSIONS

The bulk of evidence regarding the comparison between endovascular and open surgery approach to RAAA points to: 1) non-inferiority of rEVAR in terms of early (within 30 days) and late mortality as well as rate of complications and length of hospitalization, with trends of better outcomes associated to the endovascular approach; 2) significantly better outcomes in terms of intensive care unit transfer and blood loss with or without transfusion need in the rEVAR group. These conclusions reflect the results of the available RCTs included in the present review. Thus rEVAR can be considered a safe method in treating RAAA and we suggest that it should be preferred when technically feasible. However, more RCTs are needed in order to give strength of these evidences, bring to definite clinical recommendations regarding this subject, and assess the superiority (if present) of one or more brands of stent grafts over the others.

Indications, risk factors, and outcomes of 30-day readmission after infrarenal abdominal aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

Reducing readmissions is an important target for improving patient care and enhancing health care quality and cost-effectiveness. The aim of this study was to assess rates, risk factors, and indications of 30-day readmission after open aortic repair (OAR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the Premier Healthcare Database from 2009 to 2015 was performed. Indications for readmission after the index procedure, risk factors, and outcomes of the index admission and rehospitalization were evaluated. Multivariate logistic models were used to assess the association between 30-day readmission and different patient and hospital factors.

RESULTS

A total of 33,332 AAA repair procedures were identified: 27,483 (82.5%) EVAR and 5849 (17.5%) OAR. The overall rate of 30-day readmission was 8.1%, and it was greater after OAR (12.9% vs 7.1% in EVAR; P < .001). In general, the most common specific readmission diagnoses were infectious complications (16.1%), followed by respiratory and cardiac complications (11.8% and 11.3%, respectively). After multivariate adjustment, OAR was associated with higher 30-day readmission compared with EVAR (adjusted odds ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-1.2; P = .04). Other risk factors of 30-day readmission included female gender, emergency and urgent procedures, certain patient comorbidities (dyslipidemia, congestive heart failure, history of transient ischemic attack, previous cardiac surgery, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, chronic kidney disease, peripheral vascular disease, and history of malignant disease), and hemorrhage/shock/bleeding occurring during the index admission as well as nonhome discharge. Readmitted patients had an overall in-hospital mortality of 3.6% and paid a median rehospitalization cost of $7757.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that around 8.1% of patients undergoing infrarenal AAA repair were readmitted within 30 days. Because many readmissions are unrelated to the index procedure or caused by factors that are nonmodifiable or nonidentifiable at discharge, efforts should focus on discharge planning and improving the decision process regarding discharge destination as well as postdischarge coordination of care for high-risk patients.

Association of Matrix Metalloproteinase Levels with Collagen Degradation in the Context of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND

Matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) have already been identified as key players in the pathogenesis of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). However, the current data remain inconclusive. In this study, the expression of MMPs at mRNA and protein levels were investigated in relation to the degradation of collagen I and collagen III.

METHODS

Tissue samples were obtained from 40 patients with AAA undergoing open aortic repair, and from five healthy controls during kidney transplantation. Expression of MMPs 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, and 12, and tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase (TIMP)1, and TIMP2 were measured at the mRNA level using quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. At the protein level, MMPs, collagen I, and collagen III, and their degradation products carboxy-terminal collagen cross-links (CTX)-I and CTX-III, were quantified via enzyme linked immunosorbent assay. In addition, immunohistochemistry and gelatine zymography were performed.

RESULTS

In AAA, significantly enhanced mRNA expression was observed for MMPs 3, 9, and 12 compared with controls (p ≤ .001). MMPs 3, 9, and 12 correlated significantly with macrophages (p = .007, p = .018, and p = .015, respectively), and synthetic smooth muscle cells with MMPs 1, 2, and 9 (p = .020, p = .018, and p = .027, respectively). At the protein level, MMPs 8, 9, and 12 were significantly elevated in AAA (p = .006, p = .0004, and p < .001, respectively). No significant correlation between mRNA and protein was observed for any MMP. AAA contained significantly reduced intact collagen I (twofold; p = .002), whereas collagen III was increased (4.6 fold; p < .001). Regarding degraded collagen I and III relative to intact collagens, observations were inverse (1.4 fold increase for CTX-1 [p < .001]; fivefold decrease for CTX-III [p = .004]). MMPs 8, 9, and 12 correlated with collagen I (p = .019, p < .001, and p = 0.003, respectively), collagen III (p = .015, p < .001, and p < .001, respectively), and degraded collagen I (p = .012, p = .049, and p = .001, respectively).

CONCLUSION

No significant relationship was found between mRNA and protein and MMP levels. MMPs 9 and 12 were overexpressed in AAA at the mRNA and protein level, and MMP-8 at the protein level. MMP-2 was detected in synthetic SMCs. Collagen I and III showed inverse behaviour in AAA. In particular, MMPs 8, 9, and 12 appear to be associated with collagen I, collagen III, and their degradation products.