A comparative cohort study of totally laparoscopic and open aortobifemoral bypass for the treatment of advanced atherosclerosis

A Short Series of Laparoscopic Mesenteric Bypasses for Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia

Background

Laparoscopic aortomesenteric bypass may be performed to treat the chronic mesenteric ischemia patients who are not suitable for endovascular treatment. This study presents an initial experience with a limited series of laparoscopic mesenteric artery revascularization for the treatment of mesenteric ischemia.

Methods

Chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI) patients with previous unsuccessful endovascular treatment or with arterial occlusion and extensive calcification precluding safe endovascular treatment were offered laparoscopic mesenteric revascularization. From October 2015 until November 2018, nine patients with CMI underwent laparoscopic revascularization. In addition to demographic data and perioperative results of the treatment, graft patency was assessed with Duplex ultrasound at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months, and annually thereafter. A descriptive analysis of the data was performed.

Results

All bypasses were constructed with an 8 mm ring enforced expanded polytetrafluoroethylene graft in a retrograde fashion (from infrarenal aorta or iliac artery) to either superior mesenteric artery or splenic artery (2 cases). Median operation time was 356 mins (range 247–492 mins). Five patients had a history of unsuccessful endovascular treatment. Laparoscopic technical success was 78%, and the primary open conversion rate was 22%. All laparoscopic revascularization procedures remained patent after discharge during a median follow-up time of 26 months (range 18–49 months). The primary graft patency at 30 days was 78%. Primary assisted, and secondary graft patency was 78% and 100%, respectively. Median weight gain was 2 kg (range 2–18 kg), and all patients achieved relief from postprandial pain and nausea. No mortality was observed during the follow-up period.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic aortomesenteric revascularization procedures for chronic mesenteric ischemia are feasible but require careful patient selection. These procedures should only be performed at referral centers by vascular surgeons with prior experience in laparoscopic vascular surgery.

Cost-utility analysis comparing laparoscopic vs open aortobifemoral bypass surgery

OBJECTIVES

Laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass has become an established treatment option for symptomatic aortoiliac obstructive disease at dedicated centers. Minimally invasive surgical techniques like laparoscopic surgery have often been shown to reduce expenses and increase patients' health-related quality of life. The main objective of our study was to measure quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs after totally laparoscopic and open aortobifemoral bypass.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a within trial analysis in a larger ongoing randomized controlled prospective multicenter trial, Norwegian Laparoscopic Aortic Surgery Trial. Fifty consecutive patients suffering from symptomatic aortoiliac occlusive disease suitable for aortobifemoral bypass surgery were randomized to either totally laparoscopic (n=25) or open surgical procedure (n=25). One patient dropped out of the study before surgery. We measured health-related quality of life using the EuroQol (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire at 4 different time points, before surgery and for 6 months during follow-up. We calculated the QALYs gained by using the area under the curve for both groups. Costs were calculated based on prices for surgical equipment, vascular prosthesis and hospital stay.

RESULTS

We found a significantly higher increase in QALYs after laparoscopic vs open aortobifemoral bypass surgery, with a difference of 0.07 QALYs, (p=0.001) in favor of laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass. The total cost of surgery, equipment and hospital stay after laparoscopic surgery (9,953 €) was less than open surgery (17,260 €), (p=0.001).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass seems to be cost-effective compared with open surgery, due to an increase in QALYs and lower procedure-related costs.

Patient-perceived health-related quality of life before and after laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass

Background

In patients operated with laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass (LABFB) for atherosclerotic obstruction in aortoiliac segment, the main focus of the reports published during the last two decades has been morbidity and mortality. The primary objective of this study was to examine the health-related quality of life (HRQL) in these patients before and after LABFB.

Patients and methods

Fifty consecutive patients (27 females) with Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus II, type D lesions were prospectively included. Short-Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire was used to get information about the HRQL before LABFB and at 1, 3 and 6 months after the operation. Main indication for LABFB was intermittent claudication. Linear mixed-effect models were used to assess changes in HRQL over time. Age, gender, smoking, blood loss, operation time, concomitant operation, the American Society of Anesthesiologists category, length of hospital stay, previous vascular procedures and aorta cross-clamping were used as fixed factors and their impact on the physical components of the SF-36, as well as the summary scores were determined with univariate analysis. Variables with P<0.2 were included in the multivariate regression analysis. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Statistically significant improvement was found in all SF-36 domains as well as in the summary scores after LABFB compared to the preoperative scores. The improvement in scores was substantial already at 1 month and the effect was maintained at 3 and 6 months survey time points. Concomitant operations had a statistically significant negative impact on the physical components of SF-36. Data completeness of item questionnaires was 93% in the whole material. Reliability scale and homogeneity estimates for the eight domains had high internal consistency.

Conclusion

Patients operated with LABFB for Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus II, type D lesions have reduced HRQL. LABFB leads to substantial and statistically significant improvement in the patients’ HRQL, when examined with SF-36. These results need to be replicated by a randomized clinical trial.

Totally laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass surgery in the treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease or abdominal aortic aneurysms - a systematic review and critical appraisal of literature

PURPOSE

This systematic review aims to evaluate the published literature regarding totally laparoscopic aortobifemoral bypass (LABF) surgery in the treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD) or abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), compared with open aortobifemoral bypass surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review of the medical literature between 1990 and 2016 was performed, searching the medical databases Cochrane Library, OVID Medline, Embase and PubMed. Studies concerning totally LABF with or without control group and containing more than 10 patients were included in the analysis. Operative and aortic cross-clamping times, blood loss, rate of conversion to open surgery, mortality and morbidity within the first 30 postoperative days, hospital stay and primary and secondary patency of the graft were extracted and compared with open surgery when possible.

RESULTS

Sixty-six studies were deemed eligible for inclusion in this review, 16 of them matched the inclusion criteria for quantitative synthesis. The patient material consisted of 588 patients undergoing totally LABF, 22 due to AAA, and the remaining 566 for AIOD. Five comparative studies regarding AIOD compared 211 totally LABF procedures with 246 open procedures. Only one study concerning AAA was eligible for inclusion, and this study did not provide a comparison against an open group. The operating and aortic cross-clamping times were shorter in the open group. Conversion rates ranged from 0% to 27%. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality between the two groups (p=0.64). Hospital stays ranged from 4.0 to 12.1 and 5.0 to 12.8 days in the laparoscopic group and open group, respectively. Most of the studies provided low levels of evidence, mainly due to lack of blinding, randomization and correction of bias.

CONCLUSION

Totally laparoscopic aortoiliac surgery seems to be a feasible technique with unaffected mortality and trend toward benefits in hospital stay and possibly also in complication rates. The literature published this far is sparse and with inconsistent results. More randomized controlled trials are required before this method can be widely implemented.

Comparison of the acute-phase response after laparoscopic versus open aortobifemoral bypass surgery: a substudy of a randomized controlled trial

PURPOSE

Minimally invasive surgical techniques have been shown to reduce the inflammatory response related to a surgical procedure. The main objective of our study was to measure the inflammatory response in patients undergoing a totally laparoscopic versus open aortobifemoral bypass surgery. This is the first randomized trial on subjects in this population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This is a substudy of a larger randomized controlled multicenter trial (Norwegian Laparoscopic Aortic Surgery Trial). Thirty consecutive patients with severe aortoiliac occlusive disease eligible for aortobifemoral bypass surgery were randomized to either a totally laparoscopic (n=14) or an open surgical procedure (n=16). The inflammatory response was measured by perioperative monitoring of serum interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-8, and C-reactive protein (CRP) at six different time points.

RESULTS

The inflammatory reaction caused by the laparoscopic procedure was reduced compared with open surgery. IL-6 was significantly lower after the laparoscopic procedure, measured by comparing area under the curve (AUC), and after adjusting for the confounding effect of coronary heart disease (P=0.010). The differences in serum levels of IL-8 and CRP did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

In this substudy of a randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic and open aortobifemoral bypass surgeries, we found a decreased perioperative inflammatory response after the laparoscopic procedure measured by comparing AUC for serum IL-6.