The UK EndoVascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR) trials: randomised trials of EVAR versus standard therapy

Propensity score analysis demonstrates no long term survival benefit from contemporary endovascular aneurysm repair compared to open in Aotearoa New Zealand

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines for AAA management are based on landmark trials comparing EVAR and open aneurysm repair (OAR) conducted more than 20 years ago. Important advancements have been made in peri-operative care but the impact of EVAR and OAR on long-term patient survival has not been well reported using contemporary data. The objective of this study was to compare the short and long-term outcomes of OAR and EVAR in the recent era.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study included all patients undergoing intact AAA repair in NZ from 1st of January 2011 until 31st of December 2019. Data was collected from national administrative and clinical vascular databases and matched using unique identifiers. Time-to-event survival analyses was conducted using cox proportional hazard models to adjust for confounders and propensity score matching were used.

RESULTS

Two thousand two hundred and ninety-seven patients had an intact AAA repair with a median (IQR) age of 75 (69-80) years; 494 (21.2%) patients were females and 1206 (53%) underwent EVAR. The 30-day mortality for OAR and EVAR was 4.8% and 1.2%. The median (IQR) follow up was 5.2 (2.3-9.2) years. After propensity matching for co-variates, the study cohort consisted of 835 patients in each matched group. Patients undergoing EVAR had a higher overall mortality (HR 1.48 (95% CI: 1.26-1.74) after adjusting for confounders compared to OAR.

CONCLUSION

Analysis of survival following EVAR and OAR in the current era demonstrates that patients that underwent EVAR had a lower 30-day mortality. However, in the long-term after adjusting for confounders OAR had a better overall survival.

An Analysis of Cost-Effectiveness and Clinical Outcomes of a Comprehensive Aortic Service in a Tertiary Center over One Year

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is an established and attractive alternative to open surgical repair (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) due to its superior short-term safety profile. However, opinions are divided regarding its long-term cost-effectiveness. We compared the total yearly cost of running endovascular and OSR services in a single tertiary center to determine whether fenestrated EVAR (FEVAR) represents a clinically efficacious, affordable treatment option.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective review was performed on 109 patients undergoing a procedure related to index or previous abdominal aortic repair, with 1 year follow-up. Data was collected from the National Vascular Registry and hospital records. The primary outcome was cost per quality-adjusted life year. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality and morbidity, reintervention rates, length of hospital stay, aneurysm, and all-cause mortality at 1 year for elective index procedures.

RESULTS

The average cost per patient of all FEVAR was £16,041.53 (±8,857.54), £13,893.51 (±£21,425.25) for standard EVAR, and £15,357.22 (±£15,904.49) for OSR (FEVAR versus EVAR P = 0.55, FEVAR versus OSR P = 0.83, OSR versus EVAR P = 0.76). Of the secondary outcomes, significant findings included increased length of stay and respiratory morbidity for patients undergoing open versus endovascular repair. There was no significant difference in 30-day or 1-year mortality between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

FEVAR, EVAR, and OSR all represent cost-effective options for aortic repair with similar outcomes. Our data highlights the potential for FEVAR to present a viable alternative to open repair, particularly in higher-risk groups, when performed in specialist centers.

Pre-operative Aortic Anatomic Features as Predictors of Clinical Outcomes Following Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Retrospective Cohort Study

ARTICLE REMOVED.

The sinister story of a gauche deliverer and his corrie-fisted tribesmen: Ehud and the left-handed artillery

Bias against left-handers is well-documented and seen in the etymology of "left" and "right" in most languages. The subject of this study, Ehud, lived between the exodus of the Hebrew slaves from Egypt and the establishment of the Israelite kingdom (c1200-1000 BC), at the transition between the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age 1. His left-handedness was crucial to his deliverance of the proto-nation from tyranny, recorded in Judges in the Hebrew Bible. The description of Ehud as left-handed ('iṭṭēr yaḏ-yεmînô) is used once more in the Hebrew Bible, also in Judges, to describe the artillery of Ehud's tribe. The words apparently mean "bound/restricted in the right hand", sometimes interpreted as "ambidextrous". This is unlikely: ambidexterity is uncommon. The artillery used the sling with either hand, but Ehud used his left (śεm'ōl) hand to draw his sword. śεm'ōl, used throughout the Hebrew Bible, means left, without bias or derogatory implications. We suggest that 'iṭṭēr yaḏ-yεmînô was a right-handed bias towards left-handed people, but Ehud's left-handed victory was recognized as significant. Significant enough that (a) the language changed and the biased description was dropped in favour of simple description, and (b) the army changed with the development of left-handed slingers (artillery).

Endovascular aneurysm repair offers a survival advantage and is cost-effective compared with conservative management in patients physiologically unfit for open repair

OBJECTIVE

The endovascular aneurysm repair-2 (EVAR-2) trial suggested that EVAR in patients unfit for open surgical repair (OSR) failed to provide a significant overall survival advantage compared with conservative management. The aim is to compare survival and cost-effectiveness in patients with poor cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) metrics who underwent EVAR or were managed conservatively.

METHODS

A prospective database of all CPETs (1435 patients) performed to assess preoperative fitness for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair was maintained. A total of 350 patients deemed unfit for OSR underwent EVAR or were managed conservatively. A 1:1 propensity-matched analysis incorporating age, gender, anaerobic threshold, and aneurysm size was used to compare survival. Cost-effectiveness analysis was based on the economic model for the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence clinical guideline on abdominal aortic aneurysm treatment.

RESULTS

Propensity matching produced 122 pairs of patients in the EVAR and conservative management groups. The median overall survival for the EVAR group was significantly longer than that for the conservative management group (84 vs 30 months, P < .001). One-, three-, and five-year mortality in the EVAR group was 7%, 40%, and 68%, respectively, compared with 25%, 68%, and 82% in the conservative management group, all P < .001. The increment cost-effectiveness ratio for EVAR was £8023 (US$11,644) per quality-adjusted life year gained compared with £430,602 (US$624,967) in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline, which is based on EVAR-2 results.

CONCLUSIONS

EVAR offers a survival advantage and is cost-effective in selected patients deemed unfit for OSR based on CPET compared with conservative management.

Efficacy and safety of prophylactic intraoperative sac embolization in EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm: A meta-analysis

Objective

We aimed to investigate the effectiveness and safety of prophylactic sac embolization during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in patients suffering from abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Methods

We performed a systematic literature search of PubMed, Web of Science, EMbase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), VIP, Wanfang and China Biomedical Literature Database (CBM) to identify studies evaluating the outcomes of sac embolization vs. no embolization among patients who had received EVAR. The time limit of the search was from the establishing database to July 22, 2022. Outcome measures involved the type II endoleak rate, the other endoleak rate, the reintervention rate, mortality, and operation time. Fixed (no heterogeneity) or random effects models were constructed for each outcome. The outcomes are represented as the odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

Among the 2,622 studies screened, 13 studies involving 747 participants were included in the review. The incidence of early-term type II endoleak (OR = 0.2, 95% CI (0.13,0.31), P < 0.00001), mid-term type II endoleak (OR = 0.23, 95% CI (0.15,0.37), P < 0.00001), late-term type II endoleak (OR = 0.27, 95% CI (0.16,0.46), P < 0.00001) and reintervention (OR = 0.50, 95% CI (0.37,0.78), P = 0.002) within the sac embolization group were significantly lower than those in the non-embolization group. No significant differences were observed between the two groups were found for the other endoleak rates (OR = 0.67, 95% CI (0.34,1.32), P = 0.25), mortality (OR = 0.64, 95% CI (0.25,1.66), P = 0.36) and operation time operation (MD = 5.76, 95% CI (-8.30,19.83), P = 0.42).

Conclusions

EVAR combined with sac embolization effectively reduces the incidence of type II endoleak and the reintervention rate without enhancing the operation time. Therefore, more high-quality studies are still needed for validation due to the limited amount and quality of included literature.

Systematic Review Registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier: CRD42022365648.

Effectiveness of Inferior Mesenteric Artery Embolization on Type II Endoleak-Related Complications after Endovascular Aortic Repair (EVAR): Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Type II endoleak is one of the most common and problematic complications after endovascular aneurysm repair. It has been suggested that the inferior mesenteric artery (IMA) embolization could prevent further adverse events and postoperative complications. This article is a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines. The Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were used to identify studies that investigated the effect of IMA embolization on the occurrence of type II endoleaks and secondary interventions in a group of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm who underwent EVAR compared with results after EVAR procedure without embolization. A random effects meta-analysis was performed. Of 3510 studies, 6 studies involving 659 patients were included. Meta-analysis of all studies showed that the rate of secondary interventions was smaller in patients with IMA embolization (OR, 0.17; SE, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.41; p < 0.01; I2 = 0%). The occurrence of type II endoleaks was also smaller in the embolization group (OR, 0.37; SE, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.57; p < 0.01; I2 = 16.20%). This meta-analysis suggests that IMA embolization correlates with lower rates of type II endoleaks and secondary interventions.

Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: JACC Focus Seminar, Part 1

Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), defined by an aortic diameter >3 cm, affect >1 million people in the United States. Risk factors for AAA include male sex, family history of AAA, smoking, Caucasian ethnicity, and age. Patients with known AAA should undergo regular surveillance via ultrasonography. Medical management, including smoking cessation and blood pressure management, is recommended for asymptomatic patients who do not meet the threshold for intervention. Repair options include endovascular aortic repair and open surgical repair, with good outcomes in long-term follow-up. Men with AAA >5.5 cm and women with AAA >5.0 cm in general should undergo elective repair. Medical management, including smoking cessation and blood pressure management, is recommended for asymptomatic patients who do not meet the threshold for intervention.

Evaluation Of The Effectiveness Of Endovascular Treatment Of Type 2 Endoleaks

INTRODUCTION

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) is a safe and minimally invasive alternative to open surgical repair for infra renal aortic aneuvrysm. EVAR requires lifelong post-procedural surveillance. Endoleaks represent the main complication. Type II endoleaks (EL2) are the most frequent and tend to be indolent. Most practitioners do not treat in EL2 as long as they are associated with stable aneurysm diameter. European guidelines recommend treatment in case of aneurysm growth. Several techniques can be offered, such as transarterial embolization and translumbar embolization. This study reports the experience and results of a single center for EL2 endovascular treatment. The aim of this study was to determine more precisely the efficacity of embolization for type 2 endoleaks treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A single center cohort of patients treated for EL2 with endovascular technique between 1998 and 2018 was formed to perform a descriptive analysis. Preoperative sizing, risk factors of endoleaks and intraoperative data were collected. CT scans were regularly performed after EVAR to detect endoleak recurrence. Clinical recurrence was defined as the persistence of aneurysm sac growth and radiological recurrence was defined as the occurrence of EL2 on a post-embolization CT scan. Data related to reintervention, overall mortality and aneurysm related mortality were also collected. Kaplan Meier survival analyses were used to determine the rates of reoperation-free survival and recurrence-free survival.

RESULTS

Six hundred seven patients underwent an endovascular treatment for abdominal aorta aneurysm between 1998 and 2018. One hundred forty-five type 2 endoleaks occurred during this period. Nineteen patients (median age 76 years), underwent endovascular treatment for EL2, with immediate success on 15 patients (8 transarterial embolization, 8 direct sac puncture and 3 combined procedures). During follow-up, 5 patients required a new translumbar embolization and 6 required an open surgery for recurrence of the EL2. Six patients died, 2 of them of causes related to the aneurysm. At 59,6 months median follow-up, 53% of the patients presented a radiologic recurrence, with a sac growth of more than 5 mm since last procedure in 4 patients (24%).

CONCLUSION

Long term clinical recurrence of type 2 endoleaks treated by endovascular procedures appear to be frequent in our experience, leading to several deaths and requiring open surgical treatment.

Trends in thoracic aortic aneurysm hospital admissions, interventions and mortality in England between 1998 to 2020: An observational study

OBJECTIVE

To assess trends in thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) hospital admissions, interventions, and aneurysm-related mortality (ARM) in England and examine the impact of endovascular repair on mortality for the years 1998 to 2020.

METHODS

Hospital admission and operative approach (thoracic endovascular aortic repair, TEVAR or open surgical repair, OSR) using Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES), and ARM data from the Office for National Statistics for England (ONS) standardised to the 2013 European Standard Population were analysed using linear regression and Joinpoint regression analyses. ARM was compared between the pre-endovascular era (1998-2008) and the endovascular era (2009-2019).

RESULTS

A rising trend in in-hospital admission incidence was observed, mainly due non-ruptured admissions (4.11 per 100,000 in 1998 [95% CI 3.71 to 4.50 per 100,000] to 12.61 per 100,000 in 2020 [95% CI 12.00 to 13.21 per 100,000] in 2020; r² = 0.98; p < .001). Operative interventions increased mainly due to an increase in TEVAR (2.15 per 100,000 [95% CI 1.91 to 2.41 per 100,000] in 2020 vs 0.26 per 100,000 [95% CI 0.16 to 0.36 per 100,000] in 2006; r² = 0.90; p < .001). Reductions in ARM from TAA were observed for males and females, irrespective of age and rupture status. The greatest reduction in ARM in the endovascular era was observed in females > 80 years, with ruptured disease 15.26 deaths per 100,000 versus 9.50 deaths per 100,000, p < .0001).

CONCLUSION

A significant increase in hospital admissions for non-ruptured TAA was observed in the last 23 years in England, paralleled by a shift towards endovascular repair, and significant declining trends in ARM irrespective of gender and age. The significant reductions in ASDR from ruptured and non-ruptured TAA in the endovascular era, particularly for females >80 years with ruptured disease affirm the positive impact of an endovascular approach to TAA.

[Abdominal aortic aneurysms-open vs. endovascular treatment : Decision-making from the perspective of the vascular surgeon]

CLINICAL/METHODICAL ISSUE

In the last 20 years, the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms has essentially evolved from surgical to minimally invasive endovascular treatment.

ACHIEVEMENTS

There are still a number of clinical situations that make surgical intervention useful or even necessary. This underlines the importance of interdisciplinary vascular centers for the treatment of complex aortic pathologies and their sequelae.

PRACTICAL RECOMMENDATIONS

In the following article, the arguments for the choice of procedure for the treatment of infrarenal aortic aneurysms are discussed and the recommendations of various guidelines are compared.

Mini-surgical access prevents local complications and reduces costs in endovascular aortic repair

BACKGROUND

This study aims to propose a minimally invasive surgical approach to the common femoral artery in endovascular aortic repair and assess its value by a single-center retrospective study including 118 patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2017 and 2022, all patients receiving endovascular treatment for thoracic and abdominal aortic aneurysms in our Center had the anterior wall of the common femoral artery exposed, through a 2- 3cm transverse groin incision, instead of a complete surgical cut-down. We access the artery with a purse-string suture, held tight with a tourniquet. After procedure completion, we tie the purse-string closing the arteriotomy. We retrospectively analyzed the cohort of all consecutive patients treated with endovascular aortic repair in this period and recorded primary and assisted technical success, operative time, in-hospital length of stay, access failure, and access-related complications, comparing the results with the current literature.

RESULTS

All procedures were successful, with no perioperative mortality. Primary technical success was achieved in 116 patients: two required adjunctive procedures. No access failure or access-related complications (thrombosis, groin hematoma, lymphocele, wound dehiscence, or infection) occurred. Two accesses required conversion to complete femoral artery exposure and endarterectomy. Operatory time and length of in-hospital stay were comparable to the outcomes of the major studies reporting on percutaneous access, saving the costs of the closure devices.

CONCLUSION

Minimally invasive surgical access is safe and feasible for endovascular aortic procedures. Compared to the costs of percutaneous access found in literature, it is cost-effective. It can be chosen whenever the percutaneous approach is not feasible or at high risk of complications.

Out of Date or Best Before? A Commentary on the Relevance of Economic Evaluations Over Time

The impact of time on the applicability and relevance of historical economic evaluations can be considerable. Ignoring this may lead to the use of weak or invalid evidence to inform important research questions or resource allocation decisions, as historical economic evaluations may have reached different conclusions compared to if a similar study had been conducted more recently. There are multiple factors that contribute towards evidence becoming outdated including changes to the relevant decision problem (e.g. comparators), changes to parameters (such as costs, utilities and resource use) and methodological updates (e.g. recommendations on uncertainty analysis). Researchers reviewing economic evaluations need to consider whether changes over time would influence the study design and results if the evaluation were repeated, to the extent that it is no longer helpful or informative. In this paper, we summarise these key issues and make recommendations about how and whether researchers can future proof their economic evaluations.

Creating Interactive Three-Dimensional Applications to Visualise Novel Stent Grafts That Aid in the Treatment of Aortic Aneurysms

Three-Dimensional (3D) medical animations incorporated into applications are highly beneficial for clinical outreach and medical communication purposes that work towards educating the clinician and patient. Aortic aneurysms are a clinically important area to communicate with multiple audiences about various treatment options; both abdominal and thoracic aortic aneurysms were selected to create 3D animations and applications to educate medical professionals and patients regarding treatment options. Fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) are both tried and tested minimally invasive surgical methods for treating thoracic aortic aneurysms respectively. The Terumo Aortic Custom Relay Proximal Scalloped stent graft and Fenestrated Anaconda stent graft were both designed specifically for these procedures; however, it can be difficult to visually communicate to clinicians and patients in a straightforward way how these devices work. Therefore, we have developed two interactive applications that use 3D visualisation techniques to demonstrate how these aortic devices function and are implemented. The objective of these applications is to engage both clinicians and patients, therefore demonstrating that the addition of anatomically accurate 3D visualisations within an interactive interface would have a positive impact on public engagement while also ensuring that clinicians will have the best possible understanding of the potential uses of both devices, enabling them to exploit their key features to effectively broaden the treatable patient population.Detailed anatomical modelling and animation was used to generate realistic and accurate rendered videos showcasing both products. These videos were integrated into an interactive application within a modern, professional graphic interface that allowed the user to explore all aspects of the stent device. The resulting applications were broken down into three modules: deployment, clinical performance and features. Following application development, these applications were evaluated by professionals in the field. Overall, positive feedback was received regarding the user-friendly nature of the applications and highly effective animations to showcase the products. The clinical applications and feature modules were particularly successful, while the deployment modules had a neutral response. Biomedical applications such as these show great potential for communicating the key features of medical devices and promoting discussion between clinicians and patients; further testing would need to be conducted on a larger group of participants in order to validate the learning effectiveness of the applications.

Endovascular stent grafting and open surgical replacement for chronic thoracic aortic aneurysms: a systematic review and prospective cohort study

Background

The management of chronic thoracic aortic aneurysms includes conservative management, watchful waiting, endovascular stent grafting and open surgical replacement. The Effective Treatments for Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms (ETTAA) study investigates timing and intervention choice.

Objective

To describe pre- and post-intervention management of and outcomes for chronic thoracic aortic aneurysms.

Design

A systematic review of intervention effects; a Delphi study of 360 case scenarios based on aneurysm size, location, age, operative risk and connective tissue disorders; and a prospective cohort study of growth, clinical outcomes, costs and quality of life.

Setting

Thirty NHS vascular/cardiothoracic units.

Participants

Patients aged > 17 years who had existing or new aneurysms of ≥ 4 cm in diameter in the arch, descending or thoracoabdominal aorta.

Interventions

Endovascular stent grafting and open surgical replacement.

Main outcomes

Pre-intervention aneurysm growth, pre-/post-intervention survival, clinical events, readmissions and quality of life; and descriptive statistics for costs and quality-adjusted life-years over 12 months and value of information using a propensity score-matched subsample.

Results

The review identified five comparative cohort studies (endovascular stent grafting patients, n = 3955; open surgical replacement patients, n = 21,197). Pooled short-term all-cause mortality favoured endovascular stent grafting (odds ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.51 to 0.98; no heterogeneity). Data on survival beyond 30 days were mixed. Fewer short-term complications were reported with endovascular stent grafting. The Delphi study included 20 experts (13 centres). For patients with aneurysms of ≤ 6.0 cm in diameter, watchful waiting was preferred. For patients with aneurysms of > 6.0 cm, open surgical replacement was preferred in the arch, except for elderly or high-risk patients, and in the descending aorta if patients had connective tissue disorders. Otherwise endovascular stent grafting was preferred. Between 2014 and 2018, 886 patients were recruited (watchful waiting, n = 489; conservative management, n = 112; endovascular stent grafting, n = 150; open surgical replacement, n = 135). Pre-intervention death rate was 8.6% per patient-year; 49.6% of deaths were aneurysm related. Death rates were higher for women (hazard ratio 1.79, 95% confidence interval 1.25 to 2.57; p = 0.001) and older patients (age 61–70 years: hazard ratio 2.50, 95% confidence interval 0.76 to 5.43; age 71–80 years: hazard ratio 3.49, 95% confidence interval 1.26 to 9.66; age > 80 years: hazard ratio 7.01, 95% confidence interval 2.50 to 19.62; all compared with age < 60 years, p < 0.001) and per 1-cm increase in diameter (hazard ratio 1.90, 95% confidence interval 1.65 to 2.18; p = 0.001). The results were similar for aneurysm-related deaths. Decline per year in quality of life was greater for older patients (additional change –0.013 per decade increase in age, 95% confidence interval –0.019 to –0.007; p < 0.001) and smokers (additional change for ex-smokers compared with non-smokers 0.003, 95% confidence interval –0.026 to 0.032; additional change for current smokers compared with non-smokers –0.034, 95% confidence interval –0.057 to –0.01; p = 0.004). At the time of intervention, endovascular stent grafting patients were older (age difference 7.1 years; 95% confidence interval 4.7 to 9.5 years; p < 0.001) and more likely to be smokers (75.8% vs. 66.4%; p = 0.080), have valve disease (89.9% vs. 71.6%; p < 0.0001), have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (21.3% vs. 13.3%; p = 0.087), be at New York Heart Association stage III/IV (22.3% vs. 16.0%; p = 0.217), have lower levels of haemoglobin (difference –6.8 g/l, 95% confidence interval –11.2 to –2.4 g/l; p = 0.003) and take statins (69.3% vs. 42.2%; p < 0.0001). Ten (6.7%) endovascular stent grafting and 15 (11.1%) open surgical replacement patients died within 30 days of the procedure (p = 0.2107). One-year overall survival was 82.5% (95% confidence interval 75.2% to 87.8%) after endovascular stent grafting and 79.3% (95% confidence interval 71.1% to 85.4%) after open surgical replacement. Variables affecting survival were aneurysm site, age, New York Heart Association stage and time waiting for procedure. For endovascular stent grafting, utility decreased slightly, by –0.017 (95% confidence interval –0.062 to 0.027), in the first 6 weeks. For open surgical replacement, there was a substantial decrease of –0.160 (95% confidence interval –0.199 to –0.121; p < 0.001) up to 6 weeks after the procedure. Over 12 months endovascular stent grafting was less costly, with higher quality-adjusted life-years. Formal economic analysis was unfeasible.

Limitations

The study was limited by small numbers of patients receiving interventions and because only 53% of patients were suitable for both interventions.

Conclusions

Small (4–6 cm) aneurysms require close observation. Larger (> 6 cm) aneurysms require intervention without delay. Endovascular stent grafting and open surgical replacement were successful for carefully selected patients, but cost comparisons were unfeasible. The choice of intervention is well established, but the timing of intervention remains challenging.

Future work

Further research should include an analysis of the risk factors for growth/rupture and long-term outcomes.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN04044627 and NCT02010892.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 6. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

ANALYSIS OF SPIN IN VASCULAR SURGERY RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS WITH NONSIGNIFICANT OUTCOMES

OBJECTIVES

Spin is the manipulation of language that distorts the interpretation of objective findings. The purpose of this study is to describe the characteristics of spin found in statistically nonsignificant randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) to carotid artery stenting (CAS) for carotid stenosis (CS), and endovascular repair (EVAR) to open repair (OR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA).

METHODS

A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials was performed in June 2020 for studies published describing AAA or CS. All phase three RCTs with nonsignificant primary outcomes comparing OR to EVAR or CEA to CAS were included. Studies were appraised for the characteristics and severity of spin using a validated tool. Binary logistic regression was performed to assess the association of spin grade to (1) funding source (commercial vs non-commercial) and (2) the publishing journal's impact factor.

RESULTS

Thirty-one of 355 articles captured were included for analysis. Spin was identified in nine abstracts (9/18) and 13 main texts (13/18) of AAA articles and seven abstracts (7/13) and ten main texts (10/13) of CS articles. For both AAA and CS articles, spin was most commonly found in the manuscript discussion section, with the most commonly employed strategy being the interpretation of statistically nonsignificant primary results to show treatment equivalence or rule out adverse treatment effects. Increasing journal impact factor was associated with a statistically significant lower likelihood of spin in the study title or abstract conclusion (βOR = 0.96, 95% CI: 0.94 - 0.98, p < 0.01) while no significant association could be found with funding source (βOR = 1.33, 95% CI: 0.30-5.92, p = 0.71).

CONCLUSIONS

A large proportion of statistically nonsignificant RCTs contain interpretations that are inconsistent with their results. These findings should prompt authors and readers to appraise study findings independently and to limit the use of spin in study interpretations.

Quality-adjusted life year comparison at medium term follow-up of endovascular versus open surgical repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm in young patients

Objectives

This study aimed to compare the quality of life and cost effectiveness between endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) in young patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA).

Design

This was a single-center, observational, and retrospective study.

Materials and methods

A retrospective analysis was conducted of patients with AAA, who were <70 years old and underwent EVAR or OSR between January 2012 and October 2016. Only patients with aortic morphology that was suitable for EVAR were enrolled. Data on the complication rates, medical expenses, and expected quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were collected, and the cost per QALY at three years was compared.

Results

Among 90 patients with aortic morphology who were eligible for EVAR, 37 and 53 patients underwent EVAR and OSR, respectively. No significant differences were observed in perioperative cardiovascular events and death between the two groups. However, during the follow-up period, patients undergoing OSR showed a significantly lower complication rate (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.11; P = .021). From the three-year cost-effectiveness analysis, the total sum of costs was significantly lower in the OSR group (P < .001) than that in the EVAR group, and the number of QALYs was superior in the OSR group (P = .013). The cost per QALY at three years was significantly lower in the OSR group than that in the EVAR group (mean: $4038 vs. $10 137; respectively; P < .001)

Conclusions

OSR had lower complication rates and better cost-effectiveness than EVAR Among young patients with feasible aortic anatomy.

Patient-specific computational modeling of endovascular aneurysm repair: State of the art and future directions

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) has become the preferred intervention option for aortic aneurysms and dissections. This is because EVAR is much less invasive than the alternative open surgery repair. While in-hospital mortality rates are smaller for EVAR than open repair (1%-2% vs. 3%-5%), the early benefits of EVAR are lost after 3 years due to larger rates of complications in the EVAR group. Clinicians follow instructions for use (IFU) when possible, but are left with personal experience on how to best proceed and what choices to make with respect to stent-graft (SG) model choice, sizing, procedural options, and their implications on long-term outcomes. Computational modeling of SG deployment in EVAR and tissue remodeling after intervention offers an alternative way of testing SG designs in silico, in a personalized way before intervention, to ultimately select the strategies leading to better outcomes. Further, computational modeling can be used in the optimal design of SGs in cases of complex geometries. In this review, we address some of the difficulties and successes associated with computational modeling of EVAR procedures. There is still work to be done in all areas of EVAR in silico modeling, including model validation, before models can be applied in the clinic, but much progress has already been made. Critical to clinical implementation are current efforts focusing on developing fast algorithms that can achieve (near) real-time solutions, as well as ways of dealing with inherent uncertainties related to patient aortic wall degradation on an individualized basis. We are optimistic that EVAR modeling in the clinic will soon become a reality to help clinicians optimize EVAR interventions and ultimately reduce EVAR-associated complications.

[Debate on Infrarenal AAA in Young and Fit Patients ('Fit for Open Repair'): Open Repair is Safe and Long-term Results are Better]

Endovascular aortic repair, initially developed for patients at prohibitively high risk for an open repair, has undergone significant technical evolution and refinement and has emerged as the preferred treatment option for patients with an infrarenal aortic aneurysm. However, analysis of long-term data of the randomised studies revealed inferior results with regards to survival and freedom-from-reintervention after eight years. Open aortic repair has been performed for more than seven decades and especially for the younger patients with few comorbidities, results are excellent. Potential drawbacks of open repair like incisional hernias, erectile dysfunction and quality of life can either be effectively prevented (mesh reinforcement) or actually failed to show a significant difference compared to open repair in recent studies. Therefore, meticulous assessment of patient comorbidites using validated parameters is the key element for decision-making and parameters such as young age, low comorbidity profile, large aneurysm and presence of atopic renal arteries or a dominant inferior mesenteric artery should prompt a recommendation of open repair.

Public Health Radiography: A Scoping Review of Benefits, and Growth Opportunities for Radiographers

INTRODUCTION

There is growing adoption of radiographic techniques in public health to improve outcomes of chronic and communicable diseases. This review examines the applications, benefits, and implications of radiography in public health. It also examines the challenges and potential advanced practice roles for radiographers in public health radiography (PHR).

METHODOLOGY

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses - Scoping review extension (PRISMA- ScR) checklist was employed, and the search was conducted using PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar to identify relevant articles that explored the concept of radiography in public health. Evidence was analysed using an inductive iterative approach.

RESULTS

Radiographic imaging modalities such as ultrasound, computed tomography, and plain X-ray had wide applicability in public health fields of preventive cardiology, preventive oncology, maternal health, infectious disease epidemiology, and radiographic informatics. PHR effectively reduced mortality, improved outcomes, informed lifestyle changes to mitigate the risk of impending disease. PHR also helped in monitoring disease progression and predicting treatment outcomes. However, evidence establishing a competency framework that supports PHR is scarce.

CONCLUSION

Radiography makes a significant contribution to public health in reducing mortality and morbidity. Therefore, developing a PHR competency framework can accentuate the contribution Radiographers make to solving public health issues.

Endovascular aortic repair is a cost-effective option for in-hospital patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm

BACKGROUND

To investigate the cost-effectiveness of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) versus open aortic repair (OAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) using incremental costs per decreased in-hospital mortality rate gained through our patients' cohort.

METHODS

Medical records and healthcare costs of patients with AAA hospitalized between 2010 and 2015 were extracted from the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) of Taiwan. Multiple regression analysis was applied to adjust for confounding factors and to compare the differences in postoperative clinical outcomes between patients who received EVAR and OAR. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of EVAR was determined based on the healthcare cost obtained from the analyzed data.

RESULTS

A total of 2803 AAA patients were identified (n = 559 with ruptured AAA and n = 2244 unruptured AAA). Patients with ruptured AAA who underwent EVAR compared with OAR patients had shorter hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) stays (all p < 0.05). For patients with unruptured AAA, those who received EVAR compared with OAR, the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of postoperative complications and in-hospital mortality were 0.371 and 0.447 (all p < 0.05). The total direct surgical costs and medical expenses during hospitalization in all AAA patients were higher for the EVAR group; however, ICER was <1 per capita gross domestic product. Stratification by age groups further suggested that ICER for patients with unruptured AAA who received EVAR, compared with OAR, decreased with age.

CONCLUSION

Total direct medical costs were higher for AAA patients receiving EVAR regardless of rupture status; however, the cost is offset by lower odds of postoperative complications and in-hospital mortality. The observed decrease in ICER with age and EVAR use warrants further analysis. Our findings further validate the use of EVAR over OAR. These results provides supporting evidence for physicians and patients with AAA to inform shared decision making regarding endovascular or OAR options.

Treatment of infectious aortic disease with bovine pericardial tube grafts

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to evaluate the mid-term outcomes of bovine pericardial tube graft repair for infectious aortic disease in any aortic segment.

METHODS

Between May 2015 and July 2020, 45 patients were treated for infectious aortic disease of the native (n = 9) aorta or after (endo-)graft (n = 36) implantation with bovine pericardial tube grafts. Clinical, infectious details, outcomes and follow-up data were evaluated.

RESULTS

All aortic segments underwent pericardial tube graft or bifurcational replacement: the aortic root (n = 12, 27%), ascending aorta (n = 18, 40%), aortic arch (n = 7, 16%), descending aorta (n = 5, 11%), thoraco-abdominal aorta (n = 6, 13%) and abdominal aorta (n = 18, 40%) including the iliac arteries (n = 14, 31%). Organ fistulation (n = 15, 33%) was the most common underlying pathology. Seven patients (16%) expired in-hospital secondary to ongoing sepsis (n = 5, 11%), respiratory failure (n = 1, 2%) and unknown cause (n = 1, 2%). A fungal infection was predictive for in-hospital mortality (P = 0.026, odds ratio: 19.470). After a median follow-up of 11 [first quartile: 2, third quartile 26] months, 9 additional patients (20%) expired and 1 patient developed a postoperative spondylodiscitis at the level of the aortic tube graft. Hence, freedom from proven aortic graft re-infection was 98%.

CONCLUSIONS

Orthotopic aortic reconstruction using bovine pericardial tube grafts to treat infectious aortic disease is possible in any aortic segment. Organ fistulation is a frequently observed disease mechanism requiring concomitant treatment. Granted, the early attrition rate is substantial, but after the initial period, both survival and freedom from re-infection appear encouraging.

Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair during the Early Days of the COVID-19 Outbreak

Introduction: We report the results of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) in three patients during the COVID-19 pandemic. Materials and Methods: Three patients were diagnosed with abdominal aortic aneurysm. All three patients were male and aged 68 years. The diameter of the aneurysm was larger than 65 mm and was considered suitable for EVAR. Thorax tomography was performed to exclude SARS-CoV-2 infection before the procedure. Results: We performed EVAR under general anesthesia. “Priority Level” was based on the guideline of the American College of Surgeons. The procedure was conducted in the angiography laboratory by taking advanced precautions. Intensive care admission was avoided. The postoperative period was uneventful, and all patients were discharged without any condition associated with COVID-19. There were no mortality, rupture, secondary intervention, major adverse event, limb occlusion, and 60-day read-mission. Conclusions: During the pandemic, EVAR can be performed for symptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm with a diameter of more than 65 mm. Thorax tomography is safe to exclude SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, tomographic angiography to monitor patients may be difficult during the pandemic.

Prehabilitation exercise therapy before elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

BACKGROUND

An abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is an abnormal dilation in the diameter of the abdominal aorta of 50% or more of the normal diameter or greater than 3 cm in total. The risk of rupture increases with the diameter of the aneurysm, particularly above a diameter of approximately 5.5 cm. Perioperative and postoperative morbidity is common following elective repair in people with AAA. Prehabilitation or preoperative exercise is the process of enhancing an individual's functional capacity before surgery to improve postoperative outcomes. Studies have evaluated exercise interventions for people waiting for AAA repair, but the results of these studies are conflicting.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of exercise programmes on perioperative and postoperative morbidity and mortality associated with elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Vascular Specialised register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) databases, and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov trials registers to 6 July 2020. We also examined the included study reports' bibliographies to identify other relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) examining exercise interventions compared with usual care (no exercise; participants maintained normal physical activity) for people waiting for AAA repair.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies for inclusion, assessed the included studies, extracted data and resolved disagreements by discussion. We assessed the methodological quality of studies using the Cochrane risk of bias tool and collected results related to the outcomes of interest: post-AAA repair mortality; perioperative and postoperative complications; length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay; length of hospital stay; number of days on a ventilator; change in aneurysm size pre- and post-exercise; and quality of life. We used GRADE to evaluate certainty of the evidence. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated the risk ratio (RR) with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

This review identified four RCTs with a total of 232 participants with clinically diagnosed AAA deemed suitable for elective intervention, comparing prehabilitation exercise therapy with usual care (no exercise). The prehabilitation exercise therapy was supervised and hospital-based in three of the four included trials, and in the remaining trial the first session was supervised in hospital, but subsequent sessions were completed unsupervised in the participants' homes. The dose and schedule of the prehabilitation exercise therapy varied across the trials with three to six sessions per week and a duration of one hour per session for a period of one to six weeks. The types of exercise therapy included circuit training, moderate-intensity continuous exercise and high-intensity interval training. All trials were at a high risk of bias. The certainty of the evidence for each of our outcomes was low to very low. We downgraded the certainty of the evidence because of risk of bias and imprecision (small sample sizes). Overall, we are uncertain whether prehabilitation exercise compared to usual care (no exercise) reduces the occurrence of 30-day (or longer if reported) mortality post-AAA repair (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.31 to 5.77; 3 trials, 192 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Compared to usual care (no exercise), prehabilitation exercise may decrease the occurrence of cardiac complications (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.92; 1 trial, 124 participants; low-certainty evidence) and the occurrence of renal complications (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.88; 1 trial, 124 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether prehabilitation exercise, compared to usual care (no exercise), decreases the occurrence of pulmonary complications (RR 0.49, 95% 0.26 to 0.92; 2 trials, 144 participants; very low-certainty evidence), decreases the need for re-intervention (RR 1.29, 95% 0.33 to 4.96; 2 trials, 144 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or decreases postoperative bleeding (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.18 to 1.80; 1 trial, 124 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was little or no difference between the exercise and usual care (no exercise) groups in length of ICU stay, length of hospital stay and quality of life. None of the studies reported data for the number of days on a ventilator and change in aneurysm size pre- and post-exercise outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Due to very low-certainty evidence, we are uncertain whether prehabilitation exercise therapy reduces 30-day mortality, pulmonary complications, need for re-intervention or postoperative bleeding. Prehabilitation exercise therapy might slightly reduce cardiac and renal complications compared with usual care (no exercise). More RCTs of high methodological quality, with large sample sizes and long-term follow-up, are needed. Important questions should include the type and cost-effectiveness of exercise programmes, the minimum number of sessions and programme duration needed to effect clinically important benefits, and which groups of participants and types of repair benefit most.

Cost-Effectiveness of Endovascular Versus Open Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a life-threatening condition which, in the absence of increasing diameter or rupture, often remains asymptomatic, and a diameter greater than 5.5 cm requires elective surgical repair. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of endovascular repair (EVAR) versus open surgical repair (OSR) in patients with AAA through a systematic review of published health economics studies.

METHODS

Using a systematic review method, an electronic search was conducted for cost-effectiveness studies published on AAA (both in English and Persian) on PubMed, Embase, ISI/Web of Science (WoS), SCOPUS, Global Health databases, and the national databases of Iran from 1990 to 2020 including the keywords "cost-effectiveness", "endovascular", "open surgical", and "abdominal aortic aneurysms". The quality of the studies was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) checklist.

RESULTS

In total, 958 studies were found, of which 16 were eligible for further study. All studies were conducted in developed countries, and quality-adjusted life years (QALY) and life years (LY) were used to measure the outcomes. According to the QHES checklist, most studies were of good quality. In European countries and Canada, EVAR has not been cost-effective, while most studies in the United States regard this technique as a cost-effective intervention. For example, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) values ranged from $14,252.12 to $34,446.37 per QALY in the USA, while ICER was €116,600.40 per QALY in Portugal.

CONCLUSION

According to the results, the EVAR technique has been more cost-effective than OSR for high-risk patients, but the need for continuous follow-up, increased costs, and re-intervention over the long term and for low-risk patients has reduced the cost-effectiveness of this method. As the health systems vary among different countries (i.e. quality of care, cost of devices, etc.), and due to the heterogeneity of studies in terms of the follow-up period, time horizon, and threshold, all of which are inherent features of economic evaluation, generalizing the results should be done with much caution, and policymaking must be based on national evidence.

The Effect of Patient Oral Intake Status on Abdominal Aortic Ultrasound Visualization

BACKGROUND

The standard abdominal aortic duplex ultrasound protocol requires fasting for 8-12 hours prior to examination in attempt to reduce bowel gas and improve visualization. Such practice results in frequent testing delays and patient non-compliance. The aim of this study was to determine whether fasting improves visualization of the abdominal aorta in patients undergoing duplex ultrasound or influences diagnostic properties.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind imaging trail at a single institution. Ninety patients were randomized to one of three dietary groups, including NPO, clear liquids or control (regular diet). Diagnostic ultrasound examinations were performed by accredited Registered Vascular Technologists who remained blinded to the patients' diet. Sonographers commented on the presence of limited visualization in the study based on their ability to accurately measure aortic diameter. Examination results were randomly assigned to interpreting physicians who were also blinded to the patients' diet. Following interpretation, the reading physician was asked to comment whether they had sufficient information for a conclusive diagnostic interpretation.

RESULTS

All ultrasound studies were deemed diagnostic by the interpreting physician regardless of the patients' dietary status. Limited visualization was reported in 19 of the 90 study patients (21.1%) with no significant difference existing between the dietary groups (P = 0.344). The NPO group contained the most patients with studies deemed to have limited visualization.

CONCLUSION

Oral intake status did not affect visualization of the abdominal aorta or the rate of diagnostic studies in patients undergoing DUS at a single center. These results suggest that dietary restrictions prior to DUS evaluation of the abdominal aorta is unnecessary.

Migration After Endovasclar Aneurysm Sealing in Conjunction With Chimney Grafts

Purpose

To assess the incidence of migration after endovascular aneurysm sealing (EVAS) in conjunction with chimney grafts (chEVAS) for repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs).

Materials and Methods

A retrospective, observational cohort study was conducted of 31 patients (mean age 75.7 years; 27 men) treated for juxtarenal AAA between April 2013 and December 2018 at single centers in New Zealand and the Netherlands. The majority of patients received >1 chimney graft (13 single, 13 double, and 5 triple) during chEVAS. Six patients had only the first postoperative scan, so the migration analysis was based on 25 patients.

Results

Median seal length assessed on the first postoperative computed tomography scan was 36.5 mm. The assisted technical success rate was 93.5% with 2 technical failures. Median time to final imaging follow-up was 17 months in 25 patients. At the latest follow-up, there were no cases of caudal migration >10 mm. Freedom from caudal movement of 5 to 9 mm was estimated as 86.1% at 1 year and 73.9% at 2 years; freedom from clinically relevant migration (movement requiring reintervention) was 100% at both time intervals. However, at 3 years there were 2 cases of caudal movement of 5 to 9 mm and a type Ia endoleak warranting reintervention. No correlation between migration and aneurysm growth (p=0.851), endoleak (p=0.562), or the number of chimney grafts (p=0.728) was found. During follow-up, 2 patients (7%) had aneurysm rupture and 10 (33%) had reinterventions. Eight patients (27%) died; 2 were aneurysm-related (7%) and due to the consequences of a reintervention.

Conclusion

In the 2 years following chEVAS, there was no caudal migration >10 mm, but nearly a quarter of patients had caudal movement of 5 to 9 mm. A trend was observed toward ongoing migration that required intervention at 3-year follow-up. chEVAS is technically challenging and should be considered only for patients with no viable alternative treatment option.

Effect of Blood Loss and Transfusion Requirements on Clinical Outcomes of Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of blood loss and transfusion requirements on clinical outcomes of patients treated by fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (F-BEVAR) for pararenal (PRA) and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs).

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical data of 370 consecutive patients (277 male, mean age 74 ± 10 years) treated by F-BEVAR between 2007 and 2017. Outcomes were estimated blood loss (EBL), use of intraoperative blood salvage (IOBS), transfusion of packed red blood cells (PRBCs), mortality, and major adverse events (MAEs).

RESULTS

There were 189 patients (51%) treated for PRAs and 181 patients (49%) treated for TAAAs. IOBS was used in 194 patients (52%) and transfusion of PRBCs was needed in 137 (37%). Thirty-day mortality was 2.2% (8/370) and MAEs occurred in 123 patients (33%), including 74 patients (20%) who had EBL > 1L. EBL > 1L and transfusion of PRBCs were significantly higher (P < 0.05) in patients treated in the first half of clinical experience and in those with larger aneurysms, iliofemoral conduits, bilateral open surgical femoral access and Extent I-III TAAAs. Use of DrySeal^® sheaths (WL Gore, Flagstaff AZ) was associated with significantly lower (P < .05) EBL volume and with less transfusion of PRBCs. On multivariate analysis PRBCs > 1L, male gender and the last half of clinical experience were associated with MAEs/mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

F-BEVAR was associated with significantly higher volume of blood loss and transfusion requirements in patients treated in the early experience and in those who had iliofemoral conduits, open femoral surgical exposure or Extent I-III TAAAs.

Short-term outcomes of the t-Branch off-the-shelf multibranched stent graft for reintervention after previous infrarenal aortic repair

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome of t-Branch (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind) stent graft for the treatment of thoracoabdominal and pararenal aortic aneurysms in patients who had previous infrarenal aortic repair.

METHODS

A retrospective two-center study was undertaken. All consecutive patients who underwent endovascular repair using t-Branch stent graft after previous infrarenal aortic repair between January 2010 and August 2018 were included. Demographics, past medical history, cardiovascular risk factors, and intraoperative and perioperative details were recorded. Technical success and early (30-day) mortality, morbidity, target vessel patency, and presence of endoleak were analyzed. During the first year of follow-up, survival, freedom from reintervention, and patency rates were recorded.

RESULTS

There were 32 patients (mean age, 74 ± 7 years; 81% male) included in the study; 24 (75%) patients had prior open surgical repair, and 8 (25%) patients had undergone standard endovascular aneurysm repair. The index operation was performed 9 ± 5 years earlier, including 10 ± 5 years for open surgical repair and 8 ± 6 years for endovascular aortic repair. The indication was progression of the disease in 26 patients (81%) and type IA endoleak in 6 patients (19%). The total number of target vessels incorporated was 117 arteries (3.8 ± 0.6 target vessels per patient). Eleven patients had only three vessels incorporated; celiac trunk was occluded in three patients, and eight patients had one functioning kidney. Technical success rate was 97% (31/32). There was a single technical failure in one patient who had a type IA endoleak after endovascular repair with suprarenal fixation. The stenotic right renal artery was not catheterized at the initial procedure, and retrograde access was achieved through a right subcostal incision 3 days later with successful completion of the repair. Early mortality rate was 13%, and spinal cord ischemia rate was 22% (7/32); four patients had permanent and three had transient neurologic deficits. Early target vessel patency was 100%, and the rate of any endoleak was 9% (3/32); two patients had type II endoleaks and one patient had type III endoleak. The mean follow-up was 5.4 ± 5.9 months. The cumulative survival rate was 82% and 73% at 6 and 12 months, respectively. The freedom from aorta-related mortality was 92% at 6 and 12 months. The cumulative freedom from reintervention during follow-up was 90% at 6 and 12 months. The overall target vessel patency rate was 100% and 97.5% at 6 and 12 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of t-Branch off-the-shelf stent graft for the treatment of aortic disease in patients who had previous infrarenal aortic repair appears to be feasible, with acceptable early outcomes in terms of morbidity and mortality.

Regional anesthesia for vascular surgery: does the anesthetic choice influence outcome?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Outcomes following surgery are of major importance to clinicians, institutions and most importantly patients. This review examines whether regional anesthesia and analgesia influence outcome after vascular surgery.

RECENT FINDINGS

Large database analyses of contemporary practice suggest that utilizing regional anesthesia for both open and endovascular aortic aneurysm repair, lower limb revascularization and carotid endarterectomy reduces morbidity, length of stay and possibly even mortality. Results from such analyses are limited by an inherent risk of bias but are nevertheless important given the number of patients required in randomized trials to detect differences in rare outcomes. There is minimal evidence that regional anesthesia influences longer term outcomes except for arteriovenous fistula surgery where brachial plexus blocks appear to improve 3-month fistula patency.

SUMMARY

Patients undergoing vascular surgery often have multiple comorbidities and it is important to be able to outline both benefits and risks of regional anesthesia techniques. Regional anesthesia in vascular surgery allows avoidance of general anesthesia and does provide short-term benefits beyond superior analgesia. Evidence of long-term benefits is lacking in most procedures. Further work is required on newer patient centered outcomes.

Anaerobic threshold as an independent predictor of mid-term survival following elective endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to examine the value preoperative AT as predictor of postoperative survival in patients who underwent elective EVAR for repair of asymptomatic AAA.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent elective EVAR between 2008 and 2018 were analyzed. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing was performed. Perioperative 30-day mortality was compared between patients who had AT ≥8 mL/kg/min and those with AT<8 mL/kg/min. Risk factors for postoperative survival following EVAR were examined using Cox's regression analysis.

RESULTS

Between 1^st January 2008 and 31^st December 2017, 430 patients underwent elective EVAR (standard device: N.=374, fenestrated/branched: N.=56); their median age was 76 years (range: 53-91 years), median AT was 9.3 (range: 5.4-16.1), and 30-day mortality was 0.9%. These patients were followed up for a median of 1630 days. There was no significant difference in perioperative 30-day mortality between patients who had AT≥8 and those who had AT<8 (χ²=1.56, P=0.22). Age (HR=1.51 [CI: 1.07-1.99], P<0.05) and AT (HR=0.59 [CI: 0.45-0.76], P=0.0003) were predictors of reduced postoperative survival following elective EVAR whereas gender (HR=0.75 [CI: 0.4-1.4], P=0.37), AAA diameter (HR=0.95 [CI: 0.77-1.16], P=0.6), and AAA morphology (HR=1.23 [CI: 0.68-1.76], P=0.95) were not.

CONCLUSIONS

Anaerobic threshold is an independent predictor of prolonged survival following elective EVAR and can be used to identify patients who receive most benefit from elective EVAR.

Long-term radiation exposure in patients undergoing EVAR: Reflecting clinical day-to-day practice to assess realistic radiation burden

Endovascular repair of aortic aneurysms (EVAR) has become an established treatment option currently applied in an increasing numbers of patients with aortic aneurysms. Advantages include reduced surgical trauma, procedural time, intensive care unit and hospital lengths of stay, blood loss as well as morbidity and mortality.The optimal imaging modalities in EVAR follow-up as well as the appropriate intervals between these follow-ups remain subject of controversial discussion. Objective of this study was the evaluation of the realistic radiation exposure and risk estimate postop EVAR treatment.Of the follow-ups required according to the surveillance schedule during the first year post-EVAR, only 68.3% were actually implemented. Of those required from the second year onwards, an average of 70% was actually performed. During the observation period, each patient underwent a mean of 4.3 CTAs. The median ED calculated from all CTAs was 24. 5 mSv. The minimum and maximum cumulative EDs for the entire observation period were 55 mSv and 310 mSv, respectively.

Optimizing Surveillance and Re-intervention Strategy Following Elective Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm has an initial survival advantage over OR, but more frequent complications increase costs and long-term aneurysm-related mortality. Randomized controlled trials of EVAR versus OR have shown EVAR is not cost-effective over a patient's lifetime. However, in the EVAR-1 trial, postoperative surveillance may have been sub-optimal, as the importance of sac growth as a predictor of graft failure was overlooked.

METHODS

Real-world data informed a discrete event simulation model of postoperative outcomes following EVAR. Outcomes observed EVAR-1 were compared with those from 5 alternative postoperative surveillance and re-intervention strategies. Key events, quality-adjusted life years and costs were predicted. The impact of using complication and rupture rates from more recent devices, imaging and re-intervention methods was also explored.

RESULTS

Compared with observed EVAR-1 outcomes, modeling full adherence to the EVAR-1 scan protocol reduced abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) deaths by 3% and increased elective re-interventions by 44%. European Society re-intervention guidelines provided the most clinically effective strategy, with an 8% reduction in AAA deaths, but a 52% increase in elective re-interventions. The cheapest and most cost-effective strategy used lifetime annual ultrasound in primary care with confirmatory computed tomography if necessary, and reduced AAA-related deaths by 5%. Using contemporary rates for complications and rupture did not alter these conclusions.

CONCLUSIONS

All alternative strategies improved clinical benefits compared with the EVAR-1 trial. Further work is needed regarding the cost and accuracy of primary care ultrasound, and the potential impact of these strategies in the comparison with OR.

Comparison of perioperative costs with fast-track vs standard endovascular aneurysm repair

Background

Perioperative health care utilization and costs in patients undergoing elective fast-track vs standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) remain unclear.

Methods

The fast-track EVAR group included patients treated with a 14 Fr stent graft, bilateral percutaneous access, no general anesthesia or intensive care monitoring, and next-day hospital discharge. The standard EVAR group was identified from Medicare administrative claims using a matching algorithm to adjust for imbalances in patient characteristics. Hospital outcomes included operating room time, intensive care monitoring, hospital stay, secondary interventions, and major adverse events (MAEs). Perioperative outcomes occurring from hospital discharge to 30 days postdischarge included MAE, secondary interventions, and unrelated readmissions.

Results

Among 1000 matched patients (250 fast-track; 750 standard), hospital outcomes favored the fast-track EVAR group, including shorter operating room time (2.30 vs 2.83 hrs, P<0.001), shorter hospital stay (1.16 vs 1.69 d, P<0.001), less need for intensive care monitoring (4.4% vs 48.0%, P<0.001), and lower secondary intervention rate (0% vs 2.4%, P=0.01). Postdischarge outcomes also favored fast-track EVAR with a lower rate of MAE (0% vs 7.2%, P<0.001) and all-cause readmission (1.6% vs 6.8%, P=0.001). The total cost to the health care system during the perioperative period was $26,730 with fast-track EVAR vs $30,730 with standard EVAR. Total perioperative health care costs were $4000 (95% CI: $3130–$4830) lower with fast-track EVAR vs standard EVAR, with $2980 in savings to hospitals and $1030 savings to health care payers.

Conclusion

A fast-track EVAR protocol using a 14 Fr stent graft resulted in shorter procedure time, lower intensive care utilization, faster discharge, lower incidence of MAE, lower readmission rates, and lower perioperative costs compared to standard EVAR.