Literature DB >> 21803521

Anatomic severity grading score predicts technical difficulty, early outcomes, and hospital resource utilization of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

Sadaf S Ahanchi1, Megan Carroll, Babatunde Almaroof, Jean M Panneton.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In 2002, a system for the grading of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) was developed by the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS). Because the correlation of the anatomic severity grading (ASG) score to patient outcomes has yet to be validated, we provide our experience with calculating the ASG score using three-dimensional (3-D) image-rendering software and provide the practical translation of this score into early outcomes and hospital charges.
METHODS: All patients who underwent an endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for infrarenal AAAs between 2009 and 2010 were retrospectively reviewed for demographics, intraoperative data, and 30-day outcomes. ASG scores were calculated from morphologic measurements, and two independent patient groups were created: those with a low ASG score (score <14) and a high ASG score (score ≥14).
RESULTS: We identified 108 patients (mean age, 75 years), of whom 56 were in the low-score ASG group and 52 were in the high-score ASG group. Operative outcomes significantly different in the low-score group vs high-score group were number of endograft implants (three vs four, P = .001), operative time (113 vs 210 minutes, P < .0001), blood loss (227 vs 866 mL, P = .0002), and contrast volume (100 vs 131 mL, P = .032). In the low-score group compared with the high-score group, access site adjuncts were 14% vs 50% (P < .0001), and intraoperative adjuncts were 54% vs 80% (P = .004). Most adjuncts (75%) were endovascular. No EVARs were converted to open. Mean hospital stay was 2 days for the low-score group and 5 days for the high-score group (P = .012). The 30-day operative mortality was zero. No aneurysm-related deaths occurred during follow-up. In the low-score vs high-score groups, mean operating room supply charge was $16,646 vs $25,765 (P = .006), and the mean total hospital charge was $70,956 vs $105,153 (P = .016).
CONCLUSION: The anatomic severity grading score can be easily and rapidly calculated from computed tomography images with the aid of 3-D image-rendering software. The anatomic severity grading score correlates with the technical difficulty of EVAR and the extent of hospital resource utilization.
Copyright © 2011 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21803521     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2011.05.019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0741-5214            Impact factor:   4.268


  6 in total

1.  An evaluation score of the difficulty of thyroidectomy considering operating time and preservation of recurrent laryngeal nerve.

Authors:  Salvatore Vieni; Giuseppa Graceffa; Giacomo E M Rizzo; Federica Latteri; Mario A Latteri; Calogero Cipolla
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2018-11-15

2.  Identifying predictors of a difficult thyroidectomy.

Authors:  Valerie M Mok; Sarah C Oltmann; Herbert Chen; Rebecca S Sippel; David F Schneider
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2014-03-19       Impact factor: 2.192

3.  Novel thyroidectomy difficulty scale correlates with operative times.

Authors:  David F Schneider; Haggi Mazeh; Sarah C Oltmann; Herbert Chen; Rebecca S Sippel
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  A novel anatomic severity grading score for acute Type B aortic dissections and correlation to aortic reinterventions after thoracic endovascular aortic repair.

Authors:  Shirui Chen; Sebastian Larion; Sadaf S Ahanchi; Chad P Ammar; Colin T Brandt; Jean M Panneton
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2017-05-23       Impact factor: 1.637

5.  May predictors of difficulty in thyroid surgery increase the incidence of complications? Prospective study with the proposal of a preoperative score.

Authors:  Valerio D'Orazi; Andrea Sacconi; Silvia Trombetta; Menelaos Karpathiotakis; Daniele Pichelli; Enrico Di Lorenzo; Alice Ortensi; Paolo Urciuoli; Marco Biffoni; Andrea Ortensi
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2019-04-24       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  Remote ischaemic preconditioning versus sham procedure for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: an external feasibility randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Ronelle Mouton; Jon Pollock; Jasmeet Soar; David C Mitchell; Chris A Rogers
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2015-08-25       Impact factor: 2.279

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.