Literature DB >> 27288102

Outcomes after endovascular aneurysm repair conversion and primary aortic repair for urgent and emergency indications in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative.

Salvatore T Scali1, Sara J Runge2, Robert J Feezor2, Kristina A Giles2, Javairiah Fatima2, Scott A Berceli2, Thomas S Huber2, Adam W Beck2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Open conversion after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR-c) is performed nonelectively in up to 60% of cases. EVAR-c has been reported to have significantly greater risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality than primary aortic repair, but few data exist on outcomes for symptomatic or ruptured presentations. This study determined outcomes and identified predictors of postoperative major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) and mortality for patients undergoing nonelective EVAR-c compared with nonelective primary aortic repair (PAR) in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI).
METHODS: All VQI patients undergoing urgent/emergency EVAR-c or urgent/emergency PAR from 2002 to 2014 were reviewed. Urgent presentation was defined by repair ≤24 hours of a nonelective admission, and emergency operations had clinical or radiographic evidence, or both, of rupture. End points included in-hospital MACE (myocardial infarction, dysrhythmia, congestive heart failure) and 30-day mortality. Possible covariates identified on univariate analysis (P < .2) were entered into a multivariable model, and stepwise elimination identified the best subset of predictors. Generalized estimating equations logistic regression analysis was used to determine the relative effect of EVAR-c compared with PAR on outcomes.
RESULTS: During the study interval, we identified 277 EVAR-c, and 118 (43%) underwent urgent/emergency repair. nonelective PAR was performed in 1388 of 6152 total (23%). EVAR-c patients were older (75 ± 9 vs 71 ± 10 years; P < .0001), more likely to be male (84% vs 74%; P = .02), and had a higher prevalence of hypertension (88% vs 79%; P = .02) and coronary artery disease (38% vs 27%; P = .01). No differences in MACE (EVAR-c, 31% [n = 34] vs PAR, 30% [n = 398]) or any major postoperative complication (EVAR-c, 57% [n = 63] vs PAR, 55% [n = 740]; P = .8) were found; however, 30-day mortality was significantly greater in EVAR-c (37% [n = 41]) than in (PAR, 24% [n = 291]; P = .003), with an odds ratio (OR) of 2.2 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-4.77; P = .04) for EVAR-c. Predictors of any MACE included age (OR, × 1.03 for each additional year; 95% CI, 1.01-1.03; P = .0002), male gender (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.03-1.67; P = .03), body mass index ≤20 kg/m2 (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.13-2.87; P = .01), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.86-1.80; P = .25), congestive heart failure (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 0.98-2.34; P = .06), preoperative chronic β-blocker use (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.97-1.63; P = .09), and emergency presentation (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.8-3.01; area under the curve, 0.70; P < .0001). Significant predictors for 30-day mortality were age (OR × 1.07 for each additional year; 95% CI, 1.05-1.09; P < .0001), female gender (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.01-2.46; P = .04), preoperative creatinine >1.8 mg/dL (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.04-2.35; P = .03), an emergency presentation (OR, 4.8; 95% CI, 2.93-7.93; P < .0001), and renal/visceral ischemia (OR, × 1.1 for each unit increase log (time-minutes); 95% CI, 1.02-1.22; area under the curve, 0.84; P = .01).
CONCLUSIONS: Nonelective EVAR-c patients are older and have higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors than PAR patients. Similar rates of postoperative complications occur; however, urgent/emergency EVAR-c has a significantly higher risk of 30-day mortality than nonelective PAR. Several variables are identified that predict outcomes after these repairs and may help risk stratify patients to further inform clinical decision making when patients present nonelectively with EVAR failure.
Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27288102      PMCID: PMC5545799          DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.02.028

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


  32 in total

Review 1.  A meta-analysis of 50 years of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

Authors:  M J Bown; A J Sutton; P R F Bell; R D Sayers
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 6.939

Review 2.  Late Rupture of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm After Previous Endovascular Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  George A Antoniou; George S Georgiadis; Stavros A Antoniou; Simon Neequaye; John A Brennan; Francesco Torella; S Rao Vallabhaneni
Journal:  J Endovasc Ther       Date:  2015-08-18       Impact factor: 3.487

3.  Elective endovascular aortic repair conversion for type Ia endoleak is not associated with increased morbidity or mortality compared with primary juxtarenal aneurysm repair.

Authors:  Salvatore T Scali; Michael M McNally; Robert J Feezor; Catherine K Chang; Alyson L Waterman; Scott A Berceli; Thomas S Huber; Adam W Beck
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2014-03-27       Impact factor: 4.268

4.  Treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm after endovascular abdominal aortic repair: A comparison with patients without prior treatment.

Authors:  Gioacchino Coppi; Stefano Gennai; Giuseppe Saitta; Roberto Silingardi; Sebastiano Tasselli
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2009-01-09       Impact factor: 4.268

5.  Immediate and Late Open Conversion after Ovation Endograft.

Authors:  Daniela Mazzaccaro; Silvia Stegher; Maria T Occhiuto; Giovanni Malacrida; Giovanni Nano
Journal:  Ann Vasc Surg       Date:  2015-06-27       Impact factor: 1.466

6.  Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm in a well-defined geographic area.

Authors:  M Heikkinen; J-P Salenius; O Auvinen
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2002-08       Impact factor: 4.268

7.  Open surgical repair after failed endovascular aneurysm repair: is endograft removal necessary?

Authors:  David Nabi; Erin H Murphy; Jimmy Pak; Christopher K Zarins
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 4.268

8.  Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms: predictors for early complications and death.

Authors:  E P Bauer; C Redaelli; L K von Segesser; M I Turina
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 3.982

9.  Late conversion of aortic stent grafts.

Authors:  Rebecca L Kelso; Sean P Lyden; Brett Butler; Roy K Greenberg; Matthew J Eagleton; Daniel G Clair
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2009-01-09       Impact factor: 4.268

10.  Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms: who should be offered surgery?

Authors:  D T Hardman; C M Fisher; M I Patel; M Neale; J Chambers; R Lane; M Appleberg
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 4.268

View more
  2 in total

1.  Increasing use of open conversion for late complications after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

Authors:  Abhisekh Mohapatra; Darve Robinson; Othman Malak; Michael C Madigan; Efthimios D Avgerinos; Rabih A Chaer; Michael J Singh; Michel S Makaroun
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2018-12-21       Impact factor: 4.268

Review 2.  Utility of the Vascular Quality Initiative in improving quality of care in Canadian patients undergoing vascular surgery

Authors:  Elizabeth Liao; Naomi Eisenberg; Anish Kaushal; Janice Montbriand; Kong-Teng Tan; Graham Roche-Nagle
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 2.089

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.