Klaas H J Ultee1, Sara L Zettervall2, Peter A Soden2, Dominique B Buck2, Sarah E Deery2, Katie E Shean2, Hence J M Verhagen3, Marc L Schermerhorn4. 1. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass; Department of Vascular Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 2. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass. 3. Department of Vascular Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 4. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass. Electronic address: mscherm@bidmc.harvard.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become an alternative to open repair for the treatment of ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysms (rTAAs). The aim of this study was to assess national trends in the use of TEVAR for the treatment of rTAA and to determine its impact on perioperative outcomes. METHODS: Patients admitted with an rTAA between 1993 and 2012 were identified from the National Inpatient Sample. Patients were grouped in accordance with their treatment: TEVAR, open repair, or nonoperative treatment. The primary outcomes were treatment trends over time and in-hospital death. Secondary outcomes included perioperative complications and length of stay. Trend analyses were performed using the Cochran-Armitage test for trend, and adjusted mortality risks were established using multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 12,399 patients were included, with 1622 (13%) undergoing TEVAR, 2808 (23%) undergoing open repair, and 7969 (64%) not undergoing surgical treatment. TEVAR has been increasingly used from 2% of total admissions in 2003-2004 to 43% in 2011-2012 (P < .001). Concurrently, there was a decline in the proportion of patients undergoing open repair (29% to 12%; P < .001) and nonoperative treatment (69% to 45%; P < .001). The proportion of patients undergoing surgical repair has increased for all age groups since 1993-1994 (P < .001 for all) but was most pronounced among those aged 80 years with a 7.5-fold increase. After TEVAR was introduced, procedural mortality decreased from 36% in 2003-2004 to 27% in 2011-2012 (P < .001); mortality among those undergoing nonoperative treatment remained stable between 63% and 60% (P = .167). Overall mortality after rTAA admission decreased from 55% to 42% (P < .001). Since 2005, mortality for open repair was 33% and 22% for TEVAR (P < .001). In adjusted analysis, open repair was associated with a twofold higher mortality than TEVAR (odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-2.5). CONCLUSIONS: TEVAR has replaced open repair as primary surgical treatment for rTAA. The introduction of endovascular treatment appears to have broadened the eligibility of patients for surgical treatment, particularly among the elderly. Mortality after rTAA admission has declined since the introduction of TEVAR, which is the result of improved operative mortality as well as the increased proportion of patients undergoing surgical repair.
BACKGROUND: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become an alternative to open repair for the treatment of ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysms (rTAAs). The aim of this study was to assess national trends in the use of TEVAR for the treatment of rTAA and to determine its impact on perioperative outcomes. METHODS:Patients admitted with an rTAA between 1993 and 2012 were identified from the National Inpatient Sample. Patients were grouped in accordance with their treatment: TEVAR, open repair, or nonoperative treatment. The primary outcomes were treatment trends over time and in-hospital death. Secondary outcomes included perioperative complications and length of stay. Trend analyses were performed using the Cochran-Armitage test for trend, and adjusted mortality risks were established using multivariable logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: A total of 12,399 patients were included, with 1622 (13%) undergoing TEVAR, 2808 (23%) undergoing open repair, and 7969 (64%) not undergoing surgical treatment. TEVAR has been increasingly used from 2% of total admissions in 2003-2004 to 43% in 2011-2012 (P < .001). Concurrently, there was a decline in the proportion of patients undergoing open repair (29% to 12%; P < .001) and nonoperative treatment (69% to 45%; P < .001). The proportion of patients undergoing surgical repair has increased for all age groups since 1993-1994 (P < .001 for all) but was most pronounced among those aged 80 years with a 7.5-fold increase. After TEVAR was introduced, procedural mortality decreased from 36% in 2003-2004 to 27% in 2011-2012 (P < .001); mortality among those undergoing nonoperative treatment remained stable between 63% and 60% (P = .167). Overall mortality after rTAA admission decreased from 55% to 42% (P < .001). Since 2005, mortality for open repair was 33% and 22% for TEVAR (P < .001). In adjusted analysis, open repair was associated with a twofold higher mortality than TEVAR (odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-2.5). CONCLUSIONS:TEVAR has replaced open repair as primary surgical treatment for rTAA. The introduction of endovascular treatment appears to have broadened the eligibility of patients for surgical treatment, particularly among the elderly. Mortality after rTAA admission has declined since the introduction of TEVAR, which is the result of improved operative mortality as well as the increased proportion of patients undergoing surgical repair.
Authors: Arman Kilic; Ashish S Shah; James H Black; Glenn J R Whitman; David D Yuh; Duke E Cameron; John V Conte Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2013-08-28 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Karen L Walker; Jonathan J Shuster; Tomas D Martin; Philip J Hess; Charles T Klodell; Robert J Feezor; Adam W Beck; Thomas M Beaver Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Leonard N Girardi; Karl H Krieger; Nasser K Altorki; Charles A Mack; Leonard Y Lee; O Wayne Isom Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Philip P Goodney; Lori Travis; F Lee Lucas; Mark F Fillinger; David C Goodman; Jack L Cronenwett; David H Stone Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-11-21 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Marc L Schermerhorn; Kristina A Giles; Allen D Hamdan; Suzanne E Dalhberg; Robert Hagberg; Frank Pomposelli Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2008-06-30 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Klaas H J Ultee; Peter A Soden; Victor Chien; Rodney P Bensley; Sara L Zettervall; Hence J M Verhagen; Marc L Schermerhorn Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2016-01-06 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Joel E Barbato; Jang Yong Kim; Mazen Zenati; Ghassan Abu-Hamad; Robert Y Rhee; Michel S Makaroun; Jae-Sung Cho Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Thomas F X O'Donnell; Virendra I Patel; Sarah E Deery; Chun Li; Nicholas J Swerdlow; Patric Liang; Adam W Beck; Marc L Schermerhorn Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2019-02-02 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Priya B Patel; Christina L Marcaccio; Livia E V M de Guerre; Virendra I Patel; Grace Wang; Kristina Giles; Marc L Schermerhorn Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2021-10-13 Impact factor: 4.268