Philip W Stather1, James Ferguson2, Ayoola Awopetu2, Jonathan R Boyle2. 1. Department of Vascular Surgery, Cambridge University Hospital, Hills Road, Cambridge, UK. Electronic address: philstather@doctors.org.uk. 2. Department of Vascular Surgery, Cambridge University Hospital, Hills Road, Cambridge, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE/ BACKGROUND: The effect of suprarenal (SR) as opposed to infrarenal (IR) fixation on renal outcomes post-endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) remains controversial. This meta-analysis aims to update current understanding of this issue. METHODS: A prior meta-analysis was updated through a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses search for additional studies published in the last 3 years reporting on renal dysfunction or related outcomes post-EVAR. Random effects meta-analysis was undertaken using SPSS. RESULTS: A total of 25 non-randomised studies comparing SR with IR fixation were included, totalling 54,832 patients. In total, 16,634 underwent SR and 38,198 IR. Baseline characteristics, including age, baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate, diabetes, cardiac disease, and smoking, were similar between the groups. There was a small but significant difference in outcomes for renal dysfunction at the study end point (SR 5.98% vs. IR 4.83%; odds ratio [OR] 1.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-1.40 [p < .001]); however, at 30 days and 12 months there was no significant difference, and this did not hold up to sensitivity analysis. Incidence of renal infarcts (SR 6.6% vs. IR 2.3%; OR 2.78, 95% CI 1.46-5.29 [p = .002]), renal stenosis (SR 2.4% vs. IR 0.8%; OR 2.89, 95% CI 1.00-8.38 [p = .05]), and renal artery occlusion (SR 2.4% vs. IR 1.2%; OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.15-4.25 [p = 0.02]) favoured IR fixation; however, there was no difference in haemodialysis rates. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis has identified small but significantly worse renal outcomes in patients having SR fixation devices compared with IR; however, there was no difference in dialysis rates and a small effect on renal dysfunction, which did not stand up to rigorous sensitivity analysis. This should be taken into consideration during graft selection, and further studies must assess renal outcomes in the longer term, and in those with pre-existing renal dysfunction.
OBJECTIVE/ BACKGROUND: The effect of suprarenal (SR) as opposed to infrarenal (IR) fixation on renal outcomes post-endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) remains controversial. This meta-analysis aims to update current understanding of this issue. METHODS: A prior meta-analysis was updated through a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses search for additional studies published in the last 3 years reporting on renal dysfunction or related outcomes post-EVAR. Random effects meta-analysis was undertaken using SPSS. RESULTS: A total of 25 non-randomised studies comparing SR with IR fixation were included, totalling 54,832 patients. In total, 16,634 underwent SR and 38,198 IR. Baseline characteristics, including age, baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate, diabetes, cardiac disease, and smoking, were similar between the groups. There was a small but significant difference in outcomes for renal dysfunction at the study end point (SR 5.98% vs. IR 4.83%; odds ratio [OR] 1.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.18-1.40 [p < .001]); however, at 30 days and 12 months there was no significant difference, and this did not hold up to sensitivity analysis. Incidence of renal infarcts (SR 6.6% vs. IR 2.3%; OR 2.78, 95% CI 1.46-5.29 [p = .002]), renal stenosis (SR 2.4% vs. IR 0.8%; OR 2.89, 95% CI 1.00-8.38 [p = .05]), and renal artery occlusion (SR 2.4% vs. IR 1.2%; OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.15-4.25 [p = 0.02]) favoured IR fixation; however, there was no difference in haemodialysis rates. CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis has identified small but significantly worse renal outcomes in patients having SR fixation devices compared with IR; however, there was no difference in dialysis rates and a small effect on renal dysfunction, which did not stand up to rigorous sensitivity analysis. This should be taken into consideration during graft selection, and further studies must assess renal outcomes in the longer term, and in those with pre-existing renal dysfunction.
Authors: Alexander Geragotellis; Kofi Cox; Ho Cheung Anthony Yip; Matti Jubouri; Ian M Williams; Damian M Bailey; Mohamad Bashir Journal: Cardiovasc Diagn Ther Date: 2022-08