Keith Glover1, Sean Lyden2, James F Bena2, Christopher Smolock2, Federico Parodi2. 1. Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH. Electronic address: Gloverk2@ccf.org. 2. Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There have been a number of studies comparing perioperative outcomes of the retroperitoneal (RP) and transperitoneal (TP) approaches to open aortic aneurysm repair (OAR), many of which have shown conflicting results. There remains a paucity of data comparing these 2 exposures beyond 30 days. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the mid-term outcomes between RP and TP exposures in OAR. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of elective OAR from a single institution from 2010 to 2014 with at least one year of follow-up. Patients with any prior aortic repair, prior midline TP or RP exposures, prior small bowel obstruction (SBO), or prior abdominal wall hernia repair were excluded. Patients' demographics, comorbidities, intraoperative details, and postoperative variables up to 5 years were compared. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, aortic or arterial reinterventions, incisional reinterventions, SBO or reintervention for SBO, and composite reintervention. RESULTS: Of the 273 OARs identified, 136 OARs (86 TP and 50 RP exposures) met criteria for the study. The average follow-up was 43.4 months. Of the preoperative and intraoperative characteristics, patients with RP exposures were significantly more likely to be female (30% vs. 12.8%; P = .014) and to have larger aneurysm (6.1 ± 1.02 cm vs. 5.4 ± 1.01 cm; P < .001), tube graft (48% vs 19.8%; P < .001), and renal bypass (30% vs. 2.3%; P < .001). Patients with TP exposures were significantly more likely to have inferior mesenteric artery reimplantation (15.1% vs. 4%; P = .046), infrarenal clamping (65.9% vs. 22%; P < .001), and iliac aneurysm (36% vs. 4%; P < .001). During mid-term follow-up, there was not a difference in all-cause survival at 3 years (95.8% vs. 95.8%; P = .52). Although there were more incisional hernias in the TP group (48% vs. 8%; P < .001), there was no difference in incisional reinterventions (14% vs. 6%; P = .36). There were no differences in aortic or arterial reinterventions (5% vs. 4%; P = .86), SBO (7% vs. 0%; P = .99), intervention for SBO (3% vs. 0%; P = .99), or composite reinterventions (16% vs. 10%; P = .6) between the TP and RP exposures. CONCLUSIONS: In mid-term follow-up, OAR through TP exposure had more incisional hernias compared with RP exposure. However, there is no difference in mortality or composite reinterventions between approaches.
BACKGROUND: There have been a number of studies comparing perioperative outcomes of the retroperitoneal (RP) and transperitoneal (TP) approaches to open aortic aneurysm repair (OAR), many of which have shown conflicting results. There remains a paucity of data comparing these 2 exposures beyond 30 days. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the mid-term outcomes between RP and TP exposures in OAR. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of elective OAR from a single institution from 2010 to 2014 with at least one year of follow-up. Patients with any prior aortic repair, prior midline TP or RP exposures, prior small bowel obstruction (SBO), or prior abdominal wall hernia repair were excluded. Patients' demographics, comorbidities, intraoperative details, and postoperative variables up to 5 years were compared. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality, aortic or arterial reinterventions, incisional reinterventions, SBO or reintervention for SBO, and composite reintervention. RESULTS: Of the 273 OARs identified, 136 OARs (86 TP and 50 RP exposures) met criteria for the study. The average follow-up was 43.4 months. Of the preoperative and intraoperative characteristics, patients with RP exposures were significantly more likely to be female (30% vs. 12.8%; P = .014) and to have larger aneurysm (6.1 ± 1.02 cm vs. 5.4 ± 1.01 cm; P < .001), tube graft (48% vs 19.8%; P < .001), and renal bypass (30% vs. 2.3%; P < .001). Patients with TP exposures were significantly more likely to have inferior mesenteric artery reimplantation (15.1% vs. 4%; P = .046), infrarenal clamping (65.9% vs. 22%; P < .001), and iliac aneurysm (36% vs. 4%; P < .001). During mid-term follow-up, there was not a difference in all-cause survival at 3 years (95.8% vs. 95.8%; P = .52). Although there were more incisional hernias in the TP group (48% vs. 8%; P < .001), there was no difference in incisional reinterventions (14% vs. 6%; P = .36). There were no differences in aortic or arterial reinterventions (5% vs. 4%; P = .86), SBO (7% vs. 0%; P = .99), intervention for SBO (3% vs. 0%; P = .99), or composite reinterventions (16% vs. 10%; P = .6) between the TP and RP exposures. CONCLUSIONS: In mid-term follow-up, OAR through TP exposure had more incisional hernias compared with RP exposure. However, there is no difference in mortality or composite reinterventions between approaches.
Authors: Vinamr Rastogi; Nicole H Kim; Christina L Marcaccio; Priya B Patel; Rens R B Varkevisser; Jorg L de Bruin; Hence J M Verhagen; Marc L Schermerhorn Journal: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg Date: 2022-05-20 Impact factor: 6.427