Safwan Omran1, Ben Raude2, Matthias Bürger2, Sebastian Kapahnke2, Jan Christoph Carstens2, Haidar Haidar2, Frank Konietschke3, Jan Paul Frese2, Andreas Greiner2. 1. Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Department of vascular surgery, Berlin, Germany. Electronic address: safwan.omran@charite.de. 2. Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin and Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Department of vascular surgery, Berlin, Germany. 3. Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, corporate member of Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Institute of Medical Biometrics and Clinical Epidemiology and Berlin Institute of Health (BIH), Berlin, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In the present study, we have reported and compared aortoduodenal fistulas (ADFs) after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) vs after open aortic repair (OAR). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the data from patients treated for ADFs from January 2015 to May 2020 in our hospital. The clinical data, diagnostic procedures, and surgical options were evaluated. The primary endpoints of the present study were 30-day and 1-year mortality. The secondary endpoints were major postoperative complications. RESULTS: A total of 24 patients (20 men; median age, 69 years; range, 53-82 years) were admitted with ADFs after EVAR (n = 9) or OAR (n = 15). These patients accounted for ∼4.3% of all abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs in our hospital. The median interval from the initial aortic repair and the diagnosis of ADF was 68 months (range, 6-83 months) for the ADF-EVAR group and 80 months (range, 1-479 months) for the ADF-OAR group. Three patients in the ADF-EVAR group had refused surgical treatment owing to their high surgical risk. One patient in the ADF-OAR group had undergone removal of the aortic prosthesis without replacement. Of the remaining 20 patients, 12 (ADF-EVAR group, n = 4; ADF-OAR group, n = 8) had undergone in situ replacement of the aorta and 8 (ADF-EVAR group, n = 2; ADF-OAR group, n = 6) had undergone extra-anatomic reconstruction with aortic ligation. After a mean follow-up of 26 months, no patient had experienced early limb loss. However, one case of rupture of the venous graft (ADF-EVAR), one case of aortic stump blowout (ADF-OAR), and one case of a ureteroarterial fistula with a homograft (ADF-OAR) had occurred. Overall, the incidence of postoperative complications was significantly greater after ADF-OAR (93% vs 33%; P = .036). The most frequent bacteria involved in the blood cultures were Escherichia coli (25% of patients), and Candida spp. (61%) were the predominant pathogens found on intra-abdominal smears. The in-hospital mortality rates for the ADF-EVAR and ADF-OAR group were 22% and 13%, respectively. The corresponding 1 -year mortality rates were 22% and 33%. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ADFs after EVAR or OAR have limited overall survival. In addition to the similar therapeutic approaches, we found no significant differences in postoperative mortality between these two uncommon pathologic entities. In our study, the overall postoperative morbidity seemed greater for the ADF-OAR group.
OBJECTIVE: In the present study, we have reported and compared aortoduodenal fistulas (ADFs) after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) vs after open aortic repair (OAR). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the data from patients treated for ADFs from January 2015 to May 2020 in our hospital. The clinical data, diagnostic procedures, and surgical options were evaluated. The primary endpoints of the present study were 30-day and 1-year mortality. The secondary endpoints were major postoperative complications. RESULTS: A total of 24 patients (20 men; median age, 69 years; range, 53-82 years) were admitted with ADFs after EVAR (n = 9) or OAR (n = 15). These patients accounted for ∼4.3% of all abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs in our hospital. The median interval from the initial aortic repair and the diagnosis of ADF was 68 months (range, 6-83 months) for the ADF-EVAR group and 80 months (range, 1-479 months) for the ADF-OAR group. Three patients in the ADF-EVAR group had refused surgical treatment owing to their high surgical risk. One patient in the ADF-OAR group had undergone removal of the aortic prosthesis without replacement. Of the remaining 20 patients, 12 (ADF-EVAR group, n = 4; ADF-OAR group, n = 8) had undergone in situ replacement of the aorta and 8 (ADF-EVAR group, n = 2; ADF-OAR group, n = 6) had undergone extra-anatomic reconstruction with aortic ligation. After a mean follow-up of 26 months, no patient had experienced early limb loss. However, one case of rupture of the venous graft (ADF-EVAR), one case of aortic stump blowout (ADF-OAR), and one case of a ureteroarterial fistula with a homograft (ADF-OAR) had occurred. Overall, the incidence of postoperative complications was significantly greater after ADF-OAR (93% vs 33%; P = .036). The most frequent bacteria involved in the blood cultures were Escherichia coli (25% of patients), and Candida spp. (61%) were the predominant pathogens found on intra-abdominal smears. The in-hospital mortality rates for the ADF-EVAR and ADF-OAR group were 22% and 13%, respectively. The corresponding 1 -year mortality rates were 22% and 33%. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with ADFs after EVAR or OAR have limited overall survival. In addition to the similar therapeutic approaches, we found no significant differences in postoperative mortality between these two uncommon pathologic entities. In our study, the overall postoperative morbidity seemed greater for the ADF-OAR group.