Vinamr Rastogi1, Christina L Marcaccio2, Priya B Patel2, Rens R B Varkevisser1, Virendra I Patel3, Peter A Soden4, Jorg L de Bruin5, Hence J M Verhagen5, Marc L Schermerhorn6. 1. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; 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, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 3. Division of Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Interventions, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY. 4. Division of Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Surgery, Brown University Medical Center, Providence, RI. 5. Department of Vascular Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 6. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. Electronic address: mscherm@bidmc.harvard.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Several studies have demonstrated the advantages of a retroperitoneal (RP) vs a transperitoneal (TP) approach during open repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). We compared the outcomes after open repair of complex AAAs (cAAAs) using an RP vs a TP approach and evaluated the relative use of these approaches over time. METHODS: We identified all patients who had undergone open intact cAAA repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative from 2003 to -2019 and created 1:1-propensity score-matched cohorts stratified by the operative approach (RP vs TP). The primary outcome was perioperative mortality. The secondary outcomes included perioperative complications and approach usage over time. To create 1:1 propensity score-matched cohorts, the patients were matched for demographics, comorbidities, and anatomic and/or intraoperative characteristics, including proximal clamp site and renal revascularization. The approach usage over time was determined by plotting the proportion of RP usage over time for the overall open cAAA cohort and subgroups of repairs using a supraceliac cross clamp, repair with concomitant renal revascularization, and repairs performed at high-volume centers (highest quintile, >11 cases annually). RESULTS: Of a total of 4613 patients, 2843 (62%) had undergone open cAAA repair using the TP approach and 1770 (38%) using the RP approach. Of the 1256 matched pairs, the RP approach was associated with lower risk of perioperative mortality compared with the TP approach (3.9% vs 6.8%; relative risk [RR], 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.80; P = .001). Furthermore, the RP approach was associated with a lower risk of cardiac complications (7.2% vs 9.6%; RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.58-0.98), bowel ischemia (3.1% vs 5.4%; RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39-0.84), and postoperative dialysis (3.3% vs 5.5%; RR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41-0.87). Overall, the proportion of patients who had undergone repair via an RP approach became lower over time (-1.0%/y; 95% CI, -1.5 to -0.5; P < .001). A similar trend in the decrease was found for the patients who had undergone repair with a supraceliac clamp (-2.3%/y; 95% CI, -3.6 to -1.0; P < .001) and in the high-volume hospitals (-2.1%/y; 95% CI, -3.4 to -0.8; P = .001), although no statistically significant decrease in RP usage was found for the patients who had undergone concomitant renal revascularization (-0.9%/y; 95% CI, -2.6 to 0.8; P = .28). CONCLUSIONS: For open cAAA repair, an RP approach was associated with lower perioperative mortality and complications compared with a TP approach. However, the relative usage of the RP approach has been decreasing over time. An increased adoption of the RP approach, when appropriate, might lead to improved outcomes with open cAAA repair. Published by Elsevier Inc.
OBJECTIVE: Several studies have demonstrated the advantages of a retroperitoneal (RP) vs a transperitoneal (TP) approach during open repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). We compared the outcomes after open repair of complex AAAs (cAAAs) using an RP vs a TP approach and evaluated the relative use of these approaches over time. METHODS: We identified all patients who had undergone open intact cAAA repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative from 2003 to -2019 and created 1:1-propensity score-matched cohorts stratified by the operative approach (RP vs TP). The primary outcome was perioperative mortality. The secondary outcomes included perioperative complications and approach usage over time. To create 1:1 propensity score-matched cohorts, the patients were matched for demographics, comorbidities, and anatomic and/or intraoperative characteristics, including proximal clamp site and renal revascularization. The approach usage over time was determined by plotting the proportion of RP usage over time for the overall open cAAA cohort and subgroups of repairs using a supraceliac cross clamp, repair with concomitant renal revascularization, and repairs performed at high-volume centers (highest quintile, >11 cases annually). RESULTS: Of a total of 4613 patients, 2843 (62%) had undergone open cAAA repair using the TP approach and 1770 (38%) using the RP approach. Of the 1256 matched pairs, the RP approach was associated with lower risk of perioperative mortality compared with the TP approach (3.9% vs 6.8%; relative risk [RR], 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-0.80; P = .001). Furthermore, the RP approach was associated with a lower risk of cardiac complications (7.2% vs 9.6%; RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.58-0.98), bowel ischemia (3.1% vs 5.4%; RR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39-0.84), and postoperative dialysis (3.3% vs 5.5%; RR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41-0.87). Overall, the proportion of patients who had undergone repair via an RP approach became lower over time (-1.0%/y; 95% CI, -1.5 to -0.5; P < .001). A similar trend in the decrease was found for the patients who had undergone repair with a supraceliac clamp (-2.3%/y; 95% CI, -3.6 to -1.0; P < .001) and in the high-volume hospitals (-2.1%/y; 95% CI, -3.4 to -0.8; P = .001), although no statistically significant decrease in RP usage was found for the patients who had undergone concomitant renal revascularization (-0.9%/y; 95% CI, -2.6 to 0.8; P = .28). CONCLUSIONS: For open cAAA repair, an RP approach was associated with lower perioperative mortality and complications compared with a TP approach. However, the relative usage of the RP approach has been decreasing over time. An increased adoption of the RP approach, when appropriate, might lead to improved outcomes with open cAAA repair. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: R P Cambria; D C Brewster; W M Abbott; M Freehan; J Megerman; G LaMuraglia; R Wilson; D Wilson; R Teplick; J K Davison Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 1990-02 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Pedro G R Teixeira; Karen Woo; Ahmed M Abou-Zamzam; Sara L Zettervall; Marc L Schermerhorn; Fred A Weaver Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2016-02-28 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Sara L Zettervall; Marc L Schermerhorn; Peter A Soden; John C McCallum; Katie E Shean; Sarah E Deery; A James O'Malley; Bruce Landon Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2016-12-14 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Rens R B Varkevisser; Thomas F X O'Donnell; Nicholas J Swerdlow; Patric Liang; Chun Li; Klaas H J Ultee; Alexander B Pothof; Livia E V M De Guerre; Hence J M Verhagen; Marc L Schermerhorn Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2018-12-13 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Elliot L Chaikof; Ronald L Dalman; Mark K Eskandari; Benjamin M Jackson; W Anthony Lee; M Ashraf Mansour; Tara M Mastracci; Matthew Mell; M Hassan Murad; Louis L Nguyen; Gustavo S Oderich; Madhukar S Patel; Marc L Schermerhorn; Benjamin W Starnes Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2018-01 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Sarah E Deery; Sara L Zettervall; Thomas F X O'Donnell; Philip P Goodney; Fred A Weaver; Pedro G Teixeira; Virendra I Patel; Marc L Schermerhorn Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2019-06-24 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Dominique B Buck; Klaas H J Ultee; Sara L Zettervall; Pete A Soden; Jeremy Darling; Mark Wyers; Joost A van Herwaarden; Marc L Schermerhorn Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2016-03-16 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Palma M Shaw; Frank J Veith; Evan C Lipsitz; Takao Ohki; William D Suggs; Manish Mehta; Katherine Freeman; Jamie McKay; George L Berdejo; Reese A Wain; Nicholas J Gargiulo Iii Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: G A Sicard; J M Reilly; B G Rubin; R W Thompson; B T Allen; M W Flye; K B Schechtman; P Young-Beyer; C Weiss; C B Anderson Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 1995-02 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Kyongjune Benjamin Lee; Jinny Lu; Robyn A Macsata; Darshan Patel; Alexander Yang; John J Ricotta; Richard L Amdur; Anton N Sidawy; Bao-Ngoc Nguyen Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2018-12-24 Impact factor: 4.268
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