Thresholds for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in England and the United States.

Background Thresholds for repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms vary considerably among countries. Methods We examined differences between England and the United States in the frequency of aneurysm repair, the mean aneurysm diameter at the time of the procedure, and rates of aneurysm rupture and aneurysm-related death. Data on the frequency of repair of intact (nonruptured) abdominal aortic aneurysms, in-hospital mortality among patients who had undergone aneurysm repair, and rates of aneurysm rupture during the period from 2005 through 2012 were extracted from the Hospital Episode Statistics database in England and the U.S. Nationwide Inpatient Sample. Data on the aneurysm diameter at the time of repair were extracted from the U.K. National Vascular Registry (2014 data) and from the U.S. National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2013 data). Aneurysm-related mortality during the period from 2005 through 2012 was determined from data obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the U.K. Office of National Statistics. Data were adjusted with the use of direct standardization or conditional logistic regression for differences between England and the United States with respect to population age and sex. Results During the period from 2005 through 2012, a total of 29,300 patients in England and 278,921 patients in the United States underwent repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms. Aneurysm repair was less common in England than in the United States (odds ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48 to 0.49; P<0.001), and aneurysm-related death was more common in England than in the United States (odds ratio, 3.60; 95% CI, 3.55 to 3.64; P<0.001). Hospitalization due to an aneurysm rupture occurred more frequently in England than in the United States (odds ratio, 2.23; 95% CI, 2.19 to 2.27; P<0.001), and the mean aneurysm diameter at the time of repair was larger in England (63.7 mm vs. 58.3 mm, P<0.001). Conclusions We found a lower rate of repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms and a larger mean aneurysm diameter at the time of repair in England than in the United States and lower rates of aneurysm rupture and aneurysm-related death in the United States than in England. (Funded by the Circulation Foundation and others.)

Beyond equilibrium climate sensitivity

ISSN:1752-0908ISSN:1752-089

The impact of concomitant procedures during endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair on perioperative outcomes

Background: Concomitant procedures during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of an abdominal aortic aneurysm are performed to facilitate endograft delivery, to simultaneously treat unrelated conditions, or to resolve intraoperative pitfalls. The frequency and perioperative impact of these procedures are not well described. This study aimed to assess the frequency and perioperative impact of various concomitant procedures performed at the time of EVAR. Methods: We included all elective EVARs in the Vascular Study Group of New England between January 2003 and November 2014 and identified those with and those without concomitant procedures. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to establish the independent association between concomitant procedures and perioperative outcomes. Results: The study included 4033 patients, with 1168 (29.0%) patients undergoing one or more additional procedures. Independent risk factors for 30-day mortality were concomitant femoral endarterectomy (odds ratio [OR], 4.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-11.2) and renal angioplasty or stenting (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.2-8.3). Postoperative bowel ischemia was associated with hypogastric embolization (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.1-13.4) and iliac angioplasty or stenting (OR, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.3-9.6). Leg ischemia was associated with unplanned graft extension (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.02-5.0), other artery reconstruction (OR, 5.2; 95% CI, 1.8-15.1), thromboembolectomy (OR, 5.2; 95% CI, 1.3-20.8), and repair of arterial injury (OR, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.2-18.3). Risk factors for deterioration of renal function were iliofemoral bypass (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.3-12.2), other artery reconstruction (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.3-5.8), renal angioplasty or stenting (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.3-4.6), and repair of arterial injury (OR, 4.5; 95% CI, 1.6-12.2). Myocardial infarction was associated with femorofemoral bypass (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.7-8.7), other artery reconstruction (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.6-9.2), and repair of arterial injury (OR, 6.1; 95% CI, 1.8-21.0). Wound complications were predicted by femorofemoral bypass (OR, 13.4; 95% CI, 5.8-31.1). Conclusions: Concomitant procedures during EVAR are associated with increased postoperative morbidity and mortality. The need for performing concomitant procedures should be carefully considered. The morbidity associated with intraoperative complications highlights the importance of avoidance of arterial injury and thromboembolic events where possible