Decrease in total aneurysm-related deaths in the era of endovascular aneurysm repair

ObjectiveWith the expansion of elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair after the introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), there is a concern that even with a lower operative mortality there could be an increasing number of aneurysm-related deaths. To evaluate this, we looked at national trends in AAA repair volume as well as mortality rates after intact and ruptured AAA repair encompassing the introduction of EVAR.MethodsPatients with intact or ruptured AAA undergoing open repair or EVAR and all those with a diagnosis of ruptured AAA were identified within the 1993 to 2005 Nationwide Inpatient Sample database using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, diagnosis and procedure codes. The number of repairs, number of rupture diagnoses without repair, number of deaths, and associated mortality rates were measured for each year of the database. Outcomes (mean annual volumes) were compared from the pre-EVAR era (1993 to 1998) with the post-EVAR era (2001 to 2005).ResultsSince its introduction, EVAR increased steadily and accounted for 56% of repairs yet only 27% of the deaths for intact repairs in 2005. The mean annual number of intact repairs increased from 36,122 in the pre-EVAR era to 38,901 in the post-EVAR era, whereas the mean annual number of deaths related to intact AAA repair decreased from 1693 pre-EVAR to 1207 post-EVAR (P < .0001). Mortality for all intact AAA repair decreased from 4.0% to 3.1% (P < .0001) pre-EVAR and post-EVAR, but open repair mortality was unchanged (open repair, 4.7% to 4.5%, P = .31; EVAR, 1.3%). During the same time, the mean annual number of ruptured repairs decreased from 2804 to 1846, and deaths from ruptured AAA repairs decreased from 2804 to 1846 (P < .0001). Mortality for ruptured AAA repair decreased from 44.3% to 39.9% (P < .0001) pre-EVAR and post-EVAR (open repair, 44.3% to 39.9%, P < .001; EVAR, 32.4%). The overall mean annual number of ruptured AAA diagnoses (9979 to 7773, P < .0001) and overall mean annual deaths from a ruptured AAA decreased post-EVAR (5338 to 3901, P < .0001).ConclusionSince the introduction of EVAR, the annual number of deaths from intact and ruptured AAA has significantly decreased. This coincided with an increase in intact AAA repair after the introduction of EVAR and a decrease in ruptured AAA diagnosis and repair volume

Life expectancy after endovascular versus open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: Results of a decision analysis model on the basis of data from EUROSTAR

AbstractBackground/Objectives: Although endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair (ENDO) has decreased operative morbidity risks compared with open AAA repair (OPEN), risks of rupture and reintervention are higher after ENDO. We used decision analysis to examine the effect of these competing risks on quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) after ENDO and OPEN. Methods: We used a Markov decision-analysis model to simulate hypothetic cohorts of patients undergoing ENDO or OPEN. Patients moved through a multistate transition model according to probabilities derived from the literature, the EUROSTAR database (for ENDO) and Medicare claims data (for OPEN). Our primary outcome measure was QALE after surgery. We used sensitivity analysis to determine which factors most influenced this outcome. Results: In the base-case analysis of 70-year-old men, life expectancy after ENDO was 7.09 quality-adjusted life years compared with 7.03 quality-adjusted life years for OPEN, a difference of 3 weeks. Sensitivity analysis showed that at less than age 64 years, OPEN results in greater QALE. However, the difference in QALE was small (<3 months) across the entire range of ages studied (60 to 85 years). The optimal strategy was sensitive to changes in ENDO and OPEN operative mortality rate, rupture rate after ENDO, late conversion to OPEN rate, ENDO revision rate, and OPEN reoperation rate. However, the difference between OPEN and ENDO strategies was small across the plausible range of most of these variables. Conclusion: For most patients who are candidates for AAA repair, ENDO and OPEN result in similar QALE. Decision analysis suggests that OPEN may be preferred for younger patients with low operative risk and ENDO may be preferred for older patients with higher operative risk. However, given the similarity in overall outcome, patient preference should be weighed heavily in decision making. (J Vasc Surg 2002;36:1112-20.

Comparative effectiveness of endovascular versus open repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm in the Medicare population

ObjectiveEndovascular aortic repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is increasingly used for emergent treatment of ruptured AAA (rAAA). We sought to compare the perioperative and long-term mortality, procedure-related complications, and rates of reintervention of EVAR vs open aortic repair of rAAA in Medicare beneficiaries.MethodsWe examined perioperative and long-term mortality and complications after EVAR or open aortic repair performed for rAAA in all traditional Medicare beneficiaries discharged from a United States hospital from 2001 to 2008. Patients were matched by propensity score on baseline demographics, coexisting conditions, admission source, and hospital volume of rAAA repair. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the effect of bias that might have resulted from unmeasured confounders.ResultsOf 10,998 patients with repaired rAAA, 1126 underwent EVAR and 9872 underwent open repair. Propensity score matching yielded 1099 patient pairs. The average age was 78 years, and 72.4% were male. Perioperative mortality was 33.8% for EVAR and 47.7% for open repair (P < .001), and this difference persisted for >4 years. At 36 months, EVAR patients had higher rates of AAA-related reinterventions than open repair patients (endovascular reintervention, 10.9% vs 1.5%; P < .001), whereas open patients had more laparotomy-related complications (incisional hernia repair, 1.8% vs 6.2%; P < .001; all surgical complications, 4.4% vs 9.1%; P < .001). Use of EVAR for rAAA increased from 6% of cases in 2001 to 31% in 2008, whereas during the same interval, overall 30-day mortality for admission for rAAA, regardless of treatment, decreased from 55.8% to 50.9%.ConclusionsEVAR for rAAA is associated with lower perioperative and long-term mortality in Medicare beneficiaries. Increasing adoption of EVAR for rAAA is associated with an overall decrease in mortality of patients hospitalized for rAAA during the last decade

Prosthetic graft infections involving the femoral artery

BackgroundProsthetic graft infection is a major complication of peripheral vascular surgery. We investigated the experience of a single institution over 10 years with bypass grafts involving the femoral artery to determine the incidence and risk factors for prosthetic graft infection.MethodsA retrospective cohort single-institution review of prosthetic bypass grafts involving the femoral artery from 2001 to 2010 evaluated patient demographics, body mass index, comorbidities, indications, location of bypass, type of prosthetic material, case urgency, and previous ipsilateral bypass or percutaneous interventions and evaluated the incidence of graft infections, amputations, and mortality.ResultsThere were 496 prosthetic grafts identified with a graft infection rate of 3.8% (n = 19) at a mean follow-up of 27 months. Multivariable analysis showed that redo bypass (hazard ratio [HR], 5.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2-15.0), active infection at the time of bypass (HR, 5.2; 95% CI, 1.9-14.2), female gender (HR, 4.5; 95% CI, 1.6-12.7), and diabetes mellitus (HR, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.5-14.3) were significant predictors of graft infection. Graft infection was predictive of major lower extremity amputation (HR, 9.8; 95% CI, 3.5-27.1), as was preoperative tissue loss (HR, 4.7; 95% CI, 1.8-11.9). Graft infection did not predict long-term mortality; however, chronic renal insufficiency (HR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.6-3.4), tissue loss (HR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.0-1.9), and active infection (HR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.6-3.4) did. Infected grafts were removed 79% of the time. Staphylococcus epidermidis (37%) and methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (26%) were the most common pathogens isolated.ConclusionsRedo bypass, female gender, diabetes, and active infection at the time of bypass are associated with a higher risk for prosthetic graft infection and major extremity amputation but do not confer an increased risk of mortality. Autologous vein for lower extremity bypass and endovascular interventions should be considered when feasible in high-risk patient

In-hospital versus postdischarge adverse events following carotid endarterectomy

ObjectiveMost studies based on state and nationwide registries evaluating perioperative outcome after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) rely on hospital discharge data only. Therefore, the true 30-day complication risk after carotid revascularization may be underestimated.MethodsWe used the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database 2005-2010 to assess the in-hospital and postdischarge rate of any stroke, death, cardiac event (new Q-wave myocardial infarction or cardiac arrest), and combined stroke/death and combined adverse outcome (S/D/CE) at 30 days following CEA. Multivariable analyses were used to identify predictors for in-hospital and postdischarge events separately, and in particular, those that predict postdischarge events distinctly.ResultsA total of 35,916 patients who underwent CEA during 2005-2010 were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database; 59% were male, median age was 72 years, and 44% had a previous neurologic event. Thirty-day stroke rate was 1.6% (n = 591), death rate was 0.8% (n = 272), cardiac event rate was 1.0% (n = 350), stroke or death rate was 2.2% (n = 794), and combined S/D/CE rate was 2.9% (n = 1043); 33% of strokes, 53% of deaths, 32% of cardiac events, 40% of combined stroke/death, and 38% of combined S/D/CE took place after hospital discharge. Patients with a prior stroke or transient ischemic attack had similar proportions of postdischarge events compared with patients without prior symptoms. Independent predictors for postdischarge events, but not for in-hospital events were female sex (stroke [odds ratio (OR), 1.6; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.2-2.1] and stroke/death [OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.7]), renal failure (stroke [OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.4-6.2]) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (death [OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.6-3.7], stroke/death [OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.4-2.4], and S/D/CE [OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.4-2.3]).ConclusionsWith 38% of perioperative adverse events after CEA happening posthospitalization, regardless of symptoms status, we need to be alert to the ongoing risks after discharge particularly in women, patients with renal failure, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. This emphasizes the need for reporting and comparing 30-day adverse event rates when evaluating outcomes for CEA, or comparing carotid stenting to CEA