Thirty-Day Outcomes of Fenestrated and Chimney Endovascular Repair and Open Repair of Juxtarenal, Pararenal, and Suprarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Using National Surgical Quality Initiative Program Database (2012-2016).

Locham S ，Dakour-Aridi H ，Bhela J ，Nejim B ，Bhavana Challa A ，Malas M ... -  《-》

Octogenarians Undergoing Open Repair Have Higher Mortality Compared with Fenestrated Endovascular Repair of Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Involving the Visceral Vessels.

Prior studies have shown that octogenarians have a higher risk of mortality than nonoctogenarians undergoing open aneurysm repair (OAR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (F-EVAR) was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2012 and has been used as a less invasive approach to treat patients with suboptimal neck anatomy with favorable outcomes compared with traditional OAR. The aim of the study is to compare 30-day outcomes of F-EVAR versus OAR in octogenarians undergoing repair of AAA involving the visceral vessels in the United States. All patients with postoperative diagnosis of nonruptured AAA repair were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2006-2015). Univariate and multivariate analyses were implemented to examine 30-day morbidity and mortality adjusting for patient demographics and comorbidities. A total of 548 octogenarians underwent repair of nonruptured AAA involving the visceral vessels, of which 242 (44%) were F-EVARs, and 306 (56%) were OARs. Octogenarians undergoing F-EVAR were on average 1-year older (median age [interquartile range]: 83 [82, 86] versus 82 [81, 85], P = 0.004) and more likely to be male (82% vs. 64%, P < 0.001) compared with OAR. Prevalence of diabetes (13% vs. 6%, P = 0.005) and progressive renal failure (57% vs. 47%, P = 0.03) was also higher in patients undergoing F-EVAR compared with OAR. Thirty-day postoperative mortality was higher after OAR (8.5% vs. 4.1%, P = 0.04). Secondary outcomes including cardiopulmonary (27.1% vs. 5.8%, P < 0.001) and renal injury (10.8% vs. 2.1%, P < 0.001) were also significantly higher in OAR compared with F-EVAR. After adjusting for patients' demographics and comorbidities, OAR had almost 4-fold increased risk of 30-day postoperative mortality compared with F-EVAR (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 3.90 [1.48-10.31], P = 0.006). In this large national cohort of octogenarians undergoing repair for complex AAA's, we showed that F-EVAR is associated with significantly lower postoperative morbidity and mortality than open repair. One of the main limitations of the study is the lack of anatomical data. However, despite that, our findings support the shifting paradigm toward minimally invasive approach in this frail population for treatment of complex AAA's. Further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term benefit of any repair in octogenarians.

Locham S ，Faateh M ，Dakour-Aridi H ，Nejim B ，Malas M ... -  《-》

Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair is associated with lower perioperative morbidity and mortality compared with open repair for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms.

The Zenith Fenestrated Endovascular Graft (ZFEN; Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind) has expanded the anatomic eligibility of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Current data on ZFEN mainly consist of single-institution experiences and show conflicting results. Therefore, we compared perioperative outcomes after repair using ZFEN with open complex AAA repair and infrarenal EVAR in a nationwide multicenter registry. We identified all patients undergoing elective AAA repair using ZFEN, open complex AAA repair, and standard infrarenal EVAR between 2012 and 2016 within the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted vascular module. Open complex AAA repairs were defined as those with a juxtarenal or suprarenal proximal AAA extent in combination with an aortic cross-clamping position that was above at least one renal artery. The primary outcome was perioperative mortality, defined as death within 30 days or within the index hospitalization. Secondary outcomes included postoperative renal dysfunction (creatinine concentration increase of >2 mg/dL from preoperative value or new dialysis), occurrence of any complication, procedure times, blood transfusion rates, and length of stay. To account for baseline differences, we calculated propensity scores and employed inverse probability-weighted logistic regression. We identified 6825 AAA repairs-220 ZFENs, 181 open complex AAA repairs, and 6424 infrarenal EVARs. Univariate analysis of ZFEN compared with open complex AAA repair demonstrated lower rates of perioperative mortality (1.8% vs 8.8%; P = .001), postoperative renal dysfunction (1.4% vs 7.7%; P = .002), and overall complications (11% vs 33%; P < .001). In addition, fewer patients undergoing ZFEN received blood transfusions (22% vs 73%; P < .001), and median length of stay was shorter (2 vs 7 days; P < .001). After adjustment, open complex AAA repair was associated with higher odds of perioperative mortality (odds ratio [OR], 4.9; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-18), postoperative renal dysfunction (OR, 13; 95% CI, 3.6-49), and overall complication rates (OR, 4.2; 95% CI, 2.3-7.5) compared with ZFEN. Compared with infrarenal EVAR, ZFEN presented comparable rates of perioperative mortality (1.8% vs 0.8%; P = .084), renal dysfunction (1.4% vs 0.7%; P = .19), and any complication (11% vs 7.7%; P = .09). Furthermore, after adjustment, there was no significant difference between the odds of perioperative mortality, postoperative renal dysfunction, or any complication between infrarenal EVAR and ZFEN. ZFEN is associated with lower perioperative morbidity and mortality compared with open complex AAA repair, and outcomes are comparable to those of infrarenal EVAR. Long-term durability of ZFEN compared with open complex AAA repair warrants future research.

Varkevisser RRB ，O'Donnell TFX ，Swerdlow NJ ，Liang P ，Li C ，Ultee KHJ ，Pothof AB ，De Guerre LEVM ，Verhagen HJM ，Schermerhorn ML ... -  《-》

Outcomes and cost of fenestrated versus standard endovascular repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysm in the United States.

Fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) has expanded the indications of this minimally invasive procedure to include patients with pararenal aneurysms. The actual cost of this relatively newer technology compared with standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has not been studied before. Thus, the aim of this study was to analyze in-hospital costs and adverse outcomes in patients undergoing FEVAR vs EVAR for intact abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Using the Premier Healthcare Database (2012-2015), we identified all patients who underwent elective EVAR and FEVAR. Univariable (χ2 test, Student t-test, median test) and multivariable (logistic regression and generalized linear modeling) analyses were implemented to examine in-hospital cost and adverse outcomes adjusting for patients' demographics, comorbidities, and regional characteristics. A total of 17,689 elective endovascular AAA repairs were performed; 1641 patients underwent FEVAR (9%), and the remaining 16,048 patients underwent standard EVAR (91%). Patients undergoing FEVAR were more likely to be white (86.3% vs 84.3%; P = .03). Both groups had similar comorbidities except for cerebrovascular disease, which was higher among patients undergoing FEVAR (8.4% vs 6.7%; P = .01). The total length of hospital stay was slightly higher in patients undergoing FEVAR compared with EVAR (mean [standard deviation], 2.40 [3.39] days vs 2.23 [3.10] days; P = .03). The rates of any complication (11.3% vs 9.6%), renal injury (5.8% vs 4.3%), and neurologic injury (0.7% vs 0.4%) were significantly higher in the FEVAR group (all P < .05). No differences were seen in mortality (0.8% vs 0.5%) or cardiac (4.9% vs 4.4%), pulmonary (2.4% vs 2.2%), and bowel (1.5% vs 1.2%) complications between the two groups (all P > .05). In multivariable logistic regression analysis, FEVAR was associated with 40% increased odds of renal failure (odds ratio, 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-1.76; P = .004) and 91% increased odds of neurologic injury (odds ratio, 1.91; 95% CI, 1.02-3.57; P = .04). The median total cost of the treatment was also significantly higher among patients undergoing FEVAR ($28,227 vs $26,781; P < .001). After adjustment, generalized linear modeling analysis showed that the cost of FEVAR was on average $1612 higher than the cost of EVAR (adjusted cost, $1612; 95% CI, $1123-$2101; P < .001). In this large cohort of elective endovascular AAA repairs, compared with standard EVAR, FEVAR is associated with significantly increased odds of renal and neurologic injury. In addition, despite adjusting for patients' demographics, comorbidities, and major complications, total cost of FEVAR was significantly higher compared with standard EVAR. This is likely driven by the additional cost of fenestrated endografts and by the increased rate of complications related to FEVAR.

Locham S ，Faateh M ，Dhaliwal J ，Nejim B ，Dakour-Aridi H ，Malas MB ... -  《-》

Thirty-day outcomes after fenestrated endovascular repair are superior to open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms involving visceral vessels.

Although few studies have reported outcomes after branched or fenestrated endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (FEVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms involving visceral vessels (AAA-Vs), no multi-institutional study has compared FEVAR with open surgery (OS) for AAA-Vs. Our objective was to compare 30-day outcomes after FEVAR vs OS for AAA-Vs. Patients who underwent FEVAR (n = 535) and OS (n = 1207) for elective AAA-Vs were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) 2008 to 2013 database. Thoracoabdominal aneurysms were excluded. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed. There were more men (82% vs 72%; P < .0001), diabetic patients (16% vs 11%; P = .005), patients with dependent functional status (4% vs 2%; P = .002), and nonsmokers (70% vs 56%; P < .0001) in the FEVAR group vs OS. There was no difference in rates of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cardiac history, peripheral artery disease, hypertension, and dialysis (P > .05). FEVAR had fewer major postoperative pulmonary complications (3.0% vs 19.0%; P < .0001), less renal failure requiring dialysis (1.9% vs 6.4%; P < .0001), less frequent cardiac arrest or myocardial infarction (2.2% vs 5.8%; P = .001), less bleeding with major transfusion (17.4% vs 50.2%; P < .0001), and decreased incidence of return to the operating room (4.5% vs 9.6%; P < .0001) and death (2.4% vs 4.7%; P = .02). The median length of stay was also significantly shorter for FEVAR (2 days vs 7 days; P < .0001). On multivariable analyses, OS was associated with higher risk than FEVAR for 30-day death (odds ratio [OR], 2.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-5.0), pulmonary complications (OR, 8.8; 95% CI, 5.1-15.0), cardiac complications (OR, 3.4; 95% CI, 1.8-6.6), renal failure needing dialysis (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.9-7.7), and return to the operating room (OR 2.5; 95% CI, 1.6-4.0). FEVAR is associated with a lower risk for 30-day mortality and adverse events compared with OS for AAA-Vs.

Gupta PK ，Brahmbhatt R ，Kempe K ，Stickley SM ，Rohrer MJ ... -  《-》