Search

This retrospective observational study using clinical data from two large hospitals in the Netherlands evaluated midterm outcomes of fenestrated endovascular aortic repair for juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (JAAAs), comparing supracoeliac with infracoeliac sealing. Supracoeliac sealing is considered advantageous due to a longer proximal sealing, but morbidity is usually higher. Supracoeliac proximal sealing was found to be safe and effective for treating JAAAs, with peri-operative and midterm outcomes comparable with infracoeliac proximal sealing. Future studies and extended long term follow up are required to determine whether supracoeliac sealing results in a more durable exclusion of the aneurysm sac., Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate peri-operative and midterm outcomes, including sac dynamics, of fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (FEVAR) for juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (JAAAs), comparing supracoeliac with infracoeliac sealing. Supracoeliac sealing may offer an advantage due to a longer proximal sealing zone, but it is associated with a more complex procedure and increased risk of complications. Furthermore, it is unknown whether supracoeliac sealing actually leads to increased durability., Methods: Patients undergoing elective FEVAR for JAAAs from 2008 - 2021 at two hospitals in the Netherlands were included. The definition of supracoeliac sealing was sealing in zone 5 or 6, with incorporation of the coeliac axis. Infracoeliac sealing was defined below zone 6. The primary endpoints included peri-operative outcomes. Secondary endpoints included one year aneurysm sac dynamics, freedom from secondary intervention, five year mortality, and sac dynamics over time., Results: Among 167 patients, 78 (46.7%) had a proximal sealing at an infracoeliac level and 89 (53.3%) at a supracoeliac level. Median proximal sealing length was 37 (interquartile range [IQR] 28, 52) mm for the supracoeliac group and 26 (IQR 19, 34) mm for the infracoeliac group. Patients with supracoeliac sealing more often had prior endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (31% vs. 12%; p = .004). Type IIIc endoleaks only occurred in patients with supracoeliac sealing (6% vs. 0%; p = .03). Other peri-operative complications and mortality were similar between the groups. Furthermore, no significant differences were found in one year aneurysm sac dynamics, freedom from secondary interventions, five year mortality, and sac dynamics over time., Conclusion: Proximal supracoeliac and infracoeliac sealing showed similar midterm outcomes, including sac dynamics, despite the higher procedural complexity of supracoeliac sealing. Supracoeliac sealing had a higher rate of 30 day type IIIc endoleak, but no difference in five year secondary intervention rate. Theoretically, supracoeliac sealing may be advantageous as sealing zones dilate over time, although future studies with longer than five year follow up are needed to determine its impact on long term aneurysm sac exclusion., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Perioperative complications in elderly patients undergoing endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) occur frequently. Although perioperative mortality has been well-described in the elderly patient population, factors associated with in-hospital complications and their impact on long-term survival remain poorly characterized., Methods: We identified all patients undergoing elective EVAR for infrarenal AAA within the Vascular Quality Initiative registry (2003-2018) and compared in-hospital complication rates between elderly (age ≥75) and nonelderly patients (<75). We used logistic regression to identify independent factors associated with in-hospital complications, whereas Kaplan-Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine associations between complications and long-term survival. To assess the effect of complications on early and late survival, we stratified survival periods into the first 30 days after discharge, and between 1 and 6 months, 7 and 12 months, and 1 and 8 years after the index procedure. To investigate the implications of in-hospital morbidity on long-term outcomes, we estimated the adjusted population-attributable fractions of individual complications on both perioperative and long-term survival., Results: We identified 17,156 elderly patients and 19,922 nonelderly patients. Elderly patients experienced higher complication rates compared with nonelderly patients (17% vs 10%; P < .001). The factors with the strongest associations with morbidity in elderly patients were anemia (odds ratio [OR], 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2-2.6), female gender (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.7-2.1), and large AAA diameter (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.6-1.9). Patients with any in-hospital complication had lower unadjusted survival estimates than patients without complications at 1 year (83% vs 95%; P < .001), 5 years (66% vs 80%; P < .001), and 8 years (60% vs 72%; P < .001). After risk adjustment, in-hospital complications were independently associated with higher mortality, although the association attenuated over time (first month after discharge: hazard ratio [HR], 5.9; 95% CI, 3.9-9.1; 1-6 months after the procedure: HR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.7-2.7; P < .001; 7-12 months after the procedure: HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-1.9; 1-8 years after the procedure: HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.01-1.3). Of all deaths occurring within 8 years after procedure, 9.5% were independently associated with in-hospital complications. Complications with the greatest impact on long-term mortality were renal dysfunction (2.4%), blood transfusion (3.4%), and reintubations (2.4%)., Conclusions: Elderly patients are at higher risk for in-hospital complications after EVAR. These in-hospital complications have a significant impact on both short- and long-term survival. To further improve the delivery of EVAR care nationally, quality improvement efforts should be focused on preventing postoperative morbidity in elderly patients, as well as refining out of hospital surveillance strategies for subjects who experience in-hospital complications to improve overall survival., (Copyright © 2019 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: 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., Methods: 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., Results: 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., Conclusions: 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., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: The efficacy and need for secondary interventions for type II endoleaks following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) remain controversial. This systematic review aimed at investigating the clinical outcomes of different type II endoleak treatments in patients with a persistent type II endoleak after EVAR., Data Sources: Embase, Medline via Ovid, Web of Science Core Collection, the Cochrane CENTRAL, and Google Scholar., Review Methods: This systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA Statement. Outcomes of interest were technical and clinical success, change in sac diameter, complications, need for additional interventions, abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture, and (AAA related) mortality. Meta-analyses were performed with random effects models., Results: A total of 59 studies were included, with a cumulative cohort of 1073 patients with persistent type II endoleak. Peri-operative complications following treatment of type II endoleaks occurred in 3.8% of patients (95% CI 2.7-5.2%), and AAA related mortality was 1.8% (95% CI 1.1-2.7%). Overall technical success was 87.9% (95% CI 83.1-92.1%), while clinical success was 68.4% (95% CI 61.2-75.1%). Among studies detailing sac dynamics, decrease or stable sac, with or without resolution, was achieved in 78.4% (95% CI 70.2-85.6%). Changes in sac diameter following type II endoleak treatment were documented in 157 patients to at least 24 months. Within this group an actual decrease in sac diameter was reported in only 27 of 40 patients., Conclusion: There is little evidence supporting the efficacy of secondary intervention for type II endoleaks after EVAR. Although generally safe, the lack of evidence supporting the efficacy of type II endoleak treatment leads to difficulty in assessing its merits., (Copyright © 2018 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Increased renal complications have been suggested with suprarenal stent grafts, but long-term analyses have been limited. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of endograft choice on perioperative and long-term outcomes., Methods: We compared Medicare beneficiaries undergoing endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysms repair from 2005 to 2008 with endografts with infrarenal fixation and a single docking limb (AneuRx, Excluder) to those with suprarenal fixation and 2 docking limbs (Zenith), or a unibody configuration (Powerlink). Propensity score weighting accounted for differences in patient characteristics among the different graft formations, and perioperative mortality, complications, and length of stay and 4-year rates of survival, rupture, and reintervention were compared., Results: Forty-six thousand one hundred seventy-one Medicare beneficiaries were identified including 11,002 (24%) with suprarenal fixation, 32,909 (71%) with infrarenal fixation, and 2,260 (5%) with a unibody graft. After propensity score weighting, there were no significant differences in patients' baseline clinical and demographic characteristics. The suprarenal fixation patients had higher rates of perioperative mortality (1.7% vs. 1.3%, P < 0.01), renal failure (6.0% vs. 4.7%, P < 0.001), and mesenteric ischemia (0.7% vs. 0.4%, P < 0.01) and longer length of stay (3.4 days vs. 3.0 days, P < 0.001) compared with patients with infrarenal fixation. Unibody grafts had higher rates of renal failure (5.9% vs. 4.7%, P < 0.001), mesenteric ischemia (1.0% vs. 0.4%, P < 0.001), and conversion to open repair (0.7% vs. 0.1%, P < 0.001) compared to those with infrarenal fixation and single docking limbs. At 4 years, mortality remained slightly higher with suprarenal compared to infrarenal fixation (30% vs. 29%, P = 0.047), although these patients had fewer conversions to open repair (0.6% vs. 0.9%, P = 0.03) and aneurysm-related reinterventions (10% vs. 12%, P < 0.01). At 4 years, unibody grafts had more aneurysm-related interventions compared to infrarenal fixation grafts (15% vs. 12%, P < 0.01) but fewer conversions to open repair (0.4% vs. 0.9%, P = 0.02). Late rupture did not differ among the groups., Conclusions: Compared to infrarenal fixation devices, patients who underwent EVAR with suprarenal fixation had higher perioperative mortality and renal complications but fewer reinterventions including conversion, while the unibody graft had more perioperative complications and aneurysm-related reinterventions, but fewer conversions to open repair. Although these differences could be explained by selection bias, these data suggest that further comparative effectiveness analyses should be performed to understand the outcomes following EVAR with suprarenal fixation and unibody grafts., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has become an alternative to open repair for the treatment of ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysms (rTAAs). The aim of this study was to assess national trends in the use of TEVAR for the treatment of rTAA and to determine its impact on perioperative outcomes., Methods: Patients admitted with an rTAA between 1993 and 2012 were identified from the National Inpatient Sample. Patients were grouped in accordance with their treatment: TEVAR, open repair, or nonoperative treatment. The primary outcomes were treatment trends over time and in-hospital death. Secondary outcomes included perioperative complications and length of stay. Trend analyses were performed using the Cochran-Armitage test for trend, and adjusted mortality risks were established using multivariable logistic regression analysis., Results: A total of 12,399 patients were included, with 1622 (13%) undergoing TEVAR, 2808 (23%) undergoing open repair, and 7969 (64%) not undergoing surgical treatment. TEVAR has been increasingly used from 2% of total admissions in 2003-2004 to 43% in 2011-2012 (P < .001). Concurrently, there was a decline in the proportion of patients undergoing open repair (29% to 12%; P < .001) and nonoperative treatment (69% to 45%; P < .001). The proportion of patients undergoing surgical repair has increased for all age groups since 1993-1994 (P < .001 for all) but was most pronounced among those aged 80 years with a 7.5-fold increase. After TEVAR was introduced, procedural mortality decreased from 36% in 2003-2004 to 27% in 2011-2012 (P < .001); mortality among those undergoing nonoperative treatment remained stable between 63% and 60% (P = .167). Overall mortality after rTAA admission decreased from 55% to 42% (P < .001). Since 2005, mortality for open repair was 33% and 22% for TEVAR (P < .001). In adjusted analysis, open repair was associated with a twofold higher mortality than TEVAR (odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-2.5)., Conclusions: TEVAR has replaced open repair as primary surgical treatment for rTAA. The introduction of endovascular treatment appears to have broadened the eligibility of patients for surgical treatment, particularly among the elderly. Mortality after rTAA admission has declined since the introduction of TEVAR, which is the result of improved operative mortality as well as the increased proportion of patients undergoing surgical repair., (Copyright © 2017 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: As endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) continues to advance, eligibility of patients with anatomically complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) for EVAR is increasing. However, whether complex EVAR is associated with favorable outcome over conventional open repair and how outcomes compare with infrarenal EVAR remains unclear. This study examined perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing complex EVAR, focusing on differences with complex open repair and standard infrarenal EVAR., Methods: We identified all patients undergoing nonruptured complex EVAR, complex open repair, and infrarenal EVAR in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Targeted Vascular Module. Aneurysms were considered complex if the proximal extent was juxtarenal or suprarenal or when the Zenith Fenestrated endograft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind) was used. Independent risks were established using multivariable logistic regression analysis., Results: Included were 4584 patients, with 411 (9.0%) undergoing complex EVAR, 395 (8.6%) undergoing complex open repair, and 3778 (82.4%) undergoing infrarenal EVAR. Perioperative mortality was 3.4% after complex EVAR, 6.6% after open repair (P = .038), and 1.5% after infrarenal EVAR (P = .005). Postoperative acute kidney injuries occurred in 2.3% of complex EVAR patients, in 9.5% of those undergoing complex open repair (P < .001), and in 0.9% of infrarenal EVAR patients (P = .007). Compared with complex EVAR, complex open repair was an independent predictor of 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR], 2.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-4.4), renal function deterioration (OR, 4.8; 95% CI, 2.2-10.5), and any complication (OR, 3.7; 95% CI, 2.5-5.5). When complex vs infrarenal EVAR were compared, infrarenal EVAR was associated with favorable 30-day mortality (OR, 0.5; 95% CI, 0.2-0.9), and renal outcome (OR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.9)., Conclusions: In this study assessing the perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing repair for anatomically complex AAAs, complex EVAR had fewer complications than complex open repair but carried a higher risk of adverse outcomes than infrarenal EVAR. Further research is warranted to determine whether the benefits of EVAR compared with open repair for complex AAA treatment are maintained during long-term follow-up., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Although an increasing number of patients with peripheral arterial disease undergo multiple revascularization procedures, the effect of prior interventions on outcomes remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate perioperative outcomes of bypass surgery in patients with and those without prior ipsilateral treatment., Methods: Patients undergoing nonemergent infrainguinal bypass between 2011 and 2014 were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Targeted Vascular module. After stratification by symptom status (chronic limb-threatening ischemia [CLTI] and claudication), patients undergoing primary bypass were compared with those undergoing secondary bypass. Within the secondary bypass group, further analysis compared prior bypass with prior endovascular intervention. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to establish the independent association between prior ipsilateral procedure and perioperative outcomes., Results: A total of 7302 patients were identified, of which 4540 (62%) underwent primary bypass (68% for CLTI), 1536 (21%) underwent secondary bypass after a previous bypass (75% for CLTI), and 1226 (17%) underwent secondary bypass after a previous endovascular intervention (72% for CLTI). Prior revascularization on the same ipsilateral arteries was associated with increased 30-day major adverse limb event in patients with CLTI (9.8% vs 7.4%; odds ratio [OR], 1.4 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.1-1.7]) and claudication (5.2% vs 2.5%; OR, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.3-3.5]). Similarly, secondary bypass was an independent risk factor for 30-day major reintervention (CLTI: OR, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.1-1.8]; claudication: OR, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.3-3.5]), bleeding (CLTI: OR, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.2-1.6]; claudication: OR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.3-2.4]), and unplanned reoperation (CLTI: OR, 1.2 [95% CI, 1.0-1.4]; claudication: OR, 1.6 [95% CI, 1.1-2.1]), whereas major amputation was increased in CLTI patients only (OR, 1.3 [95% CI, 1.01-1.8]). Postoperative mortality was not significantly different in patients undergoing secondary compared with primary bypass (CLTI: 1.7% vs 2.2% [P = .22]; claudication: 0.4% vs 0.6% [P = .76]). Among secondary bypass patients with CLTI, those with prior bypass had higher 30-day reintervention rates (7.8% vs 4.9%; OR, 1.5 [95% CI, 1.0-2.2]) but fewer wound infections (7.3% vs 12%; OR, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.4-0.8]) compared with patients with prior endovascular intervention., Conclusions: Prior revascularization, in both patients with CLTI and patients with claudication, is associated with worse perioperative outcomes compared with primary bypass. Furthermore, prior endovascular intervention is associated with increased wound infections, whereas those with prior bypass had higher reintervention rates. The increasing prevalence of patients undergoing multiple interventions stresses the importance of the selection of patients for initial treatment and should be factored into subsequent revascularization options in an effort to decrease adverse events., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Renal complications after repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) have been associated with increased morbidity and mortality. However, limited data have assessed risk factors for renal complications in the endovascular era. This study aimed to identify predictors of renal complications after endovascular AAA repair (EVAR) and open repair., Methods: Patients who underwent EVAR or open repair of a nonruptured infrarenal AAA between 2011 and 2013 were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Targeted Vascular module. Patients on hemodialysis preoperatively were excluded. Renal complications were defined as new postoperative dialysis or creatinine increase >2 mg/dL. Patient demographics, comorbidities, glomerular filtration rate (GFR), operative details, and outcomes were compared using univariate analysis between those with and without renal complications. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of renal complications., Results: We identified 4503 patients who underwent elective repair of an infrarenal AAA (EVAR: 3869, open repair: 634). Renal complication occurred in 1% of patients after EVAR and in 5% of patients after open repair. There were no differences in comorbidities between patients with and without renal complications. A preoperative GFR <60 mL/min/1.73m 2 occurred more frequently among patients with renal complications (EVAR: 81% vs 37%, P < .01; open: 60% vs 34%, P < .01). The 30-day mortality was also significantly increased (EVAR: 55% vs 1%, P < .01; open: 30% vs 4%, P < .01). After adjustment, renal complications were strongly associated with 30-day mortality (odds ratio [OR], 38.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 20.4-71.9). Independent predictors of renal complications included GFR <60 mL/min/1.73m 2 (OR, 4.6; 95% CI, 2.4-8.7), open repair (OR, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.3-5.3), transfusion (OR, 6.1; 95% CI, 3.0-12.6), and prolonged operative time (OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.6-5.6)., Conclusions: Predictors of renal complications include elevated baseline GFR, open approach, transfusion, and prolonged operative time. Given the dramatic increase in mortality associated with renal complications, care should be taken to use renal protective strategies, achieve meticulous hemostasis to limit transfusions, and to use an endovascular approach when technically feasible., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Elevated serum phosphate levels have been associated with increased risks of cardiovascular events and death in several patient populations. The effects of serum phosphate on outcomes in patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI) have not been evaluated. In this study, we assessed the effect of abnormal phosphate levels on mortality and major limb events after surgical intervention for CLI., Methods: A retrospective review was undertaken to identify all patients at a single institution who underwent a first-time open or endovascular intervention for CLI between 2005 and 2014. Patients without recorded postoperative phosphate levels were excluded. Postoperative phosphate levels ≤30 days of the initial operation were recorded, and the mean was calculated. Patients were stratified according to mean phosphate levels (low: <2.5 mg/dL, normal: 2.5-4.5 mg/dL, and high: >4.5 mg/dL). Patient demographics, comorbidities, and operative details were compared in univariate analysis. Multivariable regression and Cox proportional hazard modeling were used to account for patient demographics and comorbid conditions., Results: We identified 941 patients, including 42 (5%) with low phosphate, 768 (82%) with normal phosphate, and 131 (14%) with high phosphate. Patients with elevated phosphate were younger and had higher rates of congestive heart failure, diabetes, and dialysis dependence. Bypass was more common among patients with normal phosphate compared with high or low phosphate levels. There was no difference in the Wound, ischemia, and Foot infection (WiFi) classification or TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus classification among the cohorts. There were significant differences in 1-year mortality (low: 19%, normal: 17%, high: 33%; P < .01) and 3-year mortality (low: 38%, normal: 34%, high: 56%; P < .01) between phosphate cohorts. Major amputation (low: 12%, normal: 12%, high: 15%) and restenosis (low: 21%, normal: 24%, high: 28%) tended toward worse outcomes among patients with elevated phosphate levels but did not reach statistical significance. After adjustment for baseline characteristics, mortality was higher (hazard ratio [HR], 1.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-2.2) and amputation-free survival was lower (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.9) among patients with elevated compared with normal phosphate levels. A subgroup analysis was then performed to assess dialysis and nondialysis patients separately. Patients with elevated serum phosphate levels maintained a significantly higher risk of mortality in each group (dialysis: HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2-2.6; nondialysis: HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.04-2.10)., Conclusions: Elevated phosphate levels are associated with increased mortality and decreased amputation-free survival after interventions for CLI. Future studies evaluating the effects of phosphate reduction in patients with CLI are warranted., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The targeted vascular module in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) consists of self-selected hospitals that choose to collect extra clinical details for better risk adjustment and improved procedure-specific outcomes. The purpose of this study was to compare patient selection and outcomes between targeted and nontargeted hospitals in the NSQIP regarding the operative management of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA)., Methods: We identified all patients who underwent endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) or open AAA repair from 2011 to 2013 and compared cases by whether the operation took place in a targeted or nontargeted hospital. EVAR and open repair as well as intact and ruptured aneurysms were evaluated separately. Only variables contained in both modules were used to evaluate rupture status and operation type. All thoracoabdominal aneurysms were excluded. Univariate analysis was performed for intact and ruptured EVAR and open repair grouped by complexity, defined as visceral involvement in open repair and a compilation of concomitant procedures for EVAR. Multivariable models were developed to identify effect of hospital type on mortality., Results: There were 17,651 AAA repairs identified. After exclusion of aneurysms involving the thoracic aorta (n = 352), there were 1600 open AAA repairs at targeted hospitals (21% ruptured) and 2725 at nontargeted hospitals (19% ruptured) and 4986 EVARs performed at targeted hospitals (6.7% ruptured) and 7988 at nontargeted hospitals (5.2% ruptured). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality rates between targeted and nontargeted hospitals for intact aneurysms (EVAR noncomplex, 1.8% vs 1.4% [P = .07]; open repair noncomplex, 4.2% vs 4.5% [P = .7]; EVAR complex, 5.0% vs 3.2% [P = .3]; open repair complex, 8.0% vs 6.0% [P = .2]). For ruptured aneurysms, again there was no difference in mortality between the targeted and nontargeted hospitals (EVAR noncomplex, 23% vs 25% [P = .4]; open repair noncomplex, 38% vs 34% [P = .2]; EVAR complex, 29% vs 33% [P = 1.0]; open repair complex, 27% vs 41% [P = .09]). Multivariable analysis further demonstrated that having an operation at a targeted vs nontargeted hospital had no impact on mortality for both intact and ruptured aneurysms (odds ratio, 1.1 [0.9-1.4] and 1.0 [0.8-1.3], respectively)., Conclusions: This analysis highlights the similarities between targeted and nontargeted hospitals within the NSQIP for AAA operative management and suggests that data from the targeted NSQIP, in terms of AAA management, are generalizable to all NSQIP hospitals., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Unplanned hospital readmissions following surgical interventions are associated with adverse events and contribute to increasing health care costs. Despite numerous studies defining risk factors following lower extremity bypass surgery, evidence regarding readmission after endovascular interventions is limited. This study aimed to identify predictors of 30-day unplanned readmission following infrainguinal endovascular interventions., Methods: We identified all patients undergoing an infrainguinal endovascular intervention in the targeted vascular module of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program between 2012 and 2014. Perioperative outcomes were stratified by symptom status (chronic limb-threatening ischemia [CLI] vs claudication). Patients who died during index admission and those who remained in the hospital after 30 days were excluded. Indications for unplanned readmission related to the index procedure were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify preoperative and in-hospital (during index admission) risk factors of 30-day unplanned readmission., Results: There were 4449 patients who underwent infrainguinal endovascular intervention, of whom 2802 (63%) had CLI (66% tissue loss) and 1647 (37%) had claudication. The unplanned readmission rates for CLI and claudication patients were 16% (n = 447) and 6.5% (n = 107), respectively. Mortality after index admission was higher for readmitted patients compared with those not readmitted (CLI, 3.4% vs 0.7% [P < .001]; claudication, 2.8% vs 0.1% [P < .01]). Approximately 50% of all unplanned readmissions were related to the index procedure. Among CLI patients, the most common indication for readmission related to the index procedure was wound or infection related (42%), whereas patients with claudication were mainly readmitted for recurrent symptoms of peripheral vascular disease (28%). In patients with CLI, predictors of unplanned readmission included diabetes (odds ratio, 1.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.6), congestive heart failure (1.6; 1.1-2.5), renal insufficiency (1.7; 1.3-2.2), preoperative dialysis (1.4; 1.02-1.9), tibial angioplasty/stenting (1.3; 1.04-1.6), in-hospital bleeding (1.9; 1.04-3.5), in-hospital unplanned return to the operating room (1.9; 1.1-3.5), and discharge other than to home (1.5; 1.1-2.0). Risk factors for those with claudication were dependent functional status (3.5; 1.4-8.7), smoking (1.6; 1.02-2.5), diabetes (1.5; 1.01-2.3), preoperative dialysis (3.6; 1.6-8.3), procedure time exceeding 120 minutes (1.8; 1.1-2.7), in-hospital bleeding (2.9; 1.2-7.4), and in-hospital unplanned return to the operating room (3.4; 1.2-9.4)., Conclusions: Unplanned readmission after endovascular treatment is relatively common, especially in patients with CLI, and is associated with substantially increased mortality. Awareness of these risk factors will help providers identify patients at high risk who may benefit from early surveillance, and prophylactic measures focused on decreasing postoperative complications may reduce the rate of readmission., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Isolated visceral artery dissections are rare entities with no current consensus guidelines for treatment and follow-up. This study aims to evaluate the presentation, management, outcomes, and follow-up practices for patients with isolated visceral artery dissections and to compare those with and without symptoms., Methods: In this retrospective analysis, we identified all patients with isolated celiac artery and/or isolated superior mesenteric artery dissections at a single institution between September 2006 and December 2014. Patients with concomitant aortic dissections were excluded. Cases were stratified by symptom status. Presentation, anatomic findings, treatment, outcomes, and follow-up imaging were then compared between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients., Results: We identified 25 patients including 15 with symptoms and 10 without. There were no differences in patient comorbidities; however, symptomatic patients more frequently presented with thrombus (n = 10; 67% vs n = 1; 10%; P = .01) and inflammation (n = 8; 53% vs n = 1; 10%; P = .04), and trended toward increased stenosis (n = 12; 80% vs n = 4; 40%; P = .09) compared with asymptomatic patients. All asymptomatic patients were treated with observation alone with vessel diameter enlargement noted in 33% (n = 2) of patients on follow-up imaging. Among symptomatic patients, standard treatment included a short course of anticoagulation (mean, 4.5 months) with lifelong antiplatelet therapy. Three patients underwent operative intervention for persistent or worsening symptoms, two during the index admission and one 10 months after presentation for chronic abdominal pain. Approximately 70% (n = 17) of patients in each group had follow-up imaging (computed tomography angiography: n = 14; 56%; magnetic resonance angiography: n = 4; 16%; ultrasound: n = 13; 52%). Among patients treated nonoperatively, no patients complained of symptoms at follow-up, and 50% of those with inflammation on initial imaging had resolution. Twenty-five percent (n = 4) of patients had an increase in vessel size; however, all vessels remained less than 2 cm in maximal diameter. There were no ruptures or related deaths in either group., Conclusions: Among patients with visceral artery dissection, no ruptures occurred but diameter enlargement was documented. This disease progression suggests that routine surveillance may be appropriate; however, transitioning early to ultrasound imaging should be considered to decrease radiation, contrast, and associated costs., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Early extubation after cardiac surgery is associated with decreased hospital stay and resource savings with similar mortality and has led to the widespread use of early extubation protocols. In the Vascular Quality Initiative, there is significant regional variation in the frequency of extubation in the operating room (endovascular aneurysm repair [EVAR], 77%-97%; open repair, 30%-70%) after repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). However, the effects of extubation practices on patient outcomes after repair of AAAs are unclear., Methods: All patients undergoing repair of an intact AAA in the Vascular Study Group of New England from 2003 to 2015 were evaluated. Patients undergoing concomitant procedures or conversions were excluded. Timing of extubation was stratified for EVAR (operating room, <12 hours, >12 hours) and open repair (operating room, <12 hours, 12-24 hours, >24 hours). Prolonged hospital stay was defined as >2 days after EVAR and >7 days after open repair. Univariate and multivariable analyses were completed, and independent predictors of extubation outside of the operating room were identified., Results: There were 5774 patients evaluated (EVAR, 4453; open repair, 1321). After both EVAR and open repair, respiratory complications, prolonged hospital stay, and discharge to a skilled nursing facility (SNF) increased with intubation time. After adjustment, the odds of complications increased with each 12-hour delay in extubation: respiratory (EVAR: odds ratio [OR], 4.3 [95% confidence interval (CI), 3.0-6.1]; open repair: OR, 1.8 [95% CI, 1.5-2.2]), prolonged hospital stay (EVAR: OR, 2.7 [95% CI, 2.0-3.8]; open repair: OR, 1.3 [95% CI, 1.1-1.4]), and discharge to SNF (EVAR: OR, 2.0 [95% CI, 1.5-2.8]; open repair: OR, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.1-1.6]). Predictors of extubation outside of the operating room after EVAR included increasing age (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.8), congestive heart failure (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.0), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.4-2.9), symptomatic aneurysm (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 2.3-5.7), and increasing diameter (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.01-1.01). After open repair, increasing age (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6), congestive heart failure (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.01-3.3), dialysis (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.7-70), symptomatic aneurysm (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.9-4.3), and hospital practice patterns (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.01-1.01) were predictive of extubation outside of the operating room., Conclusions: The benefits of early extubation in cardiac patients are also seen after AAA repair. Suitable patients should be extubated in the operating room to decrease respiratory complications, length of stay, and discharge to an SNF. Early extubation protocols should be considered to reduce regional variation in extubation practices and to improve patient outcomes., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after coronary stenting prolongs survival by preventing both in-stent thrombosis and other cardiovascular atherothrombotic events. Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) typically have a heavy burden of unrevascularized coronary artery disease and also stand to benefit from increased atherothrombotic protection with DAPT. The potential benefit of DAPT compared with aspirin alone in patients with PAD is not well described., Methods: We identified all patients undergoing an initial elective lower extremity revascularization (bypass or endovascular) from 2003 to 2016 in the Vascular Quality Initiative registry discharged on aspirin or aspirin plus a thienopyridine antiplatelet agent (DAPT). We first estimated models predicting the likelihood of receiving DAPT and then used inverse probability weighting to account for baseline differences in the likelihood of receiving DAPT and compared late survival. For sensitivity analysis, we also performed Cox proportion hazard modeling on the unweighted cohorts and generated adjusted survival curves., Results: We identified 57,041 patients undergoing lower extremity revascularization (28% bypass). Of 15,985 bypasses (69% for critical limb ischemia [CLI]), 38% were discharged on DAPT. Of 41,056 endovascular interventions (39% for CLI), 69% were discharged on DAPT. Analyses using inverse probability weighting demonstrated a small survival benefit to DAPT at 1 year for bypass (93% vs 92% [P = .001]) and endovascular interventions (93% vs 92% [P = .005]) that was sustained through 5 years of follow-up (bypass, 80% vs 78% [P = .004]; endovascular, 76% vs 73% [P = .002]). When stratified by severity of PAD, DAPT had a survival benefit for patients with CLI undergoing bypass (5 years, 70% vs 66% [P = .04]) and endovascular intervention (5 years, 71% vs 67% [P = .01]) but not for patients with claudication (bypass, 89% vs 88% [P = .36]; endovascular, 87% vs 85% [P = .46]). The protective effect of DAPT was similar when using Cox proportional hazard models after bypass (hazard ratio, 0.81 [95% confidence interval, 0.72-0.90]) and endovascular intervention (hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.95])., Conclusions: DAPT at time of discharge was associated with prolonged survival for patients with CLI undergoing lower extremity revascularization but not for those with claudication. Further research is needed to quantify the risks associated with DAPT and to identify subgroups at increased risk of thrombotic and bleeding complications to guide medical management of patients with PAD., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Bowel ischemia is a rare but devastating complication after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. Its rarity has prohibited extensive risk-factor analysis, particularly since the widespread adoption of endovascular AAA repair (EVAR); therefore, this study assessed the incidence of postoperative bowel ischemia after AAA repair in the endovascular era and identified risk factors for its occurrence., Methods: All patients undergoing intact or ruptured AAA repair in the Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE) between January 2003 and November 2014 were included. Patients with and without postoperative bowel ischemia were compared and stratified by indication (intact and ruptured) and treatment approach (open repair and EVAR). Criteria for diagnosis were endoscopic or clinical evidence of ischemia, including bloody stools, in patients who died before diagnostic procedures were performed. Independent predictors of postoperative bowel ischemia were established using multivariable logistic regression analysis., Results: Included were 7312 patients, with 6668 intact (67.0% EVAR) and 644 ruptured AAA repairs (31.5% EVAR). The incidence of bowel ischemia after intact repair was 1.6% (open repair, 3.6%; EVAR, 0.6%) and 15.2% after ruptured repair (open repair, 19.3%; EVAR, 6.4%). Ruptured AAA was the most important determinant of postoperative bowel ischemia (odds ratio [OR], 6.4, 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.5-9.0), followed by open repair (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.8-4.7). Additional predictive patient factors were advanced age (OR, 1.4 per 10 years; 95% CI, 1.1-1.7), female gender (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.2), hypertension (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1-3.0), heart failure (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2-2.8), and current smoking (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1). Other risk factors included unilateral interruption of the hypogastric artery (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.0-2.8), prolonged operative time (OR, 1.2 per 60-minute increase; 95% CI, 1.1-1.3), blood loss >1 L (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.3-3.0), and a distal anastomosis to the femoral artery (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.7). Bowel ischemia patients had a significantly higher perioperative mortality after intact (open repair: 20.5% vs 1.9%; P < .001; EVAR: 34.6% vs 0.9%; P < .001) as well as after ruptured AAA repair (open repair: 48.2% vs 25.6%; P < .001; EVAR: 30.8% vs 21.1%; P < .001)., Conclusions: This study underlines that although bowel ischemia after AAA repair is rare, the associated outcomes are very poor. The cause of postoperative bowel ischemia is multifactorial and can be attributed to patient factors and operative characteristics. These data should be considered during preoperative risk assessment and for optimization of both the patient and the procedure in an effort to reduce the risk of postoperative bowel ischemia., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is occasionally performed in conjunction with additional procedures; however, how these concomitant procedures affect outcome is unclear. This study determined the frequency of additional procedures during elective open AAA repair and the effect on perioperative outcomes., Methods: All elective infrarenal open AAA repairs between January 2003 and November 2014 in the Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE) were identified. Patients were grouped by concomitant procedures, which included no concomitant procedure, renal artery bypass, lower extremity bypass, other abdominal procedure, or thromboembolectomy. Analyses were performed using multivariable logistic regression., Results: Of 1314 patients who underwent elective AAA repair, 153 (11.6%) had a concomitant procedure, including renal bypass in 27 (2.1%), lower extremity bypass in 28 (2.1%), other abdominal procedures in 64 (4.9%), and thromboembolectomy in 48 (3.7%). Independent risk factors for 30-day mortality were renal bypass (odds ratio [OR], 7.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9-27.7), other abdominal procedures (OR, 4.8; 95% CI, 1.6-14.1), and thromboembolectomy (OR, 8.8; 95% CI, 3.1-24.9). Deterioration of renal function was predicted by renal bypass (OR, 5.1; 95% CI, 2.1-12.4) and thromboembolectomy (OR, 3.7; 95% CI, 1.8-7.6). Lower extremity bypass and thromboembolectomy were predictive of postoperative leg ischemia (OR, 8.9; 95% CI, 2.7-29.0; OR, 11.2; 95% CI, 4.4-28.8, respectively), and thromboembolectomy was also predictive of postoperative bowel ischemia (OR, 4.4; 95% CI, 1.6-12.0)., Conclusions: Performing additional procedures during infrarenal open AAA repair is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in the postoperative period. Careful deliberation of the operative risks and the necessity of the additional interventions are therefore advised during operative planning. This study also highlights the importance of avoiding perioperative thromboembolic events., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: Although it has become clear that aneurysmal and occlusive arterial disease represent two distinct etiologic entities, it is still unknown whether the two vascular pathologies are prognostically different. We aim to assess the long-term vital prognosis of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysmal disease (AAA) or peripheral artery disease (PAD), focusing on possible differences in survival, prognostic risk profiles and causes of death., Methods: Patients undergoing elective surgery for isolated AAA or PAD between 2003 and 2011 were retrospectively included. Differences in postoperative survival were determined using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis. Prognostic risk profiles were also established with Cox regression analysis., Results: 429 and 338 patients were included in the AAA and PAD groups, respectively. AAA patients were older (71.7 vs. 63.3 years, p < 0.001), yet overall survival following surgery did not differ (HR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.87-1.54). Neither was type of vascular disease associated with postoperative cardiovascular nor cancer-related death. However, in comparison with age- and gender-matched general populations, cardiovascular mortality was higher in PAD than AAA patients (48.3% vs. 17.3%). Survival of AAA and PAD patients was negatively affected by age, history of cancer and renal insufficiency. Additional determinants in the PAD group were diabetes and ischemic heart disease., Conclusions: Long-term survival after surgery for PAD and AAA is similar. However, overall life expectancy is significantly worse among PAD patients. The contribution of cardiovascular disease towards mortality in PAD patients warrants more aggressive secondary prevention to reduce cardiovascular mortality and improve longevity., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: We sought to compare current practices in patient selection and 30-day outcomes for transperitoneal and retroperitoneal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repairs., Methods: All patients undergoing elective transperitoneal or retroperitoneal surgical repair for AAA between January 2011 and December 2013 were identified in the Targeted Vascular National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Emergency cases were excluded. Baseline characteristics, anatomic details, and intraoperative and postoperative outcomes were evaluated among those with infrarenal or juxtarenal AAA only., Results: We identified 1135 patients: 788 transperitoneal (69%) and 347 retroperitoneal (31%). When only infrarenal and juxtarenal AAAs were evaluated, the retroperitoneal patients were less likely to have an infrarenal clamp location (43% vs 68%) and had more renal revascularizations (15% vs 6%; P < .001), more visceral revascularizations (5.6% vs 2.4%; P = .014), and more lower extremity revascularizations (11% vs 7%; P = .021) compared with the transperitoneal approach. Postoperative mortality and return to the operating room were similar. Transperitoneal patients had a higher rate of wound dehiscence (2.4% vs 0.4%; P = .045), and retroperitoneal patients had higher incidence of pneumonia (9% vs 5%; P = .034), transfusion (77% vs 71%; P = .037), and reintubation (11% vs 7%; P = .034), and a longer median length of stay (8 vs 7 days; P = .048). After exclusion of all concomitant procedures, only transfusions remained more common in the retroperitoneal approach (78% vs 70%; P = .036). Multivariable analyses showed only higher rates of reintubation in the retroperitoneal group (odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-3.0; P = .047)., Conclusions: The retroperitoneal approach is more commonly used for more proximal aneurysms and was associated with higher rates of pneumonia, reintubation, and transfusion, and a longer length of stay on univariate analyses. However, multivariable analysis demonstrated similar results between groups. The long-term benefits and frequency of reinterventions remain to be proven., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Historically, symptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) were found to have intermediate mortality compared with asymptomatic and ruptured AAAs; but with wider use of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), a more recent study suggested that mortality of symptomatic aneurysms was similar to that of asymptomatic AAAs. These prior studies were limited by small numbers. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the mortality and morbidity associated with symptomatic AAA repair in a large contemporary population., Methods: All patients undergoing infrarenal AAA repair were identified in the 2011 to 2013 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, vascular surgery targeted module. We excluded acute conversions to open repair and those for whom the surgical indication was embolization, dissection, thrombosis, or not documented. We compared 30-day mortality and major adverse events for asymptomatic, symptomatic, and ruptured AAA repair, stratified by EVAR and open repair, with univariate analysis and multivariable logistic regression., Results: There were 5502 infrarenal AAAs identified, 4495 asymptomatic aneurysms (830 open repair, 3665 [82%] EVAR), 455 symptomatic aneurysms (143 open repair, 312 [69%] EVAR), and 552 ruptured aneurysms (263 open repair, 289 [52%] EVAR). Aneurysm diameter was similar between asymptomatic and symptomatic AAAs when stratified by procedure type, but it was larger for ruptured aneurysms (EVAR: symptomatic 5.8 ± 1.6 cm vs ruptured 7.5 ± 2.0 cm [P < .001]; open repair: symptomatic 6.4 ± 1.9 cm vs ruptured 8.0 ± 1.9 cm [P < .001]). The proportion of women was similar in symptomatic and ruptured AAAs (27% vs 23%, respectively; P = .14) but lower in asymptomatic AAAs (20%; P < .001). Symptomatic AAAs had intermediate 30-day mortality compared with asymptomatic and ruptured aneurysms after both EVAR (1.4% asymptomatic vs 3.8% symptomatic [P = .001]; symptomatic vs 22% ruptured [P < .001]) and open repair (4.3% asymptomatic vs 7.7% symptomatic [P = .08]; symptomatic vs 34% ruptured [P < .001]). After adjustment for age, gender, repair type, dialysis dependence, and history of severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, patients undergoing repair of symptomatic AAAs were twice as likely to die within 30 days compared with those with asymptomatic aneurysms (odds ratio [OR], 2.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-3.5). When stratified by repair type, the effect size and direction of the ORs were similar (EVAR: OR, 2.4 [95% CI, 1.2-4.7]; open repair: OR, 1.8 [95% CI, 0.86-3.9]) although not significant for open repair. Patients with ruptured aneurysms had a sevenfold increased risk of 30-day mortality compared with symptomatic patients (OR, 6.5; 95% CI, 4.1-10.6)., Conclusions: Patients with symptomatic AAAs had a twofold increased risk of perioperative mortality compared with patients with asymptomatic aneurysms undergoing repair. Furthermore, patients with ruptured aneurysms have a sevenfold increased risk of mortality compared with patients with symptomatic aneurysms., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Previous studies have found conflicting results regarding the operative risks associated with conversion to open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair after failed endovascular treatment (endovascular aneurysm repair [EVAR]). The purpose of this study was to assess the outcome of patients undergoing a conversion, and compare outcomes with standard open AAA repair and EVAR. In addition, we sought out to identify factors associated with conversion., Methods: All patients undergoing a conversion to open repair, and those undergoing standard EVAR and open repair between 2005 and 2013 were included from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors associated with conversion, and to assess independent perioperative risks associated with conversion compared with standard AAA repair. Subanalysis for factors associated with conversion was performed among patients additionally included in the more detailed targeted vascular module of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program., Results: A total of 32,164 patients were included, with 300 conversions, 7188 standard open repairs, and 24,676 EVARs. Conversion to open repair was associated with a significantly higher 30-day mortality than standard open repair (10.0% vs 4.2%; odds ratio [OR], 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-3.6; P < .001), and EVAR (10.0% vs 1.7%; OR, 7.2; 95% CI, 4.8-10.9; P < .001). Conversion surgery was additionally followed by an increased occurrence of any complication (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-1.9 [open]; OR, 7.8; 95% CI, 6.1-9.9 [EVAR]). Factors associated with conversion were young age (OR, 1.2 per 10 years decrease; 95% CI, 1.1-1.4), female gender (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2-2.0), and nonwhite race (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.6). Conversely, body mass index >30 was negatively associated with (OR, 0.7; 95% CI, 0.5-0.9). Among anatomic characteristics captured in the targeted vascular data set (n = 4555), large aneurysm diameter demonstrated to be strongly associated with conversion (OR, 1.1 per 1 cm increase; 95% CI, 1.03-1.1)., Conclusions: Conversion to open repair after failed EVAR is associated with substantially increased perioperative morbidity and mortality compared with standard AAA repair. Factors associated with conversion are large diameter of the aneurysm, young age, female gender, and nonwhite race, whereas obesity is inversely related to conversion surgery., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

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., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Endovascular repair of traumatic thoracic aortic injuries (TTAI) is an alternative to conventional open surgical repair. Single-institution studies have shown a survival benefit with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), but whether this is being realized nationally is not clear. The purpose of our study was to document trends in the increase in use of TEVAR and its effect on outcomes of TTAI nationally., Methods: Patients admitted with a TTAI between 2005 and 2011 were identified in the National Inpatient Sample. Patients were grouped by treatment into TEVAR, open repair, or nonoperative management. Primary outcomes were relative use over time and in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications and length of stay. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify independent predictors of mortality., Results: Included were 8384 patients, with 2492 (29.7%) undergoing TEVAR, 848 (10.1%) open repair, and 5044 (60.2%) managed nonoperatively. TEVAR became the dominant treatment option for TTAI during the study period, starting at 6.5% of interventions in 2005 and accounting for 86.5% of interventions in 2011 (P < .001). Nonoperative management declined concurrently with the widespread of adoption TEVAR (79.8% to 53.7%; P < .001). In-hospital mortality after TEVAR decreased during the study period from 33.3% in 2005 to 4.9% in 2011 (P < .001), and an increase in mortality was observed for open repair from 13.9% to 19.2% (P < .001). Procedural mortality (TEVAR or open repair) decreased from 14.9% to 6.7% (P < .001), and mortality after any TTAI admission declined from 24.5% to 13.3% during the study period (P < .001). In addition to lower mortality, TEVAR was followed by fewer cardiac complications (4.1% vs 8.5%; P < .001), respiratory complications (47.5% vs 54.8%; P < .001), and shorter length of stay (18.4 vs 20.2 days; P = .012) compared with open repair. In adjusted mortality analyses, open repair proved to be associated with twice the mortality risk compared with TEVAR (odds ratio, 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-2.7), and nonoperative management was associated with more than a fourfold increase in mortality (odds ratio, 4.5; 95% confidence interval, 3.8-5.3)., Conclusions: TEVAR is now the dominant surgical approach in TTAI, with substantial perioperative morbidity and mortality benefits over open aortic repair. Overall mortality after admission for TTAI has declined, which is most likely the result of the replacement of open repair by TEVAR as well as the broadened eligibility for operative repair., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Life expectancy and causes of death after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair are not well characterized. Population aging and improved secondary prevention may have modified the prognosis of these patients. We designed a retrospective cohort study to determine the vital prognosis, causes of death, and differences in outcome after intact and ruptured AAA., Methods: All patients with AAA treated from 2003 to 2011 at a single university institution in The Netherlands were analyzed. Survival status was derived from civil registry data. Causes of death were obtained from death certificates. The primary end point was overall mortality. Secondary end points were cardiovascular, cancer-related, and AAA-related mortality. Predictors for perioperative and late survival were obtained by logistic regression and Cox regression models, respectively., Results: The study included 619 consecutive AAA patients (12% women; mean age, 72 years), of whom 152 (24.5%) had ruptured AAAs. Endovascular repair was performed in 390 (63%). Rupture (odds ratio [OR], 10.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.80-23.5), open repair (OR, 3.59; 95% CI, 1.69-7.62), renal insufficiency (OR, 2.94; 95% CI, 1.51-3.46), and age (OR, 1.08 per year; 95% CI, 1.09-1.15) were predictors of 30-day mortality. Five-year survival expectancy was 65% for intact AAA and 41% for ruptured AAA (P < .001). Cardiovascular deaths unrelated to the AAA occurred in 35% and cancer-related deaths in 29% of deceased patients. Predictors for late mortality were history of prior malignant disease (hazard ratio, 2.83; 95% CI, 1.99-4.03) and age (hazard ratio, 1.08 per year; 95% CI, 1.05-1.10). After 30 days, only six deaths (1.1%) were AAA related., Conclusions: Endovascular repair reduced perioperative mortality by threefold, but no survival benefit was observed at long term. After the perioperative period, survival of ruptured AAA and intact AAA patients was not different. Deaths were distributed in similar proportions between cardiovascular and cancer-related causes., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair has been performed by various surgical specialties for many years. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) may be a disruptive technology, having an impact on which specialties care for patients with AAA. Therefore, we examined the proportion of AAA repairs performed by various specialties over time in the United States and evaluated the impact of the introduction of EVAR., Methods: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2001-2009) was queried for intact and ruptured AAA and for open repair and EVAR. Specific procedures were used to identify vascular surgeons (VSs), cardiac surgeons (CSs), and general surgeons (GSs) as well as interventional cardiologists and interventional radiologists for states that reported unique treating physician identifiers. Annual procedure volumes were subsequently calculated for each specialty., Results: We identified 108,587 EVARs and 85,080 open AAA repairs (3011 EVARs and 12,811 open repairs for ruptured AAA). VSs performed an increasing proportion of AAA repairs during the study period (52% in 2001 to 66% in 2009; P < .001). GSs and CSs performed fewer repairs during the same period (25% to 17% [P < .001] and 19% to 13% [P < .001], respectively). EVAR was increasingly used for intact (33% to 78% of annual cases; P < .001) as well as ruptured AAA repair (5% to 28%; P < .001). The proportion of intact open repairs performed by VSs increased from 52% to 65% (P < .001), whereas for EVAR, the proportion went from 60% to 67% (P < .001). The proportion performed by VSs increased for ruptured open repairs from 37% to 53% (P < .001) and for ruptured EVARs from 28% to 73% (P < .001). Compared with treatment by VSs, treatment by a CS (0.55 [0.53-0.56]) and GS (0.66 [0.64-0.68]) was associated with a decreased likelihood of undergoing endovascular rather than open AAA repair., Conclusions: VSs are performing an increasing majority of AAA repairs, in large part driven by the increased utilization of EVAR for both intact and ruptured AAA repair. However, GSs and CSs still perform AAA repair. Further studies should examine the implications of these national trends on the outcome of AAA repair., (Copyright © 2015 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Prior studies suggest that percutaneous access for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (pEVAR) offers significant operative and postoperative benefits compared with femoral cutdown (cEVAR). National data on this topic, however, are limited. We compared patient selection and outcomes for elective pEVAR and cEVAR., Methods: We identified all patients undergoing either pEVAR (bilateral percutaneous access, whether successful or not) or cEVAR (at least one planned groin cutdown) for abdominal aortic aneurysms from January 2011 to December 2013 in the Targeted Vascular data set from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Emergent cases, ruptures, cases with an iliac conduit, and cases with a preoperative wound infection were excluded. Groups were compared by χ(2) test or t-test or the Mann-Whitney test where appropriate., Results: We identified 4112 patients undergoing elective EVAR, 3004 cEVAR patients (73%) and 1108 pEVAR patients (27%). Of all EVAR patients, 26% had bilateral percutaneous access; 1.0% had attempted percutaneous access converted to cutdown (4% of pEVARs); and the remainder had a planned cutdown, 63.9% bilateral and 9.1% unilateral. There were no significant differences in age, gender, aneurysm diameter, or prior open abdominal surgery. Patients undergoing cEVAR were less likely to have congestive heart failure (1.5% vs 2.4%; P = .04) but more likely to undergo any concomitant procedure during surgery (32% vs 26%; P < .01) than patients undergoing pEVAR. Postoperatively, pEVAR patients had shorter operative time (mean, 135 vs 152 minutes; P < .01), shorter length of stay (median, 1 day vs 2 days; P < .01), and fewer wound complications (2.1% vs 1.0%; P = .02). On multivariable analysis, the only predictor of percutaneous access failure was performance of any concomitant procedure (odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.0-4.0; P = .04)., Conclusions: Currently, one in four patients treated at Targeted Vascular National Surgical Quality Improvement Program centers are getting pEVAR, which is associated with a high success rate, shorter operation time, shorter length of stay, and fewer wound complications compared with cEVAR., (Copyright © 2015 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Although evidence has shown that ischemic heart disease (IHD) in vascular surgery patients has a negative impact on the prognosis after surgery, it is unclear whether directed treatment of IHD may influence cause-specific and overall mortality. The objective of this study was to determine the prognostic implication of coronary revascularization (CR) on overall and cause-specific mortality in vascular surgery patients., Methods: Patients undergoing surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysm, carotid artery stenosis, or peripheral artery disease in a university hospital in The Netherlands between January 2003 and December 2011 were retrospectively included. Survival estimates were obtained by Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis., Results: A total of 1104 patients were included. Adjusted survival analyses showed that IHD significantly increased the risk of overall mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-1.87) and cardiovascular death (HR, 1.93; 95% confidence interval, 1.35-2.76). Compared with those without CR, patients previously undergoing CR had similar overall mortality (HR, 1.38 vs 1.62; P = .274) and cardiovascular mortality (HR, 1.83 vs 2.02; P = .656). Nonrevascularized IHD patients were more likely to die of IHD (6.9% vs 35.7%), whereas revascularized IHD patients more frequently died of cardiovascular causes unrelated to IHD (39.1% vs 64.3%; P = .018)., Conclusions: This study confirms the significance of IHD for postoperative survival of vascular surgery patients. CR was associated with lower IHD-related death rates. However, it failed to provide an overall survival benefit because of an increased rate of cardiovascular mortality unrelated to IHD. Intensification of secondary prevention regimens may be required to prevent this shift toward non-IHD-related death and thereby improve life expectancy., (Copyright © 2015 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)