University of Kentucky Medical Center, Lexington, KY 40536, USA.
J Vasc Surg. 2010 Feb;51(2):305-9.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2009.08.086. Epub 2009 Nov 24.
The mortality of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) has decreased 3.5% per decade in the last 50 years to a current rate of 40%-50%. Reports have indicated that endovascular repair (EVAR) is feasible for rAAA and may offer potential benefits over open repair. We examined the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database to compare 30-day multicenter outcomes for EVAR vs open rAAA repair.
Patients that underwent rAAA repair in the NSQIP database from 2005 to 2007 were identified through a combination of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes and International Classification of Diseases-Ninth Revision (ICD-9) diagnoses. Preoperative comorbidities, operative duration and transfusion, and 30 day outcomes were evaluated using t tests or Chi-squared tests depending on the variable. A separate multivariable regression was performed for each outcome adjusting for all independently predictive preoperative and intraoperative risk factors.
A total of 427 patients were identified and 76.8% of patients underwent open repair. The open repair groups exhibited lower albumin levels and higher percentage of patients with preoperative hematocrit (Hct) <38% and need for preoperative ventilation. The requirement for preoperative blood transfusion was similar. Patients undergoing open repair had much higher intraoperative transfusion requirements (11.8 +/- 8.9 vs 4.2 +/- 6.0 red blood cell units, P < .001). After adjustment for preoperative mortality risk factors, the mortality risk was higher for open repair versus EVAR (odds ratio 1.67, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91-3.05, P = .096) but did not reach significance. After similar adjustment the composite morbidity odds ratio for open repair versus EVAR was 1.82 (95% CI 1.11-2.99, P = .018) and the pulmonary adverse events odds ratio was 1.99 (95% CI 1.22-3.25, P = .006). Risks for the other outcomes were not significant.
Composite 30-day morbidity risk is lower after EVAR vs open repair of rAAA. Open repair is associated with increased transfusion requirements. Performance of EVAR in rAAA patients with favorable anatomy could potentially result in improved outcome as compared with open repair.
在过去的 50 年中,破裂性腹主动脉瘤(rAAA)的死亡率每十年下降 3.5%,目前为 40%-50%。有报道称,血管内修复(EVAR)对于 rAAA 是可行的,并且可能优于开放修复。我们检查了国家外科质量改进计划(NSQIP)数据库,以比较 EVAR 与开放 rAAA 修复的 30 天多中心结果。
通过当前程序术语(CPT)代码和国际疾病分类-第九修订版(ICD-9)诊断的组合,从 NSQIP 数据库中确定了接受 rAAA 修复的患者。使用 t 检验或卡方检验根据变量评估术前合并症、手术时间和输血以及 30 天的结果。对于每个结果,单独进行多变量回归,根据所有独立预测的术前和术中危险因素进行调整。
共确定了 427 名患者,其中 76.8%的患者接受了开放修复。开放修复组的白蛋白水平较低,术前血细胞比容(Hct)<38%和需要术前通气的患者百分比较高。术前输血的需求相似。接受开放修复的患者术中输血需求更高(11.8 +/- 8.9 vs 4.2 +/- 6.0 个红细胞单位,P <.001)。在校正术前死亡率的危险因素后,开放修复的死亡率高于 EVAR(比值比 1.67,95%置信区间[CI] 0.91-3.05,P =.096),但未达到显著性。在类似的调整后,开放修复与 EVAR 的复合发病率比值比为 1.82(95%CI 1.11-2.99,P =.018),肺部不良事件比值比为 1.99(95%CI 1.22-3.25,P =.006)。其他结果的风险无显著性。
与开放修复相比,rAAA 的 EVAR 术后复合 30 天发病率风险较低。开放修复与输血需求增加有关。在解剖结构良好的 rAAA 患者中进行 EVAR 可能会导致与开放修复相比改善结局。