Does Palmaz XL stent deployment for type 1 endoleak during elective or emergency endovascular aneurysm repair predict poor outcome? A multivariate analysis of 1470 patients.

BACKGROUND

Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is now the standard of care for elective infrarenal and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Difficult proximal necks often require adjuvant measures to seal type 1 endoleaks. We believed this was a predictor of increased 30-day morbidity and mortality and reduced long-term survival.

METHODS

We reviewed outcomes for all patients entered into our database between 2003 and 2010 who had EVAR for elective or ruptured AAAs. Patient demographics and operative indications were recorded. Operative procedures, including adjuvant procedures, such as Palmaz XL stent deployment, were documented. All postoperative deaths and morbidity were recorded. Long-term survival was calculated using life table analysis. Multivariate analysis was performed to determine significant predictors of early mortality.

RESULTS

Between 2003 and 2010, 1470 patients underwent EVAR for AAA (1378 [93.7%] elective; 92 [6.3%] ruptured or emergent). Elective EVAR patients required Palmaz stent placement in 146 of 1378 (10.6%) cases; in emergent cases, Palmaz stents were required in 16 of 92 (17.4%) cases. This was not significantly different (P=0.06). Thirty-day mortality for elective EVAR was 1.6% (22/1378) compared with 21.7% (20/92) for emergent repair (P<0.0001). Thirty-day mortality among the 146 elective patients undergoing Palmaz stenting was 3.4% compared with 1.4% in the 1232 non-Palmaz stent elective EVAR patients (P=0.085). In emergency cases, the 30-day mortality for the 16 Palmaz patients was 25% compared to 21% for the 76 non-Palmaz stent patients (P=0.76). Among 30-day survivors, there were 428 of 1356 (31.6%) endoleaks identified in the elective patient group and 36 of 72 (50%) in the emergency group (P<0.005). Of the 146 elective patients requiring insertion of a Palmaz stent, 65 (44%) developed endoleaks, significantly more than the 370 of 1232 (30%) in non-Palmaz elective patients (P=0.0004). Among the emergency group, there were also significantly more endoleaks among the 30-day survivors who had a Palmaz stent deployed. In elective EVAR requiring Palmaz XL stents, 14% still had type 1 endoleaks at the end of their procedure; 13% still had type 1 endoleaks in the rupture EVAR Palmaz group. Multivariate analysis of all patients found that while female sex, AAA diameter, and estimated blood loss predicted 30-day mortality, deployment of a Palmaz stent did not. Long-term survival among Palmaz patients was not significantly different from non-Palmaz patients in the elective or emergent setting, although Palmaz patients required more secondary interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

During EVAR, deployment of a Palmaz stent is more frequently required in patients with rupture, female sex, and larger sac size. However, Palmaz stent deployment itself is not an independent predictor of increased 30-day mortality in either the elective or emergency setting or of poorer long-term survival. However, they are associated with a greater number of postoperative endoleaks, especially type 1 endoleaks, and predict a greater need for secondary interventions.