Locham Satinderjit, Faateh Muhammad, Dakour-Aridi Hanaa, Nejim Besma, Malas Mahmoud
Johns Hopkins Bayview Vascular and Endovascular Clinical Research Center, Baltimore, MD.
Johns Hopkins Bayview Vascular and Endovascular Clinical Research Center, Baltimore, MD.
Ann Vasc Surg. 2018 Aug;51:192-199. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2018.02.017. Epub 2018 Apr 18.
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.
先前的研究表明,与接受腹主动脉瘤(AAA)开放动脉瘤修复术(OAR)和血管内动脉瘤修复术(EVAR)的非八旬老人相比,八旬老人的死亡风险更高。开窗式血管内动脉瘤修复术(F-EVAR)于2012年获得美国食品药品监督管理局(FDA)批准,与传统的OAR相比,它已被用作一种侵入性较小的方法来治疗颈部解剖结构不理想的患者,并取得了良好的效果。本研究的目的是比较美国八旬老人在接受涉及内脏血管的AAA修复时,F-EVAR与OAR的30天结局。
在国家外科质量改进计划数据库(2006 - 2015年)中识别出所有术后诊断为非破裂性AAA修复的患者。进行单因素和多因素分析,以检查在调整患者人口统计学和合并症后30天的发病率和死亡率。
共有548名八旬老人接受了涉及内脏血管的非破裂性AAA修复,其中242例(44%)为F-EVAR,306例(56%)为OAR。与OAR相比,接受F-EVAR的八旬老人平均年龄大1岁(中位年龄[四分位间距]:83[82, 86]岁 vs. 82[81, 85]岁,P = 0.004),且男性比例更高(82%对64%,P < 0.001)。与OAR相比,接受F-EVAR的患者糖尿病患病率(13%对6%,P = 0.005)和进行性肾衰竭患病率(57%对47%,P = 0.03)也更高。OAR术后30天死亡率更高(8.5%对4.1%,P = 0.04)。与F-EVAR相比,OAR的次要结局包括心肺损伤(27.1%对5.8%,P < 0.001)和肾损伤(10.8%对2.1%,P < 0.001)也显著更高。在调整患者人口统计学和合并症后,与F-EVAR相比,OAR术后30天死亡风险几乎增加了4倍(优势比[95%置信区间]:3.90[1.48 - 10.31],P = 0.006)。
在这个接受复杂AAA修复的大型全国性八旬老人队列中,我们表明F-EVAR与开放修复相比,术后发病率和死亡率显著更低。该研究的主要局限性之一是缺乏解剖学数据。然而,尽管如此,我们的研究结果支持在这个脆弱人群中治疗复杂AAA时向微创方法转变的模式。需要进一步研究来评估八旬老人任何一种修复术的长期益处。