Suppr超能文献

血管内修复破裂的腹主动脉瘤后的 5 年生存率正在提高。

Five-year survival following endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms is improving.

机构信息

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass; Department of Vascular Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg. 2020 Jul;72(1):105-113.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.10.074. Epub 2020 Feb 21.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Increasing experience and improving technology have led to the expansion of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). We investigated whether the 5-year survival after both EVAR and open repair for ruptured AAA changed over the last 14 years.

METHODS

We identified repairs for ruptured infrarenal AAA within the Vascular Quality Initiative registry between 2004 and 2018. We compared the 5-year survival of both EVAR and open repair between the early (2004-2012) and late (2013-2018) cohorts. In addition, we compared EVAR with open repair in the early and late cohorts. We used propensity score modeling to create matching cohorts for each analysis. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate survival proportions and univariate Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to compare differences in hazard of mortality in the matched cohorts.

RESULTS

We identified 4638 ruptured AAA repairs. This included 409 EVARs in the early cohort and 2250 in the late cohort, as well as 558 open repairs in the early cohort and 1421 in the late cohort. Propensity matching resulted in 366 matched pairs of late vs early EVAR and 391 matched-pairs of late vs early open repair. When comparing EVAR with open repair, propensity matching resulted in 277 matched pairs of early EVAR versus open, and 1177 matched pairs of late EVAR versus open. In matched EVAR patients, 5-year survival was higher in the late cohort (63% vs 49%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-0.97; P = .027), whereas there was no difference between matched late vs early for open repair patients (52% vs 59%; HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.85-1.28; P = .69). In the early cohort, there was no survival difference between EVAR and open repair (51% vs 46%; HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.69-1.11; P = .28). However, in the late cohort EVAR was associated with higher survival compared with open repair (63% vs 54%; HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.60-0.79; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The 5-year survival after EVAR for ruptured AAA has improved over time, whereas survival after open repair remained constant. Consequently, the relative survival benefit of EVAR over open repair has increased over time, which should encourage further adoption of EVAR for ruptured AAA.

摘要

目的

经验的积累和技术的进步推动了血管内修复术(EVAR)在破裂腹主动脉瘤(AAA)中的应用。本研究旨在探讨过去 14 年中,破裂 AAA 的 EVAR 和开放修复后 5 年生存率是否发生了变化。

方法

我们在血管质量倡议登记处确定了 2004 年至 2018 年间破裂的肾下 AAA 修复。我们比较了早期(2004-2012 年)和晚期(2013-2018 年)队列中 EVAR 和开放修复的 5 年生存率。此外,我们比较了早期和晚期队列中 EVAR 与开放修复的结果。我们使用倾向评分模型为每个分析创建匹配队列。Kaplan-Meier 分析用于估计生存比例,单变量 Cox 比例风险分析用于比较匹配队列中死亡率风险的差异。

结果

我们确定了 4638 例破裂 AAA 修复。其中,早期队列中有 409 例 EVAR,晚期队列中有 2250 例;早期队列中有 558 例开放修复,晚期队列中有 1421 例。倾向评分匹配后,晚期与早期 EVAR 之间有 366 对匹配,晚期与早期开放修复之间有 391 对匹配。在 EVAR 与开放修复的比较中,倾向评分匹配后,早期 EVAR 与开放修复之间有 277 对匹配,晚期 EVAR 与开放修复之间有 1177 对匹配。在匹配的 EVAR 患者中,晚期队列的 5 年生存率高于早期队列(63% vs. 49%;危险比[HR],0.77;95%置信区间[CI],0.61-0.97;P=.027),而晚期与早期开放修复患者之间无差异(52% vs. 59%;HR,1.04;95%CI,0.85-1.28;P=.69)。在早期队列中,EVAR 和开放修复之间的生存率无差异(51% vs. 46%;HR,0.88;95%CI,0.69-1.11;P=.28)。然而,在晚期队列中,EVAR 与开放修复相比生存率更高(63% vs. 54%;HR,0.69;95%CI,0.60-0.79;P<.001)。

结论

破裂 AAA 的 EVAR 后 5 年生存率随时间推移而提高,而开放修复后生存率保持不变。因此,EVAR 相对于开放修复的相对生存获益随时间推移而增加,这应该鼓励进一步采用 EVAR 治疗破裂 AAA。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验