Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Department of Vascular Surgery, Erasmus University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA; Department of Vascular Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Centers (Amsterdam UMC), VUMC, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
J Vasc Surg. 2022 Oct;76(4):899-907.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2022.03.867. Epub 2022 Mar 31.
The long-term survival differences between endovascular repair (EVAR) and open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) and specifically the impact of age on these differences remain a topic of debate. Therefore, we compared the long-term mortality between EVARand open abdominal aneurysm repair for patients of different ages.
This was a retrospective cohort study of prospectively collected data from patients undergoing elective EVAR or open repair for infrarenal AAAs within the Vascular Quality Initiative multinational clinical registry (2003-2021). The primary outcome was long-term all-cause mortality comparing EVAR and open repair for patients aged less than 65 years, between 65 and 79 years, and those aged 80 and older. In addition, we investigated the interaction between repair modality and 10-year hazard of mortality for sex, aneurysm diameter, and several preoperative comorbid conditions within each age category. To account for the nonrandom assignment of treatment, we used propensity scores and inverse probability weighted Cox proportional hazard analysis.
We identified 48,074 patients undergoing elective infrarenal abdominal aneurysm repair (89% EVAR) within the study period, including 7940 patients aged less than 65, 29,555 aged between 65 and 79, and 10,579 aged 80 years or more. EVAR was associated with a higher propensity score-adjusted long-term hazard of mortality compared with open repair in the cohort aged less than 65 years (hazard ratio [HR], 1.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.86; P = .026). The mortality was similar in the age cohort between 65 and 79 (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.79-1.10; P = .43), whereas EVAR was associated with a lower hazard of mortality in the cohort aged 80 years or more (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.46-0.86; P = .004). In patients aged less than 65 years, the hazard of mortality was higher with EVAR compared with open repair in those with female sex (HR, 4.40; 95% CI, 1.75-11.0), an aneurysm diameter of more than 65 mm (HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.11-4.34), and an absence of coronary artery disease (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.83-1.91), congestive heart failure (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.03-1.92), and renal dysfunction (HR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.04-2.05). In the patient cohort aged 80 and older, a lower hazard of mortality for EVAR versus open repair was observed for male patients or those with small aneurysms or certain comorbidities.
In a selected group of young patients with a substantial life expectancy, the long-term mortality is higher with EVAR compared with open repair for infrarenal AAAs. Long-term mortality with EVAR is similar in the middle cohort and lower in the elderly cohort compared with open repair.
腹主动脉瘤(AAA)的血管内修复(EVAR)与开放修复的长期生存差异,特别是年龄对这些差异的影响仍然是一个争论的话题。因此,我们比较了不同年龄患者的 EVAR 和开放腹主动脉瘤修复的长期死亡率。
这是一项回顾性队列研究,对血管质量倡议多国临床登记处(2003-2021 年)中接受择期 EVAR 或开放修复治疗的肾下 AAA 患者前瞻性收集的数据进行分析。主要结局是比较年龄小于 65 岁、65-79 岁和 80 岁及以上患者的 EVAR 和开放修复的长期全因死亡率。此外,我们还研究了在每个年龄组内,修复方式与 10 年死亡率风险之间的性别、动脉瘤直径和几种术前合并症之间的交互作用。为了考虑治疗的非随机分配,我们使用了倾向评分和逆概率加权 Cox 比例风险分析。
我们在研究期间确定了 48074 名接受择期肾下腹主动脉瘤修复的患者(89%为 EVAR),包括 7940 名年龄小于 65 岁的患者、29555 名年龄在 65-79 岁之间的患者和 10579 名年龄在 80 岁或以上的患者。与开放修复相比,年龄小于 65 岁的患者中,EVAR 与更高的长期死亡率风险相关(风险比[HR],1.39;95%置信区间[CI],1.04-1.86;P=0.026)。在 65-79 岁的年龄组中,死亡率相似(HR,0.94;95%CI,0.79-1.10;P=0.43),而在 80 岁或以上的年龄组中,EVAR 与较低的死亡率风险相关(HR,0.63;95%CI,0.46-0.86;P=0.004)。在年龄小于 65 岁的患者中,与开放修复相比,EVAR 与女性(HR,4.40;95%CI,1.75-11.0)、动脉瘤直径大于 65mm(HR,2.19;95%CI,1.11-4.34)、无冠心病(HR,1.26;95%CI,0.83-1.91)、充血性心力衰竭(HR,1.41;95%CI,1.03-1.92)和肾功能不全(HR,1.46;95%CI,1.04-2.05)患者的死亡率风险更高。在 80 岁及以上的患者队列中,与开放修复相比,EVAR 的死亡率风险较低,见于男性患者或那些具有小动脉瘤或某些合并症的患者。
在一组预期寿命较长的年轻患者中,与开放修复相比,EVAR 治疗肾下 AAA 的长期死亡率更高。在中年患者中,EVAR 的长期死亡率与开放修复相似,而在老年患者中则较低。