Suppr超能文献

血管内动脉瘤修复术-破裂性腹主动脉瘤的首选策略可能并非适用于所有病例。

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair-First Strategy for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Might Not Be Applicable to all Cases.

机构信息

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Rush Medical College/Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL.

Division of Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy, Department of Surgery, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine/University Hospitals, Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH.

出版信息

Ann Vasc Surg. 2024 Sep;106:386-393. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2024.03.012. Epub 2024 May 28.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

We evaluate the relationship between the hospital case volume (HCV) and mortality outcomes after open aortic repair (OAR) and endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) of intact (iEVAR) and ruptured (rEVAR) abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) using a contemporary administrative database.

METHODS

The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Database for New York (2016) and New Jersey/Maryland/Florida (2016-2017) were queried using International Classification of Disease-10th edition to identify patients who had undergone OAR and EVAR. The hospitals were categorized into quartiles (Q) per overall (EVAR + OAR) volume, OAR-alone volume and EVAR-alone volume. Cox regression adjusted for confounding factors was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 8,825 patients (mean age, 73.5 ± 9.5 years; 6,861 male [77.7%]) had undergone 1,355 OARs and 7,470 EVARs. Overall HCV had no impact on in-hospital mortality across quartiles after (iEVAR) (range, 0.7%-1.4%, P = 0.15), (rEVAR) (range, 20.5%-29.6%, P = 0.63) and open repair of intact AAA (iOAR) (range, 4.9%-8.8%, P = 0.63). However, the mortality rates after open repair of ruptured AAA (rOAR) in highest-volume (Q4) hospitals were significantly lower than those in the 3 lower quartile hospitals (23.1% vs. 44.7%, P < 0.001). When analyzed per OAR-alone volume, the same findings were observed (22.0% for Q4 vs. 41.6% for Q1-3, P < 0.001). Furthermore, in Q4 hospitals per the OAR-alone volume analysis, the mortality hazard was greater for rEVAR (39.0%) than for rOAR (22.0%) (HR = 2.3, 95% confidence interval, 1.02-5.34, P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The mortality rates for iEVAR, rEVAR and iOAR were independent of HCV. However, after rOAR, mortality rates in high OAR volume hospitals were lower than those in the lower quartile hospitals, and, at least comparable to those of rEVAR. EVAR-first strategy for ruptured AAA might not be applicable to all cases. Patent-specific, individualized treatment should be the gold standard. For patients requiring rOAR, transfer to a regional center of excellence, when clinical safe, should be encouraged.

摘要

背景

我们使用当代行政数据库评估完整型(iEVAR)和破裂型(rEVAR)腹主动脉瘤(AAA)的开放式主动脉修复术(OAR)和血管内修复术(EVAR)后医院病例量(HCV)与死亡率结果之间的关系。

方法

使用国际疾病分类第 10 版对纽约(2016 年)和新泽西州/马里兰州/佛罗里达州(2016-2017 年)的医疗保健成本和利用项目数据库进行查询,以确定接受 OAR 和 EVAR 的患者。将医院按整体(EVAR+OAR)量、OAR 单独量和 EVAR 单独量的四分位数(Q)进行分类。使用调整混杂因素的 Cox 回归来估计死亡率的危险比(HR)。

结果

共有 8825 名患者(平均年龄 73.5±9.5 岁,男性 6861 名[77.7%])接受了 1355 次 OAR 和 7470 次 EVAR。整体 HCV 在各四分位数组后对(iEVAR)(范围 0.7%-1.4%,P=0.15)、(rEVAR)(范围 20.5%-29.6%,P=0.63)和完整型 AAA 的开放修复(iOAR)(范围 4.9%-8.8%,P=0.63)的住院死亡率没有影响。然而,在最高容量(Q4)医院接受破裂型 AAA 开放修复(rOAR)后的死亡率明显低于 3 个低四分位数医院(23.1%比 44.7%,P<0.001)。当按 OAR 单独量进行分析时,观察到相同的结果(Q4 为 22.0%,Q1-3 为 41.6%,P<0.001)。此外,在按 OAR 单独量分析的 Q4 医院中,rEVAR 的死亡风险大于 rOAR(39.0%比 22.0%,HR=2.3,95%置信区间 1.02-5.34,P<0.05)。

结论

iEVAR、rEVAR 和 iOAR 的死亡率与 HCV 无关。然而,在 rOAR 后,高 OAR 量医院的死亡率低于低四分位数医院,并且至少与 rEVAR 相当。破裂型 AAA 的 EVAR 优先策略可能不适用于所有病例。针对特定患者、个体化治疗应成为金标准。对于需要 rOAR 的患者,在临床安全的情况下,应鼓励其转移到区域卓越中心。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验