Dissemin is shutting down on January 1st, 2025

Published in

American Heart Association, Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, 6(17), 2024

DOI: 10.1161/circoutcomes.123.010374

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Temporal Trends and Outcomes of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Care in the United States

This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Orange circle
Postprint: archiving restricted
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has had a dynamic impact on abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) care, often supplanting open AAA repair (OAR). Accordingly, US AAA management is often highlighted by disparities in patient selection and guideline compliance. The purpose of this analysis was to define secular trends in AAA care. METHODS: The Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative was queried for all EVARs and OARs (2011–2021). End points included procedure utilization, change in mortality, patient risk profile, Society for Vascular Surgery-endorsed diameter compliance, off-label EVAR use, cross-clamp location, blood loss, in-hospital complications, and post-EVAR surveillance missingness. Linear regression was used without risk adjustment for all end points except for mortality and complications, for which logistic regression with risk adjustment was used. RESULTS: In all, 66 609 EVARs (elective, 85% [n=55 805] and nonelective, 15% [n=9976]) and 13 818 OARs (elective, 70% [n=9706] and nonelective, 30% [n=4081]) were analyzed. Elective EVAR:OAR ratios were increased (0.2 per year [95% CI, 0.01–0.32]), while nonelective ratios were unchanged. Elective diameter threshold noncompliance decreased for OAR (24%→17%; P =0.01) but not EVAR (mean, 37%). Low-risk patients increasingly underwent elective repairs (EVAR, +0.4%per year [95% CI, 0.2–0.6]; OAR, +0.6 points per year [95% CI, 0.2–1.0]). Off-label EVAR frequency was unchanged (mean, 39%) but intraoperative complications decreased (0.5% per year [95% CI, 0.2–0.9]). OAR complexity increased reflecting greater suprarenal cross-clamp rates (0.4% per year [95% CI, 0.1–0.8]) and blood loss (33 mL/y [95% CI, 19–47]). In-hospital complications decreased for elective (0.7% per year [95% CI, 0.4–0.9]) and nonelective EVAR (1.7% per year [95% CI, 1.1–2.3]) but not OAR (mean, 42%). A 30-day mortality was unchanged for both elective OAR (mean, 4%) and EVAR (mean, 1%). Among nonelective OARs, an increase in both 30-day (0.8% per year [95% CI, 0.1–1.5]) and 1-year mortality (0.8% per year [95% CI, 0.3–1.6]) was observed. Postoperative EVAR surveillance acquisition decreased (67%→49%), while 1-year mortality among patients without imaging was 4-fold greater (9.2% versus imaging, 2.0%; odds ratio, 4.1 [95% CI, 3.8–4.3]; P <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: There has been an increase in EVAR and a corresponding reduction in OAR across the United States, despite established concerns surrounding guideline adherence, reintervention, follow-up, and cost. Although EVAR morbidity has declined, OAR complication rates remain unchanged and unexpectedly high. Opportunities remain for improving AAA care delivery, patient and procedure selection, guideline compliance, and surveillance.