Comparison of open and endovascular repair of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms

Sai Divya Yadavalli, Vinamr Rastogi, Ambar Mehta, Sara Allievi, Yoel Solomon, Jorg L. de Bruin, Shipra Arya, Lars Stangenberg, Hence J.M. Verhagen, Marc L. Schermerhorn*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare perioperative and 5-year outcomes following endovascular (FEVAR) and open repair (OAR) of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms (cAAAs) in males and females separately, given the known sex-related differences in perioperative outcomes. Methods: We studied all elective cAAA repairs between 2014 and 2019 in the Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network (VISION) registry. We stratified patients based on sex. We calculated propensity scores for assignment to either OAR or FEVAR. Covariates including age, race, diameter, baseline comorbidities, proximal extent of repair, annual center volumes, and annual surgeon volumes were introduced into the model for estimating propensity scores. Within matched cohorts, perioperative outcomes and 5-year outcomes (mortality, reinterventions, and ruptures) were evaluated using multivariable logistic and Cox regression models. Results: We identified 2825 patients, of whom 29% were female. Within both the sexes, OAR was more commonly performed (OAR vs FEVAR: males: 53% vs 47%; females: 63% vs 37%). After matching, among males (n = 1326), FEVAR was associated with lower perioperative mortality (FEVAR vs OAR: 2.3% vs 5.1%; P < .001). However, FEVAR was associated with comparable 5-year mortality (38% vs 28%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-1.4; P = .22) and a higher hazard of 5-year reintervention (19% vs 3.7%; adjusted HR, 4.5; 95% CI, 2.6-7.6; P < .001). Among females (n = 456), FEVAR and OAR showed similar perioperative mortality (8.3% vs 7.0%; P = .73). At 5 years, FEVAR was associated with higher hazards of mortality (43% vs 32%; adjusted HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.03-2.2; P = .034) and reintervention (20% vs 3.0%; adjusted HR, 4.8; 95% CI, 2.1-11; P < .001) compared with OAR. Conclusions: Among males, FEVAR was associated with favorable perioperative outcomes compared with OAR, although these advantages attenuate over time. However, among females, FEVAR was associated with similar perioperative outcomes, eventually leading to higher reinterventions and possibly higher mortality within 5 years. Future efforts should focus on determining the factors associated with these sex disparities to improve outcomes following FEVAR in females. Based on current evidence, females undergoing elective cAAA repair should be selected with due caution, especially for endovascular repair.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)287-297.e2
JournalJournal of Vascular Surgery
Volume81
Issue number2
Early online date18 Oct 2024
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2025

Keywords

  • Abdominal aortic aneurysm
  • Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair
  • Endovascular repair
  • Fenestrated endovascular aortic repair
  • Open complex abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of open and endovascular repair of complex abdominal aortic aneurysms'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this