Dataset Information

Observations from the IMPROVE trial concerning the clinical care of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Single-centre series of the management of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) are usually too small to identify clinical factors that could improve patient outcomes.

Methods

IMPROVE is a pragmatic, multicentre randomized clinical trial in which eligible patients with a clinical diagnosis of ruptured aneurysm were allocated to a strategy of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) or to open repair. The influences of time and manner of hospital presentation, fluid volume status, type of anaesthesia, type of endovascular repair and time to aneurysm repair on 30-day mortality were investigated according to a prespecified plan, for the subgroup of patients with a proven diagnosis of ruptured or symptomatic AAA. Adjustment was made for potential confounding factors.

Results

Some 558 of 613 randomized patients had a symptomatic or ruptured aneurysm: diagnostic accuracy was 91·0 per cent. Patients randomized outside routine working hours had higher operative mortality (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1·47, 95 per cent confidence interval 1·00 to 2·17). Mortality rates after primary and secondary presentation were similar. Lowest systolic blood pressure was strongly and independently associated with 30-day mortality (51 per cent among those with pressure below 70 mmHg). Patients who received EVAR under local anaesthesia alone had greatly reduced 30-day mortality compared with those who had general anaesthesia (adjusted OR 0·27, 0·10 to 0·70).

Conclusion

These findings suggest that the outcome of ruptured AAA might be improved by wider use of local anaesthesia for EVAR and that a minimum blood pressure of 70 mmHg is too low a threshold for permissive hypotension.

SUBMITTER: IMPROVE trial investigators

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4164272 | biostudies-literature | 2014 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Observations from the IMPROVE trial concerning the clinical care of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Powell J T JT Hinchliffe R J RJ Thompson M M MM Sweeting M J MJ Ashleigh R R Bell R R Gomes M M Greenhalgh R M RM Grieve R J RJ Heatley F F Thompson S G SG Ulug P P

The British journal of surgery 20140201 3

<h4>Background</h4>Single-centre series of the management of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) are usually too small to identify clinical factors that could improve patient outcomes.<h4>Methods</h4>IMPROVE is a pragmatic, multicentre randomized clinical trial in which eligible patients with a clinical diagnosis of ruptured aneurysm were allocated to a strategy of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) or to open repair. The influences of time and manner of hospital presentation ...[more]

PMID: 24469620

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective/backgroundThe aim was to describe the re-interventions after endovascular and open repair of rupture, and investigate whether these were associated with aortic morphology.MethodsIn total, 502 patients from the IMPROVE randomised trial (ISRCTN48334791) with repair of rupture were followed-up for re-interventions for at least 3 years. Pre-operative aortic morphology was assessed in a core laboratory. Re-interventions were described by time (0-90 days, 3 months-3 years) as arterial or laparotomy related, respectively, and ranked for severity by surgeons and patients separately. Rare re-interventions to 1 year, were summarised across three ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm trials (IMPROVE, AJAX, and ECAR) and odds ratios (OR) describing differences were pooled via meta-analysis.ResultsRe-interventions were most common in the first 90 days. Overall rates were 186 and 226 per 100 person years for the endovascular strategy and open repair groups, respectively (p = .20) but between 3 months and 3 years (mid-term) the rates had slowed to 9.5 and 6.0 re-interventions per 100 person years, respectively (p = .090) and about one third of these were for a life threatening condition. In this latter, mid-term period, 42 of 313 remaining patients (13%) required at least one re-intervention, most commonly for endoleak or other endograft complication after treatment by endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) (21 of 38 re-interventions), whereas distal aneurysms were the commonest reason (four of 23) for re-interventions after treatment by open repair. Arterial re-interventions within 3 years were associated with increasing common iliac artery diameter (OR 1.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.93; p = .004). Amputation, rare but ranked as the worst re-intervention by patients, was less common in the first year after treatment with EVAR (OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.05-0.88) from meta-analysis of three trials.ConclusionThe rate of mid-term re-interventions after rupture is high, more than double that after elective EVAR and open repair, suggesting the need for bespoke surveillance protocols. Amputations are much less common in patients treated by EVAR than in those treated by open repair.

Project description:Objective To assess the three year clinical outcomes and cost effectiveness of a strategy of endovascular repair (if aortic morphology is suitable, open repair if not) versus open repair for patients with suspected ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.Design Randomised controlled trial.Setting 30 vascular centres (29 in UK, one in Canada), 2009-16.Participants 613 eligible patients (480 men) with a clinical diagnosis of ruptured aneurysm, of whom 502 underwent emergency repair for rupture.Interventions 316 patients were randomised to an endovascular strategy (275 with confirmed rupture) and 297 to open repair (261 with confirmed rupture).Main outcome measures Mortality, with reinterventions after aneurysm repair, quality of life, and hospital costs to three years as secondary measures.Results The maximum follow-up for mortality was 7.1 years, with two patients in each group lost to follow-up by three years. After similar mortality by 90 days, in the mid-term (three months to three years) there were fewer deaths in the endovascular than the open repair group (hazard ratio 0.57, 95% confidence interval 0.36 to 0.90), leading to lower mortality at three years (48% v 56%), but by seven years mortality was about 60% in each group (hazard ratio 0.92, 0.75 to 1.13). Results for the 502 patients with repaired ruptures were more pronounced: three year mortality was lower in the endovascular strategy group (42% v 54%; odds ratio 0.62, 0.43 to 0.88), but after seven years there was no clear difference between the groups (hazard ratio 0.86, 0.68 to 1.08). Reintervention rates up to three years were not significantly different between the randomised groups (hazard ratio 1.02, 0.79 to 1.32); the initial rapid rate of reinterventions was followed by a much slower mid-term reintervention rate in both groups. The early higher average quality of life in the endovascular strategy versus open repair group, coupled with the lower mortality at three years, led to a gain in average quality adjusted life years (QALYs) at three years of 0.17 (95% confidence interval 0.00 to 0.33). The endovascular strategy group spent fewer days in hospital and had lower average costs of -£2605 (95% confidence interval -£5966 to £702) (about €2813; $3439). The probability that the endovascular strategy is cost effective was >90% at all levels of willingness to pay for a QALY gain.Conclusions At three years, compared with open repair, an endovascular strategy for suspected ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm was associated with a survival advantage, a gain in QALYs, similar levels of reintervention, and reduced costs, and this strategy was cost effective. These findings support the increasing use of an endovascular strategy, with wider availability of emergency endovascular repair.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN48334791; ClinicalTrials NCT00746122.

Project description:BackgroundMultiple organ failure (MOF) is associated with poor outcomes and increased mortality in sepsis and trauma. There are limited data regarding MOF in patients after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair. We aimed to identify the contemporary prevalence and characteristics of patients with rAAA with MOF.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed patients with rAAA who underwent repair (2010-2020) at our multihospital institution. Patients who died within the first 2 days after repair were excluded. MOF was quantified by modified (excluding hepatic system) Denver, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, and Multiple Organ Dysfunction Score (MODS) for postoperative days 3 to 5 to determine the prevalence of MOF. MOF was defined as a Denver score of >3, dysfunction in two or more organ systems by SOFA score, or a MODS score of >8. Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank testing were used to evaluate differences in 30-day mortality between multiple organ failure and patients without MOF. Logistic regression was used to assess predictors of MOF.ResultsOf 370 patients with rAAA, 288 survived past two days (mean age, 73±10.1 years; 76.7% male; 44.1% open repair), and 143 had data for MOF calculation recorded. From postoperative days 3 to 5, 41 (14.24%) had MOF by Denver, 26 (9.03%) by SOFA, and 39 (13.54%) by MODS criteria. Among these scoring systems, pulmonary and neurological systems were impacted most commonly. Among patients with MOF, pulmonary derangement occurred in 65.9% (Denver), 57.7% (SOFA), and 56.4% (MODS). Similarly, neurological derangement occurred in 92.3% (SOFA) and 89.7% (MODS), but renal derangement occurred in 26.8% (Denver), 23.1% (SOFA), and 10.3% (MODS). MOF by all three scoring systems was associated with increased 30-day mortality (Denver: 11.3% vs 41.5% [P < .01]; DOFA: 12.6% vs 46.2% [P < .01]; MODS: 12.5% vs 35.9% [P < .01]), as was MOF by any criteria (10.8% vs 35.7 %; P < .01). Patients with MOF were more likely to have a higher body mass index (55.9±26.6 vs 49.0±15.0; P = .011) and to have had a preoperative stroke (17.9% vs 6.0%; P = .016). Patients with MOF were less likely to have undergone endovascular repair (30.4% vs 62.1%; P < .001). Endovascular repair was protective against MOF (any criteria) on multivariate analysis (odds ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval, 0.08-0.64; P = .019) after adjusting for age, gender, and presenting systolic blood pressure.ConclusionsMOF occurred in only 9% to 14% of patients after rAAA repair, but was associated with a three-fold increase in mortality. Endovascular repair was associated with a reduced MOF incidence.

Project description:Despite advances in operative repair, ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) remains associated with high mortality and morbidity rates, especially in elderly patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of emergency endovascular aneurysm repair (eEVAR), conventional open repair (OPEN), and conservative treatment in elderly patients with rAAA.We conducted a retrospective study of all rAAA patients treated with OPEN or eEVAR between January 2005 and December 2011 in the vascular surgery department at Amphia Hospital, the Netherlands. The outcome in patients treated for rAAA by eEVAR or OPEN repair was investigated. Special attention was paid to patients who were admitted and did not receive operative intervention due to serious comorbidity, extremely advanced age, or poor physical condition. We calculated the 30-day rAAA-related mortality for all rAAA patients admitted to our hospital.Twelve patients did not receive operative emergency repair due to extreme fragility (mean age 87 years, median time to mortality 27 hours). Twenty-three patients had eEVAR and 82 had OPEN surgery. The 30-day mortality rate in operated patients was 30% (7/23) in the eEVAR group versus 26% (21/82) in the OPEN group (P=0.64). No difference in mortality was noted between eEVAR and OPEN over 5 years of follow-up. There were more cardiac adverse events in the OPEN group (n=25, 31%) than in the eEVAR group (n=2, 9%; P=0.035). Reintervention after discharge was more frequent in patients who received eEVAR (35%) than in patients who had OPEN (6%, P<0.001). Advancing age was associated with increasing mortality (hazard ratio 1.05 [95% confidence interval 1.01-1.09]) per year for patients who received operative repair, with a 67%, 76%, and 100% 5-year mortality rate in the 34 patients aged <70 years, 59 patients aged 70-79 years, and 12 octogenarians, respectively; 30-day rAAA-related mortality was also associated with increasing age (21%, 30%, and 61%, respectively; P=0.008).The 30-day and 5-year mortality in patients who survived rAAA was equal between the treatment options of eEVAR and OPEN. Particularly fragile and very elderly patients did not receive operative repair. The decision to intervene in rAAA should not be made on the basis of patient age alone, but also in relation to comorbidity and patient preference.

Dataset Information

Observations from the IMPROVE trial concerning the clinical care of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Observations from the IMPROVE trial concerning the clinical care of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets