Dataset Information

Predicting risk of rupture and rupture-preventing reinterventions following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Clinical and imaging surveillance practices following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) vary considerably and compliance with recommended lifelong surveillance is poor. The aim of this study was to develop a dynamic prognostic model to enable stratification of patients at risk of future secondary aortic rupture or the need for intervention to prevent rupture (rupture-preventing reintervention) to enable the development of personalized surveillance intervals. METHODS:Baseline data and repeat measurements of postoperative aneurysm sac diameter from the EVAR-1 and EVAR-2 trials were used to develop the model, with external validation in a cohort from a single-centre vascular database. Longitudinal mixed-effects models were fitted to trajectories of sac diameter, and model-predicted sac diameter and rate of growth were used in prognostic Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS:Some 785 patients from the EVAR trials were included, of whom 155 (19·7 per cent) experienced at least one rupture or required a rupture-preventing reintervention during follow-up. An increased risk was associated with preoperative AAA size, rate of sac growth and the number of previously detected complications. A prognostic model using predicted sac growth alone had good discrimination at 2?years (C-index 0·68), 3?years (C-index 0·72) and 5?years (C-index 0·75) after operation and had excellent external validation (C-index 0·76-0·79). More than 5?years after operation, growth rates above 1?mm/year had a sensitivity of over 80 per cent and specificity over 50 per cent in identifying events occurring within 2?years. CONCLUSION:Secondary sac growth is an important predictor of rupture or rupture-preventing reintervention to enable the development of personalized surveillance intervals. A dynamic prognostic model has the potential to tailor surveillance by identifying a large proportion of patients who may require less intensive follow-up.

SUBMITTER: Grootes I

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6175165 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAbdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair has been performed by various surgical specialties for many years. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) may be a disruptive technology, having an impact on which specialties care for patients with AAA. Therefore, we examined the proportion of AAA repairs performed by various specialties over time in the United States and evaluated the impact of the introduction of EVAR.MethodsThe Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2001-2009) was queried for intact and ruptured AAA and for open repair and EVAR. Specific procedures were used to identify vascular surgeons (VSs), cardiac surgeons (CSs), and general surgeons (GSs) as well as interventional cardiologists and interventional radiologists for states that reported unique treating physician identifiers. Annual procedure volumes were subsequently calculated for each specialty.ResultsWe identified 108,587 EVARs and 85,080 open AAA repairs (3011 EVARs and 12,811 open repairs for ruptured AAA). VSs performed an increasing proportion of AAA repairs during the study period (52% in 2001 to 66% in 2009; P < .001). GSs and CSs performed fewer repairs during the same period (25% to 17% [P < .001] and 19% to 13% [P < .001], respectively). EVAR was increasingly used for intact (33% to 78% of annual cases; P < .001) as well as ruptured AAA repair (5% to 28%; P < .001). The proportion of intact open repairs performed by VSs increased from 52% to 65% (P < .001), whereas for EVAR, the proportion went from 60% to 67% (P < .001). The proportion performed by VSs increased for ruptured open repairs from 37% to 53% (P < .001) and for ruptured EVARs from 28% to 73% (P < .001). Compared with treatment by VSs, treatment by a CS (0.55 [0.53-0.56]) and GS (0.66 [0.64-0.68]) was associated with a decreased likelihood of undergoing endovascular rather than open AAA repair.ConclusionsVSs are performing an increasing majority of AAA repairs, in large part driven by the increased utilization of EVAR for both intact and ruptured AAA repair. However, GSs and CSs still perform AAA repair. Further studies should examine the implications of these national trends on the outcome of AAA repair.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Ultrasmall superparamagnetic particles of iron oxide (USPIO) detect cellular inflammation on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). In patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm, we assessed whether USPIO-enhanced MRI can predict aneurysm growth rates and clinical outcomes. METHODS:In a prospective multicenter open-label cohort study, 342 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (diameter ?40 mm) were classified by the presence of USPIO enhancement and were monitored with serial ultrasound and clinical follow-up for ?2 years. The primary end point was the composite of aneurysm rupture or repair. RESULTS:Participants (85% male, 73.1±7.2 years) had a baseline aneurysm diameter of 49.6±7.7 mm, and USPIO enhancement was identified in 146 (42.7%) participants, absent in 191 (55.8%), and indeterminant in 5 (1.5%). During follow-up (1005±280 days), 17 (5.0%) abdominal aortic aneurysm ruptures, 126 (36.8%) abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs, and 48 (14.0%) deaths occurred. Compared with those without uptake, patients with USPIO enhancement have increased rates of aneurysm expansion (3.1±2.5 versus 2.5±2.4 mm/year, P=0.0424), although this was not independent of current smoking habit (P=0.1993). Patients with USPIO enhancement had higher rates of aneurysm rupture or repair (47.3% versus 35.6%; 95% confidence intervals, 1.1-22.2; P=0.0308). This finding was similar for each component of rupture (6.8% versus 3.7%, P=0.1857) or repair (41.8% versus 32.5%, P=0.0782). USPIO enhancement was associated with reduced event-free survival for aneurysm rupture or repair (P=0.0275), all-cause mortality (P=0.0635), and aneurysm-related mortality (P=0.0590). Baseline abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter (P<0.0001) and current smoking habit (P=0.0446) also predicted the primary outcome, and the addition of USPIO enhancement to the multivariate model did not improve event prediction (c-statistic, 0.7935-0.7936). CONCLUSIONS:USPIO-enhanced MRI is a novel approach to the identification of aortic wall cellular inflammation in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms and predicts the rate of aneurysm growth and clinical outcome. However, it does not provide independent prediction of aneurysm expansion or clinical outcomes in a model incorporating known clinical risk factors. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:URL: http://www.isrctn.com. Unique identifier: ISRCTN76413758.

Project description:Background Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) are far more common in male than female gender, although they appear to have a more aggressive pathophysiology in females. Given the lower incidence of AAA in females, it has been difficult to assess the impact of graft selection for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) in this cohort. Purpose To identify whether graft selection influences outcomes following AAA endoluminal repair in female patients. Methodology A retrospective analysis of published data for 711 female patients was conducted, collating data from three cohorts - Endurant Stent Graft Natural Selection Global post-market registry (ENGAGE), Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment (GREAT) and U.S. Zenith multicenter trial in combination with the Zenith female registry. Patients were recruited into the ENGAGE registry between 2009 and 2011, the GREAT registry between August 2010 and October 2016, and into the Zenith registry between 2000 and 2003. Patients from ENGAGE received the Medtronic Endurant stent graft for infrarenal AAA repair, patients analysed in GREAT received the Gore Excluder stent graft and the Zenith group received the Cook Zenith stent graft. Analyses were performed to evaluate all-cause mortality, aorta-related mortality, endoleak occurrence and surgical reintervention rates between the three cohorts. Results Of the 711 females, 133 were from ENGAGE (mean age 76 years), 538 were from GREAT (mean age 75 years) and 40 were from Zenith (mean age 74 years). The rates of co-morbidities between the three groups were broadly similar except for atherosclerotic disease which was more commonly observed in those treated with the GORE Excluder. The rate of endoleaks was lower when the Excluder stent was utilised as compared to the other two stents (Excluder 6.7% vs. Zenith 12.5% vs. Endurant 35.3%) even considering the limited follow-up of the Zenith group to two years as compared to five years for both ENGAGE and GREAT. All-cause mortality was similar in all three groups across the period examined while aorta-related mortality was uncommon. Reintervention rate was 15% at two years following the utilisation of the Zenith aortic graft while the rate of intervention at five years was broadly similar between ENGAGE and GREAT. Conclusion The newer generation, lower profile aortic endografts appear to have provided a safe and successful tool in the management of AAA in female patients, despite more complex aortic anatomy with shorter infrarenal neck length and larger aortic neck angulation.

Dataset Information

Predicting risk of rupture and rupture-preventing reinterventions following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets