Dataset Information

Volume-Outcome Relationships in Surgical and Endovascular Repair of Aortic Dissection.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:As surgical mortality decreases and endovascular utilization increases, it is unknown whether volume-outcome relationships exist in thoracic aortic dissection repair. We characterized volume-outcome relationships for surgical and endovascular management of thoracic aortic dissection. METHODS:Patients aged more than 18 years undergoing repair of thoracic aortic dissection in the United States between 2010 and 2014 were identified in seven all-payer state inpatient administrative databases. Patients were divided into groups based on type of repair: surgical repair of type A dissection (TAAD), surgical repair of type B dissection (TBAD), and endovascular repair (TEVAR). Hierarchical logistic regression models evaluated the association between hospital volume and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS:Overall in-hospital mortality rate was 13.4% (890 of 6650), highest after TAAD (463 of 2918, 15.9%), followed by TBAD (270 of 1934, 14.0%) and TEVAR (157 of 1798, 8.7%). Volume-outcome relationships for adjusted in-hospital mortality were demonstrated for TAAD and TBAD (P-trend < .001), but not TEVAR (P-trend = .11). Adjusted in-hospital mortality differed most for TAAD (fewer than 3 cases per year: 21%, 95% confidence interval, 18% to 24%; vs 11 or more cases per year: 12%, 95% confidence interval, 8% to 16%; P < .001) and TBAD (fewer than 2 cases per year: 18%, 95% confidence interval, 15% to 22%; vs 11 or more cases per year: 9%, 95% confidence interval, 5% to 12%; P < .001), whereas TEVAR did not differ between quartiles. Adjusted mortality was lower at centers with 26 or more overall annual thoracic dissection repairs, compared with any of the three lower-volume quartiles (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS:This study demonstrated lower mortality at high-volume hospitals for overall repair of aortic dissection, persisting separately for surgical repair of TAAD and TBAD, but not TEVAR. As endovascular technology advances and practice patterns consequently change, analyses should focus on understanding the balance between procedural volume, mortality, and access to care for thoracic aortic dissection.

SUBMITTER: Brescia AA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6815257 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Volume-Outcome Relationships in Surgical and Endovascular Repair of Aortic Dissection.

Brescia Alexander A AA Patel Himanshu J HJ Likosky Donald S DS Watt Tessa M F TMF Wu Xiaoting X Strobel Raymond J RJ Kim Karen M KM Fukuhara Shinichi S Yang Bo B Deeb G Michael GM Thompson Michael P MP

The Annals of thoracic surgery 20190807 5

<h4>Background</h4>As surgical mortality decreases and endovascular utilization increases, it is unknown whether volume-outcome relationships exist in thoracic aortic dissection repair. We characterized volume-outcome relationships for surgical and endovascular management of thoracic aortic dissection.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients aged more than 18 years undergoing repair of thoracic aortic dissection in the United States between 2010 and 2014 were identified in seven all-payer state inpatient admini ...[more]

PMID: 31400334

Similar Datasets

Project description:Importance:Knowledge regarding the long-term outcomes of elective treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) using endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) is increasing. However, data with greater than 10 years' follow-up remain sparse and are lacking from population-based studies. Objective:To determine the long-term outcomes of EVAR compared with open surgical repair (OSR) for elective treatment of AAA. Design, Setting, and Participants:This retrospective, population-based cohort study used linked administrative health data from Ontario, Canada, to identify all patients 40 years and older who underwent elective EVAR or OSR for AAA repair from April 1, 2003, to March 31, 2016, with follow-up terminating on March 31, 2017. A total of 17 683 patients were identified using validated procedure and billing codes and were propensity score matched. Analysis was conducted from June 26, 2018, to January 16, 2019. Exposures:Elective EVAR or OSR for AAA. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular event-free survival, defined as being free of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; reintervention; and secondary rupture. Results:Among 17 683 patients who received elective AAA repairs (mean [SD] age, 72.6 [7.8] years; 14 286 [80.8%] men), 6100 (34.5%) underwent EVAR and 11 583 (65.5%) underwent OSR. From these patients, 4010 well-balanced propensity score-matched pairs of patients were defined, with a mean (SD) age of 73.0 (7.6) years and 6583 (82.1%) men. In the matched cohort, the mean (SD) follow-up was 4.4 (2.7) years, and maximum follow-up was 13.8 years. The overall median survival was 8.9 years. Compared with OSR, EVAR was associated with a higher survival rate up to 1 year after repair (91.0% [95% CI, 90.1%-91.9%] vs 94.0% [95% CI, 93.3%-94.7%]) and a higher major adverse cardiovascular event-free survival rate up to 4 years after repair (69.9% [95% CI, 68.3%-71.3%] vs 72.9% [95% CI, 71.4%-74.4%]). Cumulative incidence of reintervention was higher among patients who underwent EVAR compared with those who underwent OSR at the 7-year follow-up (45.9% [95% CI, 44.1%-47.8%] vs 42.2% [95% CI, 40.4%-44.0%]). Survival analyses demonstrated no statistically significant differences in long-term survival, reintervention, and secondary rupture for patients who underwent EVAR compared with those who underwent OSR. Kaplan-Meier analysis suggested superior long-term major adverse cardiovascular event-free survival among patients who underwent EVAR compared with those who underwent OSR (32.6% [95% CI, 26.9%-38.4%] vs 14.1% [95% CI, 4.0%-30.4%]; stratified log-rank P < .001) during a maximum follow-up of 13.8 years. Conclusions and Relevance:Endovascular aortic repair was not associated with a difference in long-term survival during more than 13 years' maximum follow-up. The reasons for these findings will require studies to consider specific graft makes and models, adherence to instructions for use, and types and reasons for reintervention.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Retrograde type A aortic dissection (RTAD) is a rare but life-threatening complication after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for type B aortic dissection (TBAD). A graft inversion technique was applied to distal anastomosis in total arch replacement for this complicated dissection. We reviewed our results of the processing for this serious complication. The aim is to evaluate the feasibility of this technology. METHODS:From January 2013 to December 2017, 20 patients (80% male, mean age 50.9?±?9.5?years) with retrograde type A aortic dissection after thoracic endovascular aortic repair for type B aortic dissection were scheduled for surgical treatment at our center. All patients underwent an ascending aorta and total aortic arch replacement procedure. The 20 patients were divided into two groups, 1 group involved 9 patients underwent surgery using stepwise technique; the graft inversion technique was performed in the other group containing the remaining 11 patients. The postoperative variables, including cardiopulmonary bypass time, the circulatory arrest time, the aortic cross clamp time, were analyzed. Meanwhile we also analyzed the postoperative mortality and complications to evaluate the early and mid-term outcomes of surgical treatment for RTAD after TEVAR. RESULTS:In-hospital mortality was 10% (2 of 20 patients). No patient developed postoperative paraplegia, renal failure, stroke, or distal anastomotic bleeding. Two patients developed renal insufficiency, one developed neurologic insufficiency, and one developed pulmonary infection, all of which were managed accordingly. Cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time, and circulatory arrest time were significantly shorter in the graft inversion group than in the stepwise group (165.8?±?37.9?min versus 206.1?±?46.8?min, p<0.05; 34.5?±?5.6?min versus 42.4?±?9.5?min, p<0.05, respectively). The 18 survivors had a mean follow-up of 25.8?±?18.2?months, and all patients remained alive and well. CONCLUSION:Graft inversion can enable a secure distal anastomosis under good surgical exposure, resulting in reduced durations of CPB, and circulatory arrest for RTAD after TEVAR. Surgical treatment could be a safe alternative for treatment of this patients.

Project description:BackgroundThoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has been chosen as a less invasive alternative for type B aortic dissections (TBADs). However, the therapeutic effect of TEVAR has been challenged by postoperative adverse events, which were induced by inflammatory response. Glucocorticoids have been widely used because of the powerful and effective anti-inflammatory properties. Nevertheless, the prognostic effect of glucocorticoids after TBAD patients underwent TEVAR remains unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the potential effect of postoperative glucocorticoids on the prognosis of TEVAR for TBADs.MethodsA total of 92 chronic TBADs patients underwent TEVAR with epidural anesthesia between June 2012 and June 2014 was retrospectively reviewed. The patients were stratified into dexamethasone (DXM) and non-dexamethasone group (N-DXM). The indications for TEVAR were as following: malperfusion (n = 28); contained or impending rupture (n = 17); persistent intractable chest/back pain (n = 32); refractory hypertension (n = 15).ResultsNo 30-day mortality and incision infection occurred in each group. The postoperative pain score on the second day was significantly higher in N-DXM group (3.60 ± 0.21 versus 4.83 ± 0.32, P = 0.001). The differences of white blood cell, body temperature and heart rate were pronounced in both groups judged by the peak values (13.01 ± 0.58 × 10(9)/L versus 10.04 ± 0.61 × 10(9)/L, 37.67 ± 0.08 °C versus 37.92 ± 0.09 °C and 89.06 ± 1.21 bpm versus 95.95 ± 1.70 bpm, P = 0.002, 0.04 and 0.001, respectively). The white blood cells in DXM group significantly increased on the second and third postoperative day (P = 0.009 and 0.023), while the body temperature and heart rate showed an apparent decline on the second (P = 0.001 and 0.028), third (P = 0.007 and 0.005) and fourth postoperative days (P = 0.024 and 0.018). However, the changes of false lumen volumes and the endoleak incidence at 3-month follow-up were comparable in the two groups. No significant difference of post-implantation syndrome was observed either.ConclusionsAlthough postoperative prophylactic glucocorticoids administration was unable to influence mortality, incision infection or the change of false lumen volumes, it enabled to enhance the recovery of vital signs and alleviate the postoperative pain. A prospective, randomized controlled trial has been registered (NCT02523300), which will be warranted before prophylactic administration of glucocorticoids after TEVAR procedure could be recommended in the clinical work.

Project description:Endovascular repair of traumatic thoracic aortic injuries (TTAI) is an alternative to conventional open surgical repair. Single-institution studies have shown a survival benefit with thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), but whether this is being realized nationally is not clear. The purpose of our study was to document trends in the increase in use of TEVAR and its effect on outcomes of TTAI nationally.Patients admitted with a TTAI between 2005 and 2011 were identified in the National Inpatient Sample. Patients were grouped by treatment into TEVAR, open repair, or nonoperative management. Primary outcomes were relative use over time and in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications and length of stay. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify independent predictors of mortality.Included were 8384 patients, with 2492 (29.7%) undergoing TEVAR, 848 (10.1%) open repair, and 5044 (60.2%) managed nonoperatively. TEVAR became the dominant treatment option for TTAI during the study period, starting at 6.5% of interventions in 2005 and accounting for 86.5% of interventions in 2011 (P < .001). Nonoperative management declined concurrently with the widespread of adoption TEVAR (79.8% to 53.7%; P < .001). In-hospital mortality after TEVAR decreased during the study period from 33.3% in 2005 to 4.9% in 2011 (P < .001), and an increase in mortality was observed for open repair from 13.9% to 19.2% (P < .001). Procedural mortality (TEVAR or open repair) decreased from 14.9% to 6.7% (P < .001), and mortality after any TTAI admission declined from 24.5% to 13.3% during the study period (P < .001). In addition to lower mortality, TEVAR was followed by fewer cardiac complications (4.1% vs 8.5%; P < .001), respiratory complications (47.5% vs 54.8%; P < .001), and shorter length of stay (18.4 vs 20.2 days; P = .012) compared with open repair. In adjusted mortality analyses, open repair proved to be associated with twice the mortality risk compared with TEVAR (odds ratio, 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.6-2.7), and nonoperative management was associated with more than a fourfold increase in mortality (odds ratio, 4.5; 95% confidence interval, 3.8-5.3).TEVAR is now the dominant surgical approach in TTAI, with substantial perioperative morbidity and mortality benefits over open aortic repair. Overall mortality after admission for TTAI has declined, which is most likely the result of the replacement of open repair by TEVAR as well as the broadened eligibility for operative repair.

Project description:The Food and Drug Administration has approved devices for endovascular management of thoracic endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (TEVAR); however, limited data exist describing the outcomes of TEVAR for aneurysms attributable to chronic type B aortic dissection (cTBAD). This study was undertaken to determine the results of endovascular treatment of cTBAD with aneurysmal degeneration.A retrospective analysis of all patients treated for cTBAD with aneurysmal degeneration at the University of Florida from 2004 to 2011 was performed. Computed tomograms with centerline reconstruction were analyzed to determine change in aortic diameter, relative proportions of aortic treatment lengths, and false lumen perfusion status. Reintervention and mortality were estimated using life-tables. Cox regression analysis was completed to predict mortality.Eighty patients underwent TEVAR for aneurysm due to cTBAD (mean age [± standard deviation], 60 ± 13 years [male, 87.5%; n = 70]; median follow-up, 26 [range, 1-74] months). Median time from diagnosis of TBAD to TEVAR was 16 (range, 1-72) months. Prior aortic root/arch replacement had been performed in 29% (n = 23) at a median interval of 28.5 (range, 0.5-312) months. Mean preoperative aneurysm diameter was 62.0 ± 9.9 mm. In 75% (n = 60) of cases, coverage was proximal to zone 3, and 24% (n = 19) underwent carotid-subclavian bypass or other arch debranching procedure. Spinal drains were used in 78% (pre-op 71%, n = 57; post-op 6%, n = 5). Length of stay was 6.5 ± 4.7 days with a composite morbidity of 26% and in-hospital mortality of 2.5% (n = 2). Overall neurologic event rate was 17% (spinal cord ischemia 10% [n = 8], with a permanent deficit observed in 6.2% [n = 5]; stroke 7.5%). Aneurysm diameter reduced or stabilized in 65%. The false lumen thrombosed completely within the thoracic aorta in 52%, and reintervention within the treated aortic segment was required in 16% (n = 13).One- and 3-year freedom from reintervention (with 95% confidence interval [CI]) was 80% (range, 68%-88%) and 70% (range, 57%-80%), respectively. Survival at 1 and 5 years was 89% (range, 80%-94%) and 70% (range, 55%-81%) and was not significantly different among patients requiring reintervention or experiencing favorable aortic remodeling. Multivariable analysis identified coronary artery disease (hazard ratio [HR], 6.4; 95% CI, 2.3-17.7; P < .005), prior infrarenal aortic surgery (HR, 8.6; 95% CI, 2.3-31.7; P = .001), and congestive heart failure (HR, 11.9; 95% CI, 1.9-73.8; P = .008) as independent risk factors for mortality. Hyperlipidemia was found to be protective (HR, 0.2; 95% CI, 0.05-0.6; P = .004). No significant difference in predictors of mortality were found between patients who underwent reintervention vs those who did not (P = .2).TEVAR for cTBAD with aneurysmal degeneration can be performed safely but spinal cord ischemia rates may be higher than previously reported. Liberal use of procedural adjuncts to reduce this complication, such as spinal drainage, is recommended. Reintervention is common, but long-term survival does not appear to be impacted by remediation.

Dataset Information

Volume-Outcome Relationships in Surgical and Endovascular Repair of Aortic Dissection.

Publications

Volume-Outcome Relationships in Surgical and Endovascular Repair of Aortic Dissection.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure