Dataset Information

Optimising intervals for abdominal aortic aneurysm surveillance: A pilot study analysing patient opinion.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Optimising abdominal aortic aneurysm surveillance intervals will improve current surveillance programmes. To the author's knowledge, no known study has exclusively asked patient opinion with regards to their surveillance interval. The aim of this study was to therefore determine a patient's perspective of their optimal intervals, encouraging shared decision-making and creating a patient-focused service.

Methods

Fifty patients, currently under abdominal aortic aneurysm surveillance, were interviewed. Patients were asked their opinions before and after seeing a patient decision aid. A patient decision aid presents information of risk in an easy-to-understand format. This specific patient decision aid, designed and created for this study, informed patients of the 'risk of exceeding the 5.5 cm surgical threshold' with regards to various surveillance intervals. The chosen optimal surveillance interval was recorded for each patient, and a median interval was calculated for each abdominal aortic aneurysm group. Groups were categorised based upon maximum aortic diameter (3.0-3.4 cm, 3.5-3.9 cm, 4.0-4.4 cm and 4.5-4.9 cm).

Results

After assessing the patient decision aid, the median surveillance interval calculated for each abdominal aortic aneurysm group was 24 months (3.0-3.4 cm), 12 months (3.5-3.9 cm), 12 months (4.0-4.4 cm) and 6 months (4.5-4.9 cm), respectively. The majority of patients (78%, n = 39) agreed that the patient decision aid was a useful tool to help make an informed choice.

Conclusion

Overall, patients in abdominal aortic aneurysm groups 3.0-3.4 cm and 4.5-4.9 cm would choose to lengthen abdominal aortic aneurysm surveillance intervals. Lengthening the current surveillance intervals to 24 months (currently 12 months) for abdominal aortic aneurysm group 3.0-3.4 cm and to 6 months (currently 3 months) for abdominal aortic aneurysm group 4.5-4.9 cm would not only increase capacity but also reflect the needs and wishes of those using the National Health Service. The use of a patient decision aid is an effective way of communicating, to the patient, the risk of the proposed changes and thus alleviating potential anxiety.

SUBMITTER: Robertson L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7844473 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveCurrent management of small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) primarily involves serial imaging surveillance of maximum transverse diameter (MTD) to estimate rupture risk. Other measurements, such as volume and tortuosity, are less well-studied and may help characterize and predict AAA progression. This study evaluated predictors of AAA volume growth and discusses the role of volume in clinical practice.MethodsSubjects from the Non-invasive Treatment of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Clinical Trial (baseline AAA MTD, 3.5-5.0 cm) with ≥2 computed tomography scans were included in this study (n = 250). Computed tomography scans were conducted approximately every 6 months over 2 years. MTD, volume, and tortuosity were used to model growth. Univariable and multivariable backwards elimination least squares regressions assessed associations with volume growth.ResultsBaseline MTD accounted for 43% of baseline volume variance (P < .0001). Mean volume growth rate was 10.4 cm3/year (standard deviation, 8.8 cm3/year) (mean volume change +10.4%). Baseline volume accounted for 30% of volume growth variance; MTD accounted for 13% of volume growth variance. More tortuous aneurysms at baseline had significantly larger volume growth rates (difference, 32.8 cm3/year; P < .0001). Univariable analysis identified angiotensin II receptor blocker use (difference, -3.4 cm3/year; P = .02) and history of diabetes mellitus (difference, -2.8 cm3/year; P = .04) to be associated with lower rates of volume growth. Baseline volume, tortuosity index, current tobacco use, and absence of diabetes mellitus remained significantly associated with volume growth in multivariable analysis. AAAs that reached the MTD threshold for repair had a wide range of volumes: 102 cm3 to 142 cm3 in female patients (n = 5) and 105 cm3 to 229 cm3 in male patients (n = 20).ConclusionsBaseline AAA volume and MTD were found to be moderately correlated. On average, AAA volume grows about 10% annually. Baseline volume, tortuosity, MTD, current tobacco use, angiotensin II receptor blocker use, and history of diabetes mellitus were predictive of volume growth over time.

Project description:ObjectiveShared medical decision making is most important when there are competing options for repair such as in treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). We sought to understand the sources of patients' pre-existing knowledge about AAA to better inform treating physicians about patients' needs for preoperative counseling.MethodsWe performed a multicenter survey of patients facing AAA repair at 20 Veterans Affairs hospitals across the United States as part of the Preferences for Open Versus Endovascular Repair of AAA study. A validated survey instrument was administered to examine the sources of information available and commonly used by patients to learn about their repair options. The survey was administered by study personnel before the patient had any interaction with the vascular surgeon because survey data were collected before the vascular clinic visit.ResultsPreliminary analysis of data from 99 patients showed that our cohort was primarily male (99%) and elderly (mean age 73 years). Patients commonly had a history of hypertension (86%), prior myocardial infarction (32%), diabetes (32%), and were overweight (58%). Patients arrived at their surgeon's office appointment with limited information. A majority of patients (52%) reported that they had not talked to their primary care physician at all about their options for AAA repair, and one-half (50%) reported that their view of the different surgical options had not been influenced by anyone. Slightly less than one-half of patients reported that they did not receive any information about open surgical aneurysm repair and endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (41% and 37%, respectively). Few patients indicated using the internet as their main source of information about open surgical aneurysm repair and endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (10% and 11%, respectively).ConclusionsPatients are commonly referred for AAA repair having little to no information regarding AAA pathology or repair options. Fewer than one in five patients searched the internet or had accessed other sources of information on their own. Most vascular surgeons should assume that patients will present to their first vascular surgery appointment with minimal understanding of the treatment options available to them.

Project description:ObjectiveInformed consent discussions for elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair should reflect appropriate risks of the open or endovascular repair (EVAR), but few guidelines exist describing what surgeons should discuss. This study examines expert opinion regarding what constitutes informed consent.MethodsDesign. We conducted an anonymous, web-based, national survey of vascular surgeons. Associations between surgeon characteristics and opinions regarding informed consent were measured using bivariate statistics; multivariable logistic regression was performed to estimate effects adjusted for covariates. Setting. Academic and private practice surgeons were surveyed. Subjects. United States members of the International Society for Vascular Surgery membership. Main Outcome Measure. Surgeons' self-reported opinions regarding the content of informed consent for AAA repair.ResultsA total of 199 surgeons completed the survey (response rate 51%). More than 90% of respondents reported that it was essential to discuss mortality risk for both procedures. However, only 60% and 30% of respondents reported that it was essential to discuss the risk of myocardial infarction and stroke, respectively. Opinions varied by procedure regarding the risks of impotence (32% vs 62%; EVAR vs open repair), reintervention (78% vs 17%), and rupture during long-term follow-up (57% vs 17%). Younger and private practice surgeons were more likely to discuss complications compared with older surgeons and those in academic practice. Surgeons who perform predominantly EVAR were more likely to quote higher mortality rates for open repair (odds ration [OR] = 3.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.4-6.4) and lower reintervention rates for EVAR (OR = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.1-0.7) compared with other surgeons.ConclusionsThis is the first study of the practice of informed consent for AAA repair. The only risk that the vast majority of surgeons agreed should be included in informed consent for AAA repair was mortality. Significant variation exists regarding whether other complications should be discussed and what complication rates should be quoted. Surgeon characteristics may influence how risks are presented to patients. Further efforts are needed to develop guidelines to ensure consistent communication of appropriate risk during informed consent for AAA repair.

Project description:ImportanceSmall abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) are common in the elderly population. Their growth rates and patterns, which drive clinical surveillance, are widely disputed.ObjectiveTo assess the growth patterns and rates of AAAs as documented on serial computed tomography (CT) scans.Design, setting, and participantsCohort study and secondary analysis of the Non-Invasive Treatment of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Clinical Trial (N-TA3CT), a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial conducted from 2013 to 2018, with CT imaging every 6 months for 2 years. The trial was a multicenter, observational secondary analysis, not related to treatment hypotheses of data collected in the N-TA3CT. Participants included 254 patients with baseline AAA diameter between 3.5 and 5.0 cm.ExposuresPatients received serial CT scan measurements, analyzed for maximum transverse diameter, at 6-month intervals.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary study outcome was AAA annual growth rate. Secondary analyses included characterizing AAA growth patterns, assessing likelihood of AAA diameter to exceed sex-specific intervention thresholds over 2 years.ResultsA total of 254 patients, 35 women with baseline AAA diameter 3.5 to 4.5 cm and 219 men with baseline diameter 3.5 to 5.0 cm, were included. Yearly growth rates of AAA diameters were a median of 0.17 cm/y (interquartile range [IQR], 0.16) and a mean (SD), 0.19 (0.14) cm/y. Ten percent of AAAs displayed minimal to no growth (<0.05 cm/y), 62% displayed low growth (0.05-0.25 cm/y), and 28% displayed high growth (>0.25 cm/y). Baseline AAA diameter accounted for 5.4% of variance of growth rate (P < .001; R2, 0.054). Most AAAs displayed linear growth (70%); large variations in interval growth rates occurred infrequently (3% staccato growth and 4% exponential growth); and some patients' growth patterns were not clearly classifiable (23% indeterminate). No patients with a maximum transverse diameter less than 4.25 cm exceeded sex-specific repair thresholds at 2 years (men, 0 of 92; 95% CI, 0.00-0.055; women, 0 of 25 ; 95% CI, 0.00-0.247). Twenty-six percent of patients with a maximum transverse diameter of at least 4.25 cm exceeded sex-specific repair thresholds at 2 years (n = 12 of 83 men with diameter ranging from 4.25 to <4.75 cm; 95% CI, 0.091-0.264; n = 21 of 44 men with diameter ranging from 4.75-5.0 cm; 95% CI, 0.362-0.669; n = 3 of 10 women with diameter ≥4.25 cm; 95% CI, 0.093-0.726).Conclusions and relevanceMost small AAAs showed linear growth; large intrapatient variations in interval growth rates were infrequently observed over 2 years. Linear growth modeling of AAAs in individual patients suggests smaller AAAs (<4.25 cm) can be followed up with a CT scan in at least 2 years with little chance of exceeding interventional thresholds.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01756833.