Key result
The introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair expanded the indication for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair to older and higher-risk patients without increasing surgical mortality, though multivariate analysis showed no significant survival advantage over open surgery.
Why the study?
The introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) in Japan was hypothesized to expand indications for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair without increasing surgical mortality.
Does endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared to open surgery impact surgical mortality and expand treatment indications in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm?
Cohort (n=2,154)
Yes
Does endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared to open surgery impact surgical mortality and expand treatment indications in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The introduction of EVAR in Japan expanded the indications for AAA repair to older patients with more comorbidities without increasing overall surgical mortality.
BACKGROUND: The objective of the present study was to assess the hypothesis that the introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) into Japan has expanded the indication of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair without increasing surgical mortality. METHODS AND RESULTS: From 10 national hospitals, we registered a total of 2,154 consecutive patients (Open surgery [OS]: n=1,577, EVAR: n=577) over 8 years, divided into 4 time periods: Group I (2005-2006: n=522), Group II (2007-2008: n=475), Group III (2009-2010: n=551), Group IV, (2011-2012: n=606). Mean age increased over the 4 time periods (P<0.0001). The incidences of COPD, smoking history, history of abdominal surgery and concomitant malignancy significantly increased as well, while the numbers of patients with preoperative shock or high ASA status reduced over time. The proportion of EVAR in AAA repair increased from: 0% in Group I, 11.6% in Group II, 41.0% in Group III, to 48.8% in Group IV (P<0.0001). Early mortality was 0.8% in the EVAR and 3.4% in the OS (P<0.001) groups. Survival rates among the 4 groups free of all-cause death and aneurysm-related death at 1 year were 92.1-96.3% (P=0.1555) and 95.5-96.8% (P=0.9891), respectively. Multiple logistic regression analysis for surgical death failed to demonstrate survival advantage of EVAR over OS. CONCLUSIONS: Introduction of EVAR expanded the indication of AAA repair without increasing mortality, while high risk for anesthesia and emergency cases reduced over time. UMIN-CTR (UMIN000008345).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Handa et al. (2014) conducted a cohort in Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) (n=2,154). Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) vs. Open surgery (OS) was evaluated on Surgical death (in-hospital death or any death within 30 days) (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.08-1.72, p=0.2474). The introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair expanded the indication for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair to older and higher-risk patients without increasing surgical mortality, though multivariate analysis showed no significant survival advantage over open surgery.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: