Key result
Aneurysm sac shrinkage after EVAR is linked to ~27% lower mortality vs stable or expanding sacs.
Why the study?
The prognostic significance of aneurysm sac shrinkage after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and its impact on patient outcomes was unclear.
Does aneurysm sac shrinkage after EVAR improve survival and reduce complications compared to a stable or increased aneurysm sac?
Meta-Analysis (n=17,096)
Does aneurysm sac shrinkage after EVAR improve survival and reduce complications compared to a stable or increased aneurysm sac?
Hazard Ratio: 0.73 (95% CI 0.6–0.87)
Aneurysm sac shrinkage after EVAR is a strong prognostic marker associated with improved survival and reduced rates of secondary interventions and complications, suggesting a need for intensified surveillance in patients who fail to achieve sac regression.
Sac shrinkage after EVAR was associated with lower mortality and complications; leaves open whether it should guide individualized surveillance.
Purpose: To investigate whether patients who develop aneurysm sac shrinkage following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) have better outcomes than patients with a stable or increased aneurysm sac. Materials and Methods: The Healthcare Databases Advanced Search interface developed by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence was used to interrogate MEDLINE and EMBASE. Thesaurus headings were adapted accordingly. Case-control studies were identified comparing outcomes in patients demonstrating aneurysm sac shrinkage after EVAR with those of patients with a stable or expanded aneurysm sac. Pooled estimates of dichotomous outcome data were calculated using the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Meta-analysis of time-to-event data was conducted using the inverse-variance method; the results are reported as a summary hazard ratio (HR) and 95% CI. Summary outcome estimates were calculated using random-effects models. Results: Eight studies were included in quantitative synthesis reporting a total of 17,096 patients (8518 patients with sac shrinkage and 8578 patients without sac shrinkage). The pooled incidence of sac shrinkage at 12 months was 48% (95% CI 40% to 56%). Patients with aneurysm sac shrinkage had a significantly lower hazard of death (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.87), secondary interventions (HR 0.42, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.62), and late complications (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.56) than patients with a stable or increased aneurysm sac. Furthermore, their odds of rupture were significantly lower than those in patients without shrinkage (OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.36). Conclusion: Sac regression is correlated to improved survival and a reduced rate of secondary interventions and EVAR-related complications. The prognostic significance of sac regression should be considered in surveillance strategies. Intensified surveillance should be applied in patients who fail to achieve sac regression following EVAR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Antoniou et al. (2020) conducted a meta-analysis in Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) (n=17,096). Aneurysm sac shrinkage vs. Stable or increased aneurysm sac was evaluated on Death (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.60 to 0.87). Aneurysm sac shrinkage after endovascular aneurysm repair was associated with a significantly lower hazard of death (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.60-0.87) compared to a stable or increased sac.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: