共 50 条
Mortality analysis of endovascular aneurysm sealing versus endovascular aneurysm repair
被引:0
|作者:
Rastogi, Vinamr
[1
,2
]
O'Donnell, Thomas F. X.
[1
]
Solomon, Yoel
[1
,3
]
Varkevisser, Rens R. B.
[1
,2
]
Patel, Priya B.
[1
]
Carpenter, Jeffrey P.
[4
]
de Bruin, Jorg L.
[2
]
Reijnen, Michel M. P. J.
[5
,6
]
Verhagen, Hence J. M.
[2
]
Schermerhorn, Marc L.
[1
,7
]
机构:
[1] Harvard Med Sch, Beth Israel Deaconess Med Ctr, Dept Surg, Div Vasc & Endovasc Surg, Boston, MA USA
[2] Erasmus MC, Dept Vasc Surg, Rotterdam, Netherlands
[3] Univ Med Ctr, Dept Vasc Surg, Utrecht, South Africa
[4] Rowan Univ, Div Vasc Surg, Cooper Med Sch, Camden, NJ USA
[5] Rijnstate, Dept Surg, Arnhem, Netherlands
[6] Univ Twente, Multimodal Med Imaging Grp, Enschede, Netherlands
[7] Beth Israel Deaconess Med Ctr, Dept Surg, Div Vasc & Endovasc Surg, 110 Francis St,Ste 5B, Boston, MA 02215 USA
基金:
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词:
Abdominal aortic aneurysm;
Endovascular aneurysm repair;
Endovascular aneurysm sealing;
Mortality;
Survival;
ABDOMINAL AORTIC-ANEURYSM;
EDITORS CHOICE;
UNITED-STATES;
FOLLOW-UP;
EPIDEMIOLOGY;
TRIAL;
EVENTS;
D O I:
10.1016/j.jvs.2022.10.030
中图分类号:
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号:
摘要:
Background: Endovascular aneurysm sealing (EVAS), using the Nellix endovascular aneurysm sealing system, has been associated with high reintervention and migration rates. However, prior reports have suggested that EVAS might be related to a lower all-cause mortality compared with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). In the present study, we examined the 5-year all-cause mortality trends after EVAS and EVAR. Methods: We compared the 333 EVAS patients in the EVAS-1 Nellix U.S. investigational device exemption trial with 16,497 infrarenal EVAR controls from the Vascular Quality Initiative, treated between 2014 and 2016, after applying the exclusion criteria from the investigational device exemption trial (ie, hemodialysis, creatinine >2.0 mg/dL, rupture). As a secondary analysis, we stratified the patients by aneurysm diameter (<5.5 cm and >= 5.5 cm). We calculated propensity scores after adjusting for demographics, comorbidities, and anatomic characteristics and applied inverse probability weighting to compare the risk-adjusted long-term mortality using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. Results: After weighting, the EVAS group had experienced similar 5-year mortality compared with the controls from the Vascular Quality Initiative (EVAS vs EVAR, 18% vs 14%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-1.7; P = .70). The subgroup analysis demonstrated that for patients with an aneurysm diameter of <5.5 cm, EVAS was asso-ciated with higher 5-year mortality compared with EVAR (19% vs 11%; HR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.7-4.7; P = .013). In patients with an aneurysm diameter of >= 5.5 cm, EVAS was associated with lower mortality within the first 2 years (2-year mortality: HR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.13-0.62; P = .002). However, compared with EVAR, EVAS was associated with higher mortality be-tween 2 and 5 years (HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.2-3.0; P = .005), with no mortality difference at 5 years (18% vs 17%; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.4-1.4; P = .46). Conclusions: Within the overall population, EVAS was associated with similar 5-year mortality compared with EVAR. EVAS was associated with higher mortality for those with small aneurysms (<5.5 cm). For those with larger aneurysms (>= 5.5 cm), EVAS was initially associated with lower mortality within the first 2 years, although this advantage was lost thereafter, with higher mortality after 2 years. Future studies are required to evaluate the specific causes of death and to elucidate the potential beneficial mechanism behind sac obliteration that leads to this potential initial survival benefit. This could help guide the development of future grafts with better proximal fixation and sealing that also incorporate sac obliteration. (J Vasc Surg 2023;77:731-40.)
引用
收藏
页数:11
相关论文