Contemporary comparison of aortofemoral bypass to alternative inflow procedures in the Veteran population

被引:14
|
作者
McPhee, James T. [1 ,2 ]
Madenci, Arin [3 ,4 ]
Raffetto, Joseph [1 ,4 ]
Martin, Michelle [1 ,4 ]
Gupta, Naren [1 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Vet Affairs Boston Healthcare Syst, Div Vasc Surg, West Roxbury, MA USA
[2] Boston Univ, Sch Med, Boston, MA 02118 USA
[3] Brigham & Womens Hosp, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[4] Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA USA
关键词
AORTOILIAC OCCLUSIVE DISEASE; ABDOMINAL AORTIC-ANEURYSM; FEMORAL ENDARTERECTOMY; RECONSTRUCTION; OUTCOMES; METAANALYSIS; QUALITY; PROGRAM; REPAIR; CARE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jvs.2016.05.081
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: Multiple vascular inflow reconstruction options exist for claudication, including aortofemoral bypass (AFB) and alternative inflow procedures (AIPs) such as femoral reconstruction with iliac stents, and femoral-femoral, iliofemoral, and axillofemoral bypass. Contemporary multi-institution comparison of these techniques is lacking. Methods: The Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Project (VASQIP) national database (2005-2013) was used to compare AFB vs AIP in a propensity-matched analysis. Primary outcome was mortality at 30 and 90 days. Secondary outcomes included rates of postoperative complications. Multivariable regression assessed the adjusted effect of inflow procedure type on mortality. Results: A matched cohort of 748 claudicant patients (373 AFB, 375 AIP) was identified. The AFB and AIP groups had similar mean age (59.9 vs 60.8 years; P=.30), gender (P=.51), race (P=.52), recent smoking (79.1% vs 76.5%; P=.43), history of coronary artery disease (14.8% vs 14.7%; P>.99), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (18.8% vs 18.4%; P=.92), renal insufficiency (5.9% vs 6.1%; P>.99), and diabetes (22% vs 20%; P=.53), and American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification (P=.41). The AFB group had longer mean operative time (4.9 vs 3.5 hours; P<.0001), more senior resident assistants (72.4% vs 61.1%; P<.0001), and greater mean red blood cell transfusion (1.1 vs 0.12 units; P<.0001). AFB and AIP had similar rates of outflow bypass (1.9% vs 1.3%; P=.58) and outflow endovascular interventions (0.54% vs 1.6%; P=.29). AFB trended toward a higher rate of mortality at 30 days postoperatively (2.7% vs 0.8%; P=.06), but by 90 days, the crude mortality rates were similar for the two (2.9% vs 2.1%; P=.5). AFB had higher rates of pneumonia (5.9% vs 0.8%; P<.001), deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism (1.3% vs 0%; P=.03), postoperative transfusion (2.7% vs 0.53%; P=.02), and urinary tract infection (3.5% vs 0.8%; P=.01), but similar rates of myocardial infarction (1.6% vs 0.8%; P=.34), stroke (0.8% vs 0%; P=.12), wound complications (13.1% vs 12.8%; P=.91), renal failure (1.1% vs 0.3%; P=.22), graft failure (1.3% vs 1.1%; P=.75), and return to the operating room (12.9% vs 9.6%; P=.17). Multivariable analysis showed AFB was not independently associated with mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1-3.0). Significant factors included age (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.1-1.4), postoperative renal insufficiency (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.6-4.0), and unplanned reintubation (OR, 35.5; 95% CI, 3.1-399). Conclusions: For claudicant patients with inflow disease, AFB has higher rates of 30-day complications and a trend toward higher mortality; however by 90 days postoperatively, the two procedure types have similar rates of mortality.
引用
收藏
页码:1660 / 1666
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] A Contemporary Comparison of Aortofemoral Bypass and Aortoiliac Stenting in the Treatment of Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease
    Burke, Christopher R.
    Henke, Peter K.
    Hernandez, Roland
    Rectenwald, John E.
    Krishnamurthy, Venkat
    Englesbe, Michael J.
    Kubus, James J.
    Escobar, Guillermo A.
    Upchurch, Gilbert R., Jr.
    Eliason, Jonathan L.
    ANNALS OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 2010, 24 (01) : 4 - 13
  • [2] DESCENDING THORACIC AORTOFEMORAL BYPASS AS AN ALTERNATIVE FOR AORTOILIAC REVASCULARIZATION
    KALMAN, PG
    JOHNSTON, KW
    WALKER, PM
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 1991, 32 (04): : 443 - 446
  • [3] The Comparison between Axillofemoral Bypass and Endovascular Treatment for Patients with Challenging Aortoiliac Occlusive Disease as Alternative Treatment to Aortofemoral Bypass
    Nishizawa, Masato
    Igari, Kimihiro
    Katsui, Sotaro
    Kudo, Toshifumi
    Uetake, Hiroyuki
    ANNALS OF VASCULAR DISEASES, 2020, 13 (02) : 144 - 150
  • [4] Comparison of axillofemoral and aortofemoral bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease
    Passman, MA
    Taylor, LM
    Moneta, GL
    Edwards, JM
    Yeager, RA
    McConnell, DB
    Porter, JM
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 1996, 23 (02) : 263 - 269
  • [5] Comparison of femorofemoral and aortofemoral bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease
    Mingoli, A
    Sapienza, P
    Feldhaus, RJ
    Di Marzo, L
    Burchi, C
    Cavallaro, A
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2001, 42 (03): : 381 - 387
  • [6] DESCENDING THORACIC AORTOFEMORAL-FEMORAL BYPASS - A REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVE FOR THE FAILED AORTOBIFEMORAL BYPASS
    SCHELLACK, J
    FULENWIDER, JT
    SMITH, RB
    JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 1988, 29 (02): : 201 - 204
  • [7] EXTENDED AUTOGENOUS PROFUNDAPLASTY AND AORTOFEMORAL GRAFTING - AN ALTERNATIVE TO SYNCHRONOUS DISTAL BYPASS
    PEARCE, WH
    KEMPCZINSKI, RF
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 1984, 1 (03) : 455 - 458
  • [8] LATERAL PROSTHESIS OCCLUSION AFTER AORTOFEMORAL BYPASS - CAUSES, TECHNICAL PROCEDURES, RESULTS
    KNIEMEYER, HW
    SANDMANN, W
    JAESCHOCK, R
    THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGEON, 1986, 34 : 15 - 15
  • [9] EVALUATION OF CEFAZOLIN AND CEFAMANDOLE TISSUE CONCENTRATIONS DURING AORTOFEMORAL BYPASS GRAFT PROCEDURES
    DOWNS, A
    LOUIE, T
    LYE, C
    HOWARD, D
    GRAY, G
    FONG, H
    KRULICKI, W
    CANADIAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 1987, 30 (04) : 303 - 303
  • [10] Comparison of axillofemoral and aortofemoral bypass for aortoiliac occlusive disease - Discussion
    LoGerfo, FW
    Taylor, LM
    Schneider, JR
    Clagett, GP
    Mannick, JA
    Brewster, DC
    Ascer, E
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 1996, 23 (02) : 269 - 271