Purpose: To evaluate the differences in technical outcomes and secondary interventions between elective endovascular aneurysm repair (el-EVAR) procedures and those for ruptured aneurysms (r-EVAR). Methods: Of the 906 patients treated with primary EVAR from September 1998 until July 2012, 43 cases were excluded owing to the use of first-generation stent-grafts. Among the remaining 863 patients, 773 (89.6%) patients (mean age 72 years; 697 men) with asymptomatic or symptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) were assigned to the el-EVAR group; 90 (10.4%) patients (mean age 73 years; 73 men) were assigned to the r-EVAR group based on blood outside the aortic wall on preoperative imaging. The primary study outcome was technical success; secondary endpoints, including freedom from secondary interventions and late survival, were examined with Kaplan-Meier analyses. Results: At baseline, r-EVAR patients had larger aneurysms on average (p<0.001) compared to el-EVAR patients. Technical success was comparable (p=0.052), but there were more type Ia endoleaks at completion angiography in the r-EVAR group (p=0.038). As anticipated, more patients died in the first month in the r-EVAR group (18.9% vs 2.2% el-EVAR, p<0.001). At 5 years, there was an overall survival of 65.1% for the el-EVAR patients vs 48.1% in the r-EVAR group (p<0.001). The freedom from AAA-related mortality was 95.7% for el-EVAR and 71.0% for r-EVAR (p<0.001). Five-year freedom from type I/III endoleaks was significantly lower in the r-EVAR group (78.7% vs 90.0%, p=0.003). Five-year freedom from secondary intervention estimates were not significantly different (el-EVAR 84.2% vs r-EVAR 78.2%, p=0.064). Conclusion: Within our cohort of primary EVAR patients, r-EVAR cases showed comparable stent-graft–related technical outcome. Although there was a higher incidence of type Ia endoleaks on completion angiography in the r-EVAR group, the overall secondary intervention rate was comparable to el-EVAR.
EVAR trial participants. Endovascular aneurysm repair versus open repair in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR trial 1): randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2005;365:2179–2186.
2.
PrinssenMVerhoevenELButhJ. A randomized trial comparing conventional and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:1607–1618.
3.
United Kingdom EVAR Trial Investigators, GreenhalghRMBrownLC. Endovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1863–1871.
MollFLPowellJTFraedrichG. Management of abdominal aortic aneurysms clinical practice guidelines of the European Society for Vascular Surgery. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011;41(Suppl 1):S1–S58.
ParkBDAzeforNHuangCC. Trends in treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: impact of endovascular repair and implications for future care. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216:745–755.
8.
MehtaMTaggertJDarlingRC. Establishing a protocol for endovascular treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms: outcomes of a prospective analysis. J Vasc Surg. 2006;44:1–8.
9.
MooreRNutleyMCinaCS. Improved survival after introduction of an emergency endovascular therapy protocol for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg. 2007;45:443–450.
10.
AryaNMakarRRLauLL. An intention-to-treat by endovascular repair policy may reduce overall mortality in ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg. 2006;44:467–471.
11.
SweetingMJUlugPPowellJT. Ruptured Aneurysm Trialists. Ruptured aneurysm trials: the importance of longer-term outcomes and meta-analysis for 1-year mortality. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2015;50:297–302.
12.
VeithFJBaumRAOhkiT. Nature and significance of endoleaks and endotension: summary of opinions expressed at an international conference. J Vasc Surg. 2002;35:1029–1038.
13.
BastosGonçalves FVerhagenHJVasanthananthanK. Spontaneous delayed sealing in selected patients with a primary type-Ia endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2014;48:53–59.
14.
DiasNVReschTMalinaM. Intraoperative proximal endoleaks during AAA stent-graft repair: evaluation of risk factors and treatment with Palmaz stents. J Endovasc Ther. 2001;8:268–273.
15.
SampaioSMPannetonJMMozesGI. Proximal type I endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: predictive factors. Ann Vasc Surg. 2004;18:621–628.
16.
KooleDMollFLButhJ. Annual rupture risk of abdominal aortic aneurysm enlargement without detectable endoleak after endovascular abdominal aortic repair. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54:1614–1622.
17.
OhrlanderTDenckerMAcostaS.Morphological state as a predictor for reintervention and mortality after EVAR for AAA. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012;35:1009–1015.
18.
WyssTRDickFBrownLC. The influence of thrombus, calcification, angulation, and tortuosity of attachment sites on the time to the first graft-related complication after endovascular aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54:965–971.
19.
BoyleJRGibbsPJKrugerA. Existing delays following the presentation of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm allow sufficient time to assess patients for endovascular repair. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2005;29:505–509.
20.
DesaiMEaton-EvansJHilleryC. AAA stent-grafts: past problems and future prospects. Ann Biomed Eng. 2010;38:1259–1275.
21.
TadrosROFariesPLEllozySH. The impact of stent graft evolution on the results of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2014;59:1518–1527.
22.
PeppelenboschNGeelkerkenRHSoongC. Endograft treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm using the Talent aortouniiliac system: an international multicenter study. J Vasc Surg. 2006;43:1111–1122.
23.
VerhoevenELPrinsTRvan den DungenJJ. Endovascular repair of acute AAAs under local anesthesia with bifurcated endografts: a feasibility study. J Endovasc Ther. 2002;9:729–735.
24.
PeppelenboschNYilmazNvan MarrewijkC. Emergency treatment of acute symptomatic or ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Outcome of a prospective intent-to-treat by EVAR protocol. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2003;26:303–310.
