Single-Center Experience of Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair (EVAR) in Patients Not Participating in the U.K. EVAR Trials

Abstract

The objective was to evaluate outcomes of a high-risk patient cohort following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) treatment not entered into the U.K. endovascular stent-graft aortic aneurysm repair trials (EVAR-1 or -2) because of equipoise absence but where EVAR was judged to be the most appropriate intervention option on compassionate grounds. A single-center retrospective analysis was performed involving all patients undergoing compassionate EVAR treatment during the EVAR-1 and -2 trial period. Over an 8-year period, 34 patients underwent compassionate EVAR procedure. The mean (SD) age was 76 (79) years. The mean (SD) preoperative physiology score (P-POSSUM) was 25 (8.3) with a mean (SD) predicted early mortality of 9.9% (16%). The actual early mortality in our study was 2.9% and morbidity was 35%. There were 8 cases of endoleak: type I (n = 2), type II (n = 5), and type IV (n = 1). Aneurysm-related mortality and all-cause mortality after 8 years were 5.8% and 23.5% respectively. Satisfactory outcome with low mortality (2.9%) and morbidity can be achieved in patients with compassionate indications, where clinicians judge EVAR to be an advantage over open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Based on our study, the early mortality (2.9%) in our compassionate EVAR group is comparable to EVAR-1 outcomes (1.7%) and better than EVAR-2 mortality results (9%). EVAR should therefore not be denied to a significant number of high-risk abdominal aortic aneurysm patients who fall between the EVAR-1 and EVAR-2 criteria.

Keywords

endovascular aneurysm repair abdominal aortic aneurysm compassionate

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Drury D. , Michaels JA , Jones L. , Ayiku L. Systematic review of recent evidence for the safety and efficacy of elective endovascular repair in management of infrarenal AAA. Br J Surg. 2005;92:937-946.

EVAR trial participants. Endovascular aneurysm repair and outcome in patients unfit for open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR 2): Randomised control trial. Lancet. 2005;365:2187-2192.

EVAR trial participants. Endovascular aneurysm repair versus open repair of in patients of abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR 1): Randomised control trial. Lancet . 2005;365:2179-2186.

Michaels JA , Drury D. , Thoams SM Cost effectiveness of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm. Br J Surg. 2005;92:960-967.

Shuhaiber JH , Hankins M. , Robless P. , Whitehead SM Comparison of POSSUM with P-POSSUM for prediction of mortality in infra-renal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Ann Vasc Surg. 2002;6:736-741.

Harris JR , Forbes TL , Steiner SH , Lawlor DK , Derose G. , Harris KA Risk-adjusted analysis of early mortality after ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg. 2005;3:387-391.

Neary WD , Crow P. , Foy C. , Prytherch D. , Heather BP , Earnshaw JJ Comparison of POSSUM scoring and Hardman Index in selection of patients for repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Br J Surg. 2003;4: 421-425.

Irvie CD , Shaw E. , Poskitt KR , Whyman MR , Earnshaw JJ , Heather BP A comparison of mortality rate after elective repair of aortic aneurysm detected either by screening or incidentally. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2000; 4:374-378.

Prytherch DR , Whiteley MS , Weaver W. , Prout WG , Powell SJ POSSUM and Portsmouth POSSUM for predicting mortality. Br J Surg. 1998;85:1217-1220.

10.

Conway KP , Byrne J. , Townsend M. , Lane IF

Prognosis of patients turned down for conventional abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the endovascular and sonographic era: Szilagyi revisited?

J Vasc Surg. 2001;33:752-757.

11.

Jones A. , Cahill D. , Gardham R. Outcome in patients with large abdominal aortic aneurysms considered unfit for surgery. Br J Surg. 1988;85:1382-1384.