Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) outcomes of unibody and single/double docking limb endografts in Medicare beneficiaries between 2012 and 2018

Abstract

Objective

The evaluation of perioperative and long term outcomes for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) using anatomic (unibody) and proximal neck fixated (docking limbs) endografts across consecutive time cohorts.

Design

This study compares the outcomes of EVAR in Medicare patients stratified by mode of fixation.

Methods

All patients who underwent EVAR between 2012 and 2018 were identified in the Medicare database. Anatomic fixation (AF) and proximal fixation (PF) grafts were differentiated using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. The AF population was divided into three-time cohorts based on iterative changes in graft design: Cohort 1: (01/01/2012–20/07/2014); Cohort 2: (21/07/2014–09/05/2016); and Cohort 3: (10/05/2016–31/12/2017). The PF cohort was similarly divided into these three periods. Outcomes were evaluated through 31/12/2020 and included all-cause mortality, aortic rupture, and aortic-related reintervention.

Results

32,031 patients underwent EVAR during the study period; 4729 were AF and 27,302 were PF. There were more women (p < .001) and patients with peripheral vascular disease (PVD) (p < .001) in the AF group. There were no group differences in perioperative outcomes. In Cohort 1, there was a higher rate of reintervention (11.9% vs 7.6%; p < .001) and aortic rupture (5.3% vs 4.0%; p = .019) in the AF group compared to the PF group. In Cohort 2, reintervention, aortic rupture, and reintervention rates were similar between the two groups (p = NS). In Cohort 3, the reintervention and aortic rupture rates were similar between the two groups (p = NS).

Conclusion

The higher rates of aortic rupture and reintervention seen in the AF group in Cohort 1 when compared with the PF group did not persist in Cohorts 2 and 3. This suggests that improvements in graft design may have led to durability which is similar to that of PF grafts. However, late aneurysm related complications are inherent risks after EVAR and long-term surveillance remains necessary.

Keywords

AFX/AFX2 endografts anatomical fixation abdominal aortic aneurysm endovascular aneurysm repair endovascular stent graft proximal fixation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Schwarze

Shen

Hemmerich

, et al. Age-related trends in utilization and outcome of open and endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm in the United States, 2001-2006. J Vasc Surg 2009; 50(4): 722–729.

Buck

Soden

Deery

, et al. Comparison of endovascular stent grafts for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in medicare beneficiaries. Ann Vasc Surg 2018; 47: 31–42.

Lemmon

Motaganahalli

Chang

, et al. Failure mode analysis of the Endologix endograft. J Vasc Surg 2016; 64(3): 571–576.

Available from: https://endologix.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/MM2165-Rev-01-Endologix-2016-2019-AFXClinical-Availablefrom:Update.pdf

Stather

Ferguson

Awopetu

, et al. Meta-analysis of renal function following infrarenal EVAR using suprarenal or infrarenal fixation devices. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2018; 56(4): 486–496.

Goodney

Mao

Columbo

, et al. Use of linked registry claims data for long term surveillance of devices after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: observational surveillance study. BMJ 2022; 379: e071452.

Prentice

Paxton

Harris

, et al. Risk for surgical interventions following endovascular aneurysm repair with Endologix AFX or AFX2 Endovascular AAA Systems compared with other devices. J Vasc Surg. 2023; 78(2): 333–343. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2023.03.496.

Secemsky

Song

Sun

, et al. Comparison of unibody and Non-unibody endografts for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in Medicare Beneficiaries: the SAFE-AAA study. Circulation 2023; 147(17): 1264–1276.

Kwolek

Ouriel

Stucky

, et al. Five-year results of the LEOPARD trial of commercially available endografts. J Vasc Surg. 2023; 78(2): 324–332. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2023.04.011.

10.

Dua

Kuy

Lee

, et al. Epidemiology of aortic aneurysm repair in the United States from 2000 to 2010. J Vasc Surg 2014; 59(6): 1512–1517. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2014.01.007.

11.

Prinssen

Verhoeven

ELG

Buth

, et al. A randomized trial comparing conventional and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. N Engl J Med 2004; 351(16): 1607–1618. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa042002.

12.

Greenhalgh

Brown

Kwong

, et al. Comparison of endovascular aneurysm repair with open repair in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR trial 1), 30-day operative mortality results: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004; 364(9437): 843–848. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)16979-1.

13.

Lederle

Freischlag

Kyriakides

, et al. Outcomes following endovascular vs open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm: a randomized trial. JAMA 2009; 302(14): 1535–1542. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2009.1426.

14.

Columbo

Martinez-Camblor

O'Malley

, et al. Long-term reintervention after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Ann Surg 2021; 274(1): 179–185.

15.

Patel

Sweeting

Powell

, et al. Endovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm in 15-years' follow-up of the UK endovascular aneurysm repair trial 1 (EVAR trial 1): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2016; 388(10058): 2366–2374.

16.

Tzani

Doulamis

Katsaros

, et al. Mortality after endovascular treatment of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms - the newer the better? Vasa. Vasa 2018; 47(3): 187–196.

17.

Verzini

Isernia

De Rango

, et al. Abdominal aortic endografting beyond the trials: a 15-year single-center experience comparing newer to older generation stent-grafts. J Endovasc Ther 2014; 21(3): 439–447.

18.

Schermerhorn

Buck

O'Malley

, et al. Long-term outcomes of abdominal aortic aneurysm in the Medicare population. N Engl J Med 2015; 373(4): 328–338.

19.

Chang

Rothenberg

Harris

, et al. Midterm outcomes for 605 patients receiving Endologix AFX or AFX2 Endovascular AAA Systems in an integrated healthcare system. J Vasc Surg 2021; 73(3): 856–866.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.30 MB