TY - JOUR
T1 - Outcomes after endovascular versus open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair
T2 - A population-based study
AU - Rocha, Rodolfo V.
AU - Lindsay, Thomas F.
AU - Austin, Peter C.
AU - Al-Omran, Mohammed
AU - Forbes, Thomas L.
AU - Lee, Douglas S.
AU - Ouzounian, Maral
N1 - Funding Information:
Sources of Funding: This study was supported by the Divisions of Cardiovascular and Vascular Surgery, Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto , Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Dr Rocha was supported in part by the Black Family Fellowship in Vascular Surgery. Dr Austin is supported by a Mid-Career Investigator Award from the Heart and Stroke Foundation . Dr Lee is supported by a Mid-Career Investigator Award from the Heart and Stroke Foundation and is the Ted Rogers Chair in Heart Function Outcomes. This study was supported by ICES , which is funded by an annual grant from the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care . The opinions, results, and conclusions reported in this article are those of the authors and are independent from the funding sources. No endorsement by ICES or the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care is intended or should be inferred. Parts of this material are based on data and information compiled and provided by the Canadian Institute for Health Information. The analyses, conclusions, opinions, and statements expressed are those of the authors, and not necessarily those of Canadian Institute for Health Information.
Funding Information:
Sources of Funding: This study was supported by the Divisions of Cardiovascular and Vascular Surgery, Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Dr Rocha was supported in part by the Black Family Fellowship in Vascular Surgery. Dr Austin is supported by a Mid-Career Investigator Award from the Heart and Stroke Foundation. Dr Lee is supported by a Mid-Career Investigator Award from the Heart and Stroke Foundation and is the Ted Rogers Chair in Heart Function Outcomes. This study was supported by ICES, which is funded by an annual grant from the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. The opinions, results, and conclusions reported in this article are those of the authors and are independent from the funding sources. No endorsement by ICES or the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care is intended or should be inferred. Parts of this material are based on data and information compiled and provided by the Canadian Institute for Health Information. The analyses, conclusions, opinions, and statements expressed are those of the authors, and not necessarily those of Canadian Institute for Health Information.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery
PY - 2021/2
Y1 - 2021/2
N2 - Objective: We sought to determine the early and late outcomes of endovascular versus open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Methods: We performed a multicenter population-based study across the province of Ontario, Canada, from 2006 to 2017. The primary end point was mortality. Secondary end points were time to first event of a composite of mortality, permanent spinal cord injury, permanent dialysis, and stroke, the individual end points of the composite, patient disposition at discharge, hospital length of stay, myocardial infarction, and secondary procedures at follow-up. Results: A total of 664 adults undergoing surgical repair of a thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (endovascular: n = 303 [45.5%] vs open: n = 361 [54.5%]) were identified using an algorithm of administrative codes validated against the operative records. Propensity score matching resulted in 241 patient pairs. Endovascular repairs increased during the study and currently comprise more than 50% of total repairs. In the matched sample, open repair was associated with a higher incidence of in-hospital death (17.4% vs 10.8%, P =.04), complications (26.1% vs 17.4%, P =.02), discharge to rehabilitation facilities (18.7% vs 10.0%, P =.02), and longer length of stay (12 [7-21] vs 6 [3-13] days, P <.01). Long-term mortality was not significantly different (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.50), nor were the other secondary end points, with the exception of secondary procedures, which were higher in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 2.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.54-4.55). At 8 years, overall survival was 41.3% versus 44.6% after endovascular and open repair (P =.62). Conclusions: Endovascular repair was associated with improved early outcomes but higher rates of secondary procedures after discharge. Long-term survival after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair is poor and independent of repair technique.
AB - Objective: We sought to determine the early and late outcomes of endovascular versus open thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Methods: We performed a multicenter population-based study across the province of Ontario, Canada, from 2006 to 2017. The primary end point was mortality. Secondary end points were time to first event of a composite of mortality, permanent spinal cord injury, permanent dialysis, and stroke, the individual end points of the composite, patient disposition at discharge, hospital length of stay, myocardial infarction, and secondary procedures at follow-up. Results: A total of 664 adults undergoing surgical repair of a thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (endovascular: n = 303 [45.5%] vs open: n = 361 [54.5%]) were identified using an algorithm of administrative codes validated against the operative records. Propensity score matching resulted in 241 patient pairs. Endovascular repairs increased during the study and currently comprise more than 50% of total repairs. In the matched sample, open repair was associated with a higher incidence of in-hospital death (17.4% vs 10.8%, P =.04), complications (26.1% vs 17.4%, P =.02), discharge to rehabilitation facilities (18.7% vs 10.0%, P =.02), and longer length of stay (12 [7-21] vs 6 [3-13] days, P <.01). Long-term mortality was not significantly different (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-1.50), nor were the other secondary end points, with the exception of secondary procedures, which were higher in the endovascular group (hazard ratio, 2.64; 95% confidence interval, 1.54-4.55). At 8 years, overall survival was 41.3% versus 44.6% after endovascular and open repair (P =.62). Conclusions: Endovascular repair was associated with improved early outcomes but higher rates of secondary procedures after discharge. Long-term survival after thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair is poor and independent of repair technique.
KW - population-based
KW - survival
KW - thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85099115156&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.09.148
DO - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.09.148
M3 - Article
C2 - 31780062
AN - SCOPUS:85099115156
SN - 0022-5223
VL - 161
SP - 516-527.e6
JO - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
JF - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
IS - 2
ER -