Early and Long-Term Outcomes of Endovascular Aortic Repair in Young and Low Surgical Risk Patients in the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment.

Abstract

PURPOSE\nTo investigate early- and long-term outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in young and low surgical risk patients.\n\n\nMETHODS\nThe global registry for endovascular aortic treatment (GREAT) was queried for all patients with AAA undergoing standard EVAR; patients were excluded if had previous AAA repair or underwent concomitant procedures. Young patients were defined if age <60; surgical risk was assessed through the validated Medicare perioperative risk score (MPRS) based on age, sex, renal function, heart failure, and peripheral vascular disease. Patients were classified as low (MPRS<3), average (MPRS 3-11), or high (MPRS>11) risk. Young versus older patients and low-risk versus average/high-risk patients were compared. The primary endpoints were early (30\u2009days) major adverse events (MAEs), 5-year freedom from overall mortality, aortic-related mortality, and freedom from device-related reinterventions. Time-to-event endpoints were calculated by Kaplan-Meier curves.\n\n\nRESULTS\nOf 3217 included patients, 182 (6%) were <60\u2009years old, 956 (30%) had a low surgical risk, 1561 (49%) an average risk, 700 (22%) a high risk. Young patients had a less angulated proximal neck (27.2±18.4° vs 30.9±21.5°; p=0.05); in low-risk compared to average/high-risk patients, a longer neck length (3±1.8 vs 2.8±1.4\u2009cm; p=0.01) and lower neck angulation (29.7±21.8° vs 33.2±22.2°; p=0.01) were present. Young age alone had no significant impact on early mortality (0% vs 0.6%; p=0.62.) and MAEs (3.9% vs 6.1%; p=0.20), while these were significantly lower in low-risk compared to average/high-risk patients (early mortality: 0.1% vs 0.7%, p=0.04; MAEs: 4.1% vs 6.7%, p=0.005). At 5\u2009years, overall survival was significantly higher in young (88% vs 76%; p<0.001) and lower-risk (77% vs 54%; p<0.001) patients; low-risk patients also had significantly decreased aortic-related mortality (0% vs 2%; p=0.04) and reintervention rates (6% vs 11%; p=0.007). There were no statistically significant differences in mortality (0% vs 2%; p=0.42) and reintervention rate (10% vs 10%; p=1.00) between young and older patients.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nIn this real-world registry, EVAR was more often offered in cases with suitable anatomy in young and low-risk patients. Low operative risk, rather than young age alone, predicted excellent early outcomes and low 5-year mortality, aortic-related mortality, and reintervention rates.