Michael Sweeting

Meta‐analysis of individual patient data to examine factors affecting growth and rupture of small abdominal aortic aneurysms

Surveillance is a common management strategy for small abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) (3·0–5·4 cm in diameter). Individual characteristics, other than diameter, may influence aneurysm growth or rupture rates.

Endovascular or open repair strategy for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: 30 day outcomes from IMPROVE randomised trial.

Objective To assess whether a strategy of endovascular repair (if aortic morphology is suitable, open repair if not) versus open repair reduces early mortality for patients with suspected ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Design Randomised controlled trial. Setting 30 vascular centres (29 UK, 1 Canadian), 2009-13. Participants 613 eligible patients (480 men) with a clinical diagnosis of ruptured aneurysm. Interventions 316 patients were randomised to the endovascular strategy (275 confirmed ruptures, 174 anatomically suitable for endovascular repair) and 297 to open repair (261 confirmed ruptures). Main outcome measures 30 day mortality, with 24 hour and in-hospital mortality, costs, and time and place of discharge as secondary outcomes. Results 30 day mortality was 35.4% (112/316) in the endovascular strategy group and 37.4% (111/297) in the open repair group: odds ratio 0.92 (95% confidence interval 0.66 to 1.28; P=0.62); odds ratio after adjustment for age, sex, and Hardman index 0.94 (0.67 to 1.33). Women may benefit more than men (interaction test P=0.02) from the endovascular strategy: odds ratio 0.44 (0.22 to 0.91) versus 1.18 (0.80 to 1.75). 30 day mortality for patients with confirmed rupture was 36.4% (100/275) in the endovascular strategy group and 40.6% (106/261) in the open repair group (P=0.31). More patients in the endovascular strategy than in the open repair group were discharged directly to home (189/201 (94%) v 141/183 (77%); P<0.001). Average 30 day costs were similar between the randomised groups, with an incremental cost saving for the endovascular strategy versus open repair of £1186 (€1420;

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the growth and rupture rates of small abdominal aortic aneurysms: implications for surveillance intervals and their cost-effectiveness

1939) (95% confidence interval −£625 to £2997). Conclusions A strategy of endovascular repair was not associated with significant reduction in either 30 day mortality or cost. Longer term cost effectiveness evaluations are needed to assess the full effects of the endovascular strategy in both men and women. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN48334791.OBJECTIVE To assess whether a strategy of endovascular repair (if aortic morphology is suitable, open repair if not) versus open repair reduces early mortality for patients with suspected ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. DESIGN Randomised controlled trial. SETTING 30 vascular centres (29 UK, 1 Canadian), 2009-13. PARTICIPANTS 613 eligible patients (480 men) with a clinical diagnosis of ruptured aneurysm. INTERVENTIONS 316 patients were randomised to the endovascular strategy (275 confirmed ruptures, 174 anatomically suitable for endovascular repair) and 297 to open repair (261 confirmed ruptures). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES 30 day mortality, with 24 hour and in-hospital mortality, costs, and time and place of discharge as secondary outcomes. RESULTS 30 day mortality was 35.4% (112/316) in the endovascular strategy group and 37.4% (111/297) in the open repair group: odds ratio 0.92 (95% confidence interval 0.66 to 1.28; P=0.62); odds ratio after adjustment for age, sex, and Hardman index 0.94 (0.67 to 1.33). Women may benefit more than men (interaction test P=0.02) from the endovascular strategy: odds ratio 0.44 (0.22 to 0.91) versus 1.18 (0.80 to 1.75). 30 day mortality for patients with confirmed rupture was 36.4% (100/275) in the endovascular strategy group and 40.6% (106/261) in the open repair group (P=0.31). More patients in the endovascular strategy than in the open repair group were discharged directly to home (189/201 (94%) v 141/183 (77%); P<0.001). Average 30 day costs were similar between the randomised groups, with an incremental cost saving for the endovascular strategy versus open repair of £1186 (€1420;

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

1939) (95% confidence interval -£625 to £2997). CONCLUSIONS A strategy of endovascular repair was not associated with significant reduction in either 30 day mortality or cost. Longer term cost effectiveness evaluations are needed to assess the full effects of the endovascular strategy in both men and women. TRIAL REGISTRATION Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN48334791.

Surveillance intervals for small abdominal aortic aneurysms: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs; 3.0-5.4 cm in diameter) are usually asymptomatic and managed by regular ultrasound surveillance until they grow to a diameter threshold (commonly 5.5 cm) at which surgical intervention is considered. The choice of appropriate surveillance intervals is governed by the growth and rupture rates of small AAAs, as well as their relative cost-effectiveness. OBJECTIVES The aim of this series of studies was to inform the evidence base for small AAA surveillance strategies. This was achieved by literature review, collation and analysis of individual patient data, a focus group and health economic modelling. DATA SOURCES We undertook systematic literature reviews of growth rates and rupture rates of small AAAs. The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE on OvidSP, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials 2009 Issue 4, ClinicalTrials.gov, and controlled-trials.com were searched from inception up until the end of 2009. We also obtained individual data on 15,475 patients from 18 surveillance studies. REVIEW METHODS Systematic reviews of publications identified 15 studies providing small AAA growth rates, and 14 studies with small AAA rupture rates, up to December 2009 (later updated to September 2012). We developed statistical methods to analyse individual surveillance data, including the effects of patient characteristics, to inform the choice of surveillance intervals and provide inputs for health economic modelling. We updated an existing health economic model of AAA screening to address the cost-effectiveness of different surveillance intervals. RESULTS In the literature reviews, the mean growth rate was 2.3 mm/year and the reported rupture rates varied between 0 and 1.6 ruptures per 100 person-years. Growth rates increased markedly with aneurysm diameter, but insufficient detail was available to guide surveillance intervals. Based on individual surveillance data, for each 0.5-cm increase in AAA diameter, growth rates increased by about 0.5 mm/year and rupture rates doubled. To control the risk of exceeding 5.5 cm to below 10% in men, on average a 7-year surveillance interval is sufficient for a 3.0-cm aneurysm, whereas an 8-month interval is necessary for a 5.0-cm aneurysm. To control the risk of rupture to below 1%, the corresponding estimated surveillance intervals are 9 years and 17 months. Average growth rates were higher in smokers (by 0.35 mm/year) and lower in patients with diabetes (by 0.51 mm/year). Rupture rates were almost fourfold higher in women than men, doubled in current smokers and increased with higher blood pressure. Increasing the surveillance interval from 1 to 2 years for the smallest aneurysms (3.0-4.4 cm) decreased costs and led to a positive net benefit. For the larger aneurysms (4.5-5.4 cm), increasing surveillance intervals from 3 to 6 months led to equivalent cost-effectiveness. LIMITATIONS There were no clear reasons why the growth rates varied substantially between studies. Uniform diagnostic criteria for rupture were not available. The long-term cost-effectiveness results may be susceptible to the modelling assumptions made. CONCLUSIONS Surveillance intervals of several years are clinically acceptable for men with AAAs in the range 3.0-4.0 cm. Intervals of around 1 year are suitable for 4.0-4.9-cm AAAs, whereas intervals of 6 months would be acceptable for 5.0-5.4-cm AAAs. These intervals are longer than those currently employed in the UK AAA screening programmes. Lengthening surveillance intervals for the smallest aneurysms was also shown to be cost-effective. Future work should focus on optimising surveillance intervals for women, studying whether or not the threshold for surgery should depend on patient characteristics, evaluating the usefulness of surveillance for those with aortic diameters of 2.5-2.9 cm, and developing interventions that may reduce the growth or rupture rates of small AAAs. FUNDING The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Use of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors is associated with increased growth rate of abdominal aortic aneurysms

BACKGROUND Short-term survival benefits of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) versus open repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms have been shown in randomised trials, but this early survival benefit is lost after a few years. We investigated whether EVAR had a long-term survival benefit compared with open repair. METHODS We used data from the EVAR randomised controlled trial (EVAR trial 1), which enrolled 1252 patients from 37 centres in the UK between Sept 1, 1999, and Aug 31, 2004. Patients had to be aged 60 years or older, have aneurysms of at least 5·5 cm in diameter, and deemed suitable and fit for either EVAR or open repair. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using computer-generated sequences of randomly permuted blocks stratified by centre to receive either EVAR (n=626) or open repair (n=626). Patients and treating clinicians were aware of group assignments, no masking was used. The primary analysis compared total and aneurysm-related deaths in groups until mid-2015 in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ISRCTN (ISRCTN55703451). FINDINGS We recruited 1252 patients between Sept 1, 1999, and Aug 31, 2004. 25 patients (four for mortality outcome) were lost to follow-up by June 30, 2015. Over a mean of 12·7 years (SD 1·5; maximum 15·8 years) of follow-up, we recorded 9·3 deaths per 100 person-years in the EVAR group and 8·9 deaths per 100 person-years in the open-repair group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1·11, 95% CI 0·97-1·27, p=0·14). At 0-6 months after randomisation, patients in the EVAR group had a lower mortality (adjusted HR 0·61, 95% CI 0·37-1·02 for total mortality; and 0·47, 0·23-0·93 for aneurysm-related mortality, p=0·031), but beyond 8 years of follow-up open-repair had a significantly lower mortality (adjusted HR 1·25, 95% CI 1·00-1·56, p=0·048 for total mortality; and 5·82, 1·64-20·65, p=0·0064 for aneurysm-related mortality). The increased aneurysm-related mortality in the EVAR group after 8 years was mainly attributable to secondary aneurysm sac rupture (13 deaths [7%] in EVAR vs two [1%] in open repair), with increased cancer mortality also observed in the EVAR group. INTERPRETATION EVAR has an early survival benefit but an inferior late survival compared with open repair, which needs to be addressed by lifelong surveillance of EVAR and re-intervention if necessary. FUNDING UK National Institute for Health Research, Camelia Botnar Arterial Research Foundation.

Cost effectiveness of interferon alpha or peginterferon alpha with ribavirin for histologically mild chronic hepatitis C.

IMPORTANCE Small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs [3.0 cm-5.4 cm in diameter]) are monitored by ultrasound surveillance. The intervals between surveillance scans should be chosen to detect an expanding aneurysm prior to rupture. OBJECTIVE To limit risk of aneurysm rupture or excessive growth by optimizing ultrasound surveillance intervals. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION Individual patient data from studies of small AAA growth and rupture were assessed. Studies were identified for inclusion through a systematic literature search through December 2010. Study authors were contacted, which yielded 18 data sets providing repeated ultrasound measurements of AAA diameter over time in 15,471 patients. DATA EXTRACTION AAA diameters were analyzed using a random-effects model that allowed for between-patient variability in size and growth rate. Rupture rates were analyzed by proportional hazards regression using the modeled AAA diameter as a time-varying covariate. Predictions of the risks of exceeding 5.5-cm diameter and of rupture within given time intervals were estimated and pooled across studies by random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS AAA growth and rupture rates varied considerably across studies. For each 0.5-cm increase in AAA diameter, growth rates increased on average by 0.59 mm per year (95% CI, 0.51-0.66) and rupture rates increased by a factor of 1.91 (95% CI, 1.61-2.25). For example, to control the AAA growth risk in men of exceeding 5.5 cm to below 10%, on average, a 7.4-year surveillance interval (95% CI, 6.7-8.1) is sufficient for a 3.0-cm AAA, while an 8-month interval (95% CI, 7-10) is necessary for a 5.0-cm AAA. To control the risk of rupture in men to below 1%, the corresponding estimated surveillance intervals are 8.5 years (95% CI, 7.0-10.5) and 17 months (95% CI, 14-22). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE In contrast to the commonly adopted surveillance intervals in current AAA screening programs, surveillance intervals of several years may be clinically acceptable for the majority of patients with small AAA.

Meta-analysis of rare and adverse event data.

OBJECTIVES To evaluate whether either angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or other classes of antihypertensive drug attenuate or increase growth rates of small infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms. METHODS Prospective cohort study of 1701 patients enrolled in the UK Small Aneurysm Trial or associated study at 93 hospitals between 1991 and 1995 and who had at least two ultrasound measurements of aneurysm diameter and baseline drug prescription data recorded. Abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter was measured in the anterior-posterior plane using ultrasound. The mean growth rate was estimated through a mixed-effects linear growth model. RESULTS Mean aneurysm growth rate in 169 patients taking ACE inhibitors at baseline was 3.33 mm/y vs 2.77 mm/y in the remaining 1532 patients, P = .009. The significance of this finding did not alter after adjustment for known confounders. The prescription of any antihypertensive agent and other specific classes of antihypertensive drugs were not found to be associated with aneurysm growth rate. CONCLUSION These results show that patients taking ACE inhibitors have faster aneurysm growth and are in conflict with the observation from a large Canadian data-base that aneurysm patients taking ACE inhibitors are less likely to present with aneurysm rupture. There is an urgent need for a randomized trial to assess whether ACE inhibitors are beneficial or harmful to patients with aneurysms below the threshold size for surgical intervention.

Observations from the IMPROVE trial concerning the clinical care of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm

Background: For patients with mild chronic hepatitis C the cost effectiveness of antiviral therapy is unknown. Aims: To assess whether antiviral therapy (either interferon α or peginterferon α combined with ribavirin) is cost effective at a mild stage compared with waiting and only treating those cases who progress to moderate disease. Patients: Cases with mild chronic hepatitis C. Methods: A cost effectiveness model which estimates long term costs and outcomes for patients with mild chronic hepatitis C. The model uses effectiveness and cost data from the UK mild hepatitis C randomised controlled trial, combined with estimates of disease progression and cost from observational studies. Results: Antiviral treatment at a mild rather than a moderate stage improved outcomes measured by quality adjusted life years (QALYS) gained. The mean cost per QALY gained from antiviral treatment with interferon α-2b and ribavirin, compared with no treatment at a mild stage, was £4535 (

An evidence synthesis approach to estimating Hepatitis C Prevalence in England and Wales

7108) for patients with genotype non-1 and £25 188 (