-
Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Predicting aortic complications after endovascular aneurysm repair.
- A Karthikesalingam, P J Holt, A Vidal-Diez, E C Choke, B O Patterson, L J Thompson, T Ghatwary, M J Bown, R D Sayers, and M M Thompson.
- St George’s Vascular Institute, Room 4.007, St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust, Blackshaw Road, London SW17 0QT, UK. akarthik@sgul.ac.uk
- Br J Surg. 2013 Sep 1;100(10):1302-11.
BackgroundLifelong surveillance is standard after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR), but remains costly, heterogeneous and poorly calibrated. This study aimed to develop and validate a scoring system for aortic complications after EVAR, informing rationalized surveillance.MethodsPatients undergoing EVAR at two centres were studied from 2004 to 2010. Preoperative morphology was quantified using three-dimensional computed tomography according to a validated protocol, by investigators blinded to outcomes. Proportional hazards modelling was used to identify factors predicting aortic complications at the first centre, and thereby derive a risk score. Sidak tests between risk quartiles dichotomized patients to low- or high-risk groups. Aortic complications were reported by Kaplan-Meier analysis and risk groups were compared by log rank test. External validation was by comparison of aortic complications between risk groups at the second centre.ResultsSome 761 patients, with a median age of 75 (interquartile range 70-80) years, underwent EVAR. Median follow-up was 36 (range 11-94) months. Physiological variables were not associated with aortic complications. A morphological risk score incorporating maximum aneurysm diameter (P < 0·001) and largest common iliac diameter (measured 10 mm from the internal iliac origin; P = 0·004) allocated 75 per cent of patients to a low-risk group, with excellent discrimination between 5-year rates of aortic complication in low- and high-risk groups at both centres (centre 1: 12 versus 31 per cent, P < 0·001; centre 2: 12 versus 45 per cent, P = 0·002).ConclusionThe risk score uses commonly available morphological data to stratify the rate of complications after EVAR. The proposals for rationalized surveillance could provide clinical and economic benefits.© 2013 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f370b/f370b44d1a004df56edc8267f91b4a82cdb5a705" alt="alt text"
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.