Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Outcomes of Elective and Non-elective Fenestrated-branched Endovascular Aortic Repair for Treatment of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms

  • International Multicenter Aortic Research Group
  • University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
  • Medical University of Warsaw
  • Mayo Clinic Rochester, MN
  • University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf
  • University of Lille
  • Vita-Salute San Raffaele University
  • Brescia Civil Hospital
  • Maastricht University
  • Alma Mater University, Bologna, Italy
  • Lund University
  • University of Massachusetts Medical School
  • University of California at San Francisco
  • University of Alabama at Birmingham
  • University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
  • Uppsala University
  • University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
  • University of Pennsylvania
  • University of Lisbon
  • University Hospital Munich
  • Université Paris-Saclay
  • University of Washington, Seattle
  • Hospital de Santa Marta
  • Harvard Medical School
  • Amsterdam UMC
  • Waikato Hospital

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

243 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To describe outcomes after elective and non-elective fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair (FB-EVAR) for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms (TAAAs). BACKGROUND: FB-EVAR has been increasingly utilized to treat TAAAs; however, outcomes after non-elective versus elective repair are not well described. METHODS: Clinical data of consecutive patients undergoing FB-EVAR for TAAAs at 24 centers (2006-2021) were reviewed. Endpoints including early mortality and major adverse events (MAEs), all-cause mortality, and aortic-related mortality (ARM), were analyzed and compared in patients who had non-elective versus elective repair. RESULTS: A total of 2603 patients (69% males; mean age 72±10 year old) underwent FB-EVAR for TAAAs. Elective repair was performed in 2187 patients (84%) and non-elective repair in 416 patients [16%; 268 (64%) symptomatic, 148 (36%) ruptured]. Non-elective FB-EVAR was associated with higher early mortality (17% vs 5%, P <0.001) and rates of MAEs (34% vs 20%, P <0.001). Median follow-up was 15 months (interquartile range, 7-37 months). Survival and cumulative incidence of ARM at 3 years were both lower for non-elective versus elective patients (50±4% vs 70±1% and 21±3% vs 7±1%, P <0.001). On multivariable analysis, non-elective repair was associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 1.92; 95% CI] 1.50-2.44; P <0.001) and ARM (hazard ratio, 2.43; 95% CI, 1.63-3.62; P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Non-elective FB-EVAR of symptomatic or ruptured TAAAs is feasible, but carries higher incidence of early MAEs and increased all-cause mortality and ARM than elective repair. Long-term follow-up is warranted to justify the treatment.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)568-577
Number of pages10
JournalAnnals of Surgery
Volume278
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2023

Keywords

  • elective repair
  • fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair
  • non-elective repair
  • thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Outcomes of Elective and Non-elective Fenestrated-branched Endovascular Aortic Repair for Treatment of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this