Comparison of fenestrated endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms not suitable for standard endovascular repair.

Background: Abdominal aortic aneurysms that are unsuitable for a standard endovascular repair (EVAR) could be considered for fenestrated endovascular repair (f-EVAR). The aim of this study was to conduct a risk-adjusted retrospective concurrent cohort comparison of f-EVAR and open repair for such aneurysms.

Methods: All patients who underwent repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm that was unsuitable for a standard EVAR due to inadequate neck within one institution between January 2006 and December 2010 were identified. Case notes were retrieved for clinical data, Vascular Physiological and Operative Severity Score for enUmeration of Mortality and Morbidity (V-POSSUM) score, and aneurysm morphology. Computed tomography scans were reviewed to establish aneurysm morphology.

Results: A total of 107 patients were identified. The open surgery cohort included 54 patients (35 men) who were a median age of 72 years (interquartile range [IQR], 9.5; range, 60-86 years). The aortic cross-clamp was infrarenal in 20 patients, suprarenal or above in 21, and inter-renal in eight. Postoperatively, 63 major complications were noted in 30 patients, nine of whom required 16 reinterventions. Cumulative hospital stay of the cohort was 1170 days (median, 12; IQR, 13; range, 1-205 days) of which 234 days (median, 28; IQR, 36; range, 1-77 days) were in the intensive therapy unit (ITU). Perioperative mortality was 9.2% (n = 5), exactly as estimated by V-POSSUM. The f-EVAR cohort included 53 patients (47 men) who were a median age of 76 years (IQR, 11.50; range, 55-87 years). Two fenestrations and one scallop was the most frequent configuration (n = 31). Postoperatively, 37 major complications were noted in 18 patients, six requiring reintervention. Hospital stay was 559 days (median, 7; IQR, 4.5; range, 4-64 days), of which 31 days (median, 4; IQR, 10.5; range, 1-15 days) were in the ITU. Two patients died perioperatively (3.7%), resulting in an observed crude absolute risk reduction of 5.5% compared with open repair. The V-POSSUM estimated perioperative death in five patients (9.4%) in the f-EVAR cohort. In a hypothetic scenario of the f-EVAR cohort undergoing open repair, V-POSSUM estimated seven deaths (13.2%), resulting in an estimated risk-adjusted absolute risk reduction due to f-EVAR of 9.5%.

Conclusions: In this group of patients, f-EVAR reduced mortality and morbidity substantially compared with open repair and also reduced total hospital stay and ITU utilization.