Open surgical repair of juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms in the elderly is not associated with increased thirty-day mortality compared with fenestrated endovascular grafting

Objective: Endovascular repair of juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (JAAAs) with fenestrated grafts (fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair [FEVAR]) has been reported to decrease operative mortality and morbidity compared with open surgical repair (OSR). However, previous comparisons of OSR and FEVAR have not necessarily included patients with comparable clinical profiles and aneurysm extent. Although FEVAR has often been chosen as the first-line therapy for high-risk patients such as the elderly, many patients will not have anatomy favorable for FEVAR. At present, a paucity of data has examined the operative outcomes of OSR in elderly patients for JAAAs relative to FEVAR. Therefore, we chose to perform a propensity-matched comparison of OSR and FEVAR for JAAA repair in patients aged >= 70 years. Methods: Patients aged >= 70 years who had undergone elective nonruptured JAAA repairs from 2012 to 2018 were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) targeted endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and AAA databases. Patients who had undergone FEVAR were identified in the targeted EVAR database as those who had received the Cook Zenith Fenestrated endograft (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind). Because our study specifically examined JAAAs, those patients who had undergone OSR with supraceliac proximal clamping or concomitant renal/visceral revascularization were excluded. A 1:1 propensity-match algorithm matched the OSR and FEVAR patients by preoperative clinical and demographic characteristics, operative indications, and aneurysm extent. The 30-day outcomes, including mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, and pulmonary and renal complications, were compared between the propensity-matched OSR and FEVAR groups. Results: A 1:1 propensity match was achieved, and the final analysis included 136 OSR patients and 136 FEVAR patients. No significant differences were found in 30-day mortality (4.4% vs 3.7%; odds ratio [OR], 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36-4.06; P = .759) between the OSR and FEVAR groups. OSR was associated with a higher incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events compared with FEVAR; however, the trend was not statistically significant (8.1% vs 3.7%; OR, 2.31; 95% CI, 0.78-6.82; P = .131). Compared with FEVAR, the OSR group had significantly greater rates of pulmonary complications (19.1% vs 3.7%; OR, 6.19; 95% CI, 2.30-16.67; P < .001) and renal complications (8.1% vs 2.2%; OR, 3.90; 95% CI, 1.06-14.31; P = .040). Conclusions: In the samples assessed in the present study, the results with OSR of JAAAs in the elderly did not differ from those of FEVAR with respect to 30-day mortality despite a greater incidence of pulmonary and renal complications. Although FEVAR should remain the first-line therapy for JAAAs in elderly patients, OSR might be an acceptable alternative for select patients with anatomy unfavorable for FEVAR.

Automated summary

A propensity-matched comparison of OSR and FEVAR for elderly patients undergoing JAAA repair found that there was no significant difference in 30-day mortality between the two groups, although OSR was associated with higher rates of pulmonary and renal complications compared to FEVAR.