Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2010 Nov;140(5):1001-10. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2010.08.007.

Superior nationwide outcomes of endovascular versus open repair for isolated descending thoracic aortic aneurysm in 11,669 patients.

Author information

  • 1Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Michael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA. gopaldasr@health.missouri.edu

Abstract

OBJECTIVES:

Thoracic endovascular aneurysm repair (TEVAR) was introduced in 2005 to treat descending thoracic aortic aneurysms. Little is known about TEVAR's nationwide effect on patient outcomes. We evaluated nationwide data regarding the short-term outcomes of TEVAR and open aortic repair (OAR) procedures performed in the United States during a 2-year period.

METHODS:

From the Nationwide Inpatient Sample data, we identified patients who had undergone surgery for an isolated descending thoracic aortic aneurysm from 2006 to 2007. Patients with aneurysm rupture, aortic dissection, vasculitis, connective tissue disorders, or concomitant aneurysms in other aortic segments were excluded. Of the remaining 11,669 patients, 9106 had undergone conventional OAR and 2563 had undergone TEVAR. Hierarchic regression analysis was used to assess the effect of TEVAR versus OAR after adjusting for confounding factors. The primary outcomes were mortality and the hospital length of stay (LOS). The secondary outcomes were the discharge status, morbidity, and hospital charges.

RESULTS:

The patients who had undergone TEVAR were older (69.5 ± 12.7 vs 60.2 ± 14.2 years; P < .001) and had higher Deyo comorbidity scores (4.6 ± 1.8 vs 3.3 ± 1.8; P < .001). The unadjusted LOS was shorter for the TEVAR patients (7.7 ± 11 vs 8.8 ± 7.9 days), but the unadjusted mortality was similar (TEVAR 2.3% vs OAR 2.3%; P = 1.0). The proportion of nonelective interventions was similar between the 2 groups (TEVAR 15.9% vs OAR 15.8%; P = .9). The TEVAR and OAR techniques produced similar risk-adjusted mortality rates; however, the TEVAR patients had 60% fewer complications overall (odds ratio, 0.39; P < .001) and a shorter LOS (by 1.3 days). The TEVAR patients' hospital charges were greater by $6713 (95% confidence interval $1869 to $11,556; P < .001). However, the TEVAR patients were 4 times more likely to have a routine discharge to home.

CONCLUSIONS:

The nationwide data on TEVAR for descending thoracic aortic aneurysms have associated this procedure with better in-hospital outcomes than OAR, even though TEVAR was selectively performed in patients who were almost 1 decade older than the OAR patients. Compared with OAR, TEVAR was associated with a shorter hospital LOS and fewer complications but significantly greater hospital charges.

Copyright © 2010 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.

PMID:
20951252
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk