This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1538574408329271v1 43/3/252    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Vogel, T. R. Articles by Graham, A. M. PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Vogel, T. R. Articles by Graham, A. M. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Aortic Aneurysm Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Has the Implementation of EVAR for Ruptured AAA Improved Outcomes?

Division of Vascular Surgery, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, and The Surgical Outcomes Research Group, New Brunswick, New Jersey, vogelto{at}umdnj.edu

Viktor Y. Dombrovskiy, MD, PhD, MPH

Division of Vascular Surgery, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, and The Surgical Outcomes Research Group, New Brunswick, New Jersey

Paul B. Haser, MD

Division of Vascular Surgery, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, and The Surgical Outcomes Research Group, New Brunswick, New Jersey

Alan M. Graham, MD

Division of Vascular Surgery, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, and The Surgical Outcomes Research Group, New Brunswick, New Jersey

Objective: Previous studies have demonstrated improved outcomes with Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR) for the treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA). However, these data may not be generalizable to all regions.

Methods: Retrospective cohort study (2001-2005) using state inpatient data.

Results: 5,176 patients underwent repair of AAA. 700 repairs were performed for rAAA (618 [88%] with open surgery (OS) and 82 [12%] with EVAR). Mortality for rAAA was similar for EVAR and OS (45.1% vs. 52.4%, P = 0.21). Lack of insurance (OR = 5.1; 95%CI: 1.7-15.2) was a predictor of mortality. Cost of repair for rAAA was greater for EVAR ($51,339 ± 51,719 vs. $39,967 ± 43,354, P = 0.03) and hospital LOS was similar (14.08 ± 17.97 vs.13.42 ± 18.18; P = 0.8). Conclusion: EVAR did not offer a survival benefit in the state, had a similar hospital LOS, and was significantly more expensive. Further evaluation exploring explanations for inferior outcomes by region are required as EVAR becomes more commonly implemented for rAAA.

Key Words: ruptured • AAA • outcomes • population

This version was published on June 1, 2009

Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Vol. 43, No. 3, 252-257 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/1538574408329271


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?