In the event of rupture of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), mortality is very high. AAA prevalence and incidence of ruptures have been reported to be decreasing. The treatment of AAA has also undergone a change in recent decades with a shift toward endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Our aim was to evaluate how these changes have affected the elective and emergency treatment of AAA and their results in Finland.
All patients treated for AAA in Finland, a country with a population of 5.5 million, during 2000 to 2014 were searched from the registry of the Finnish Institute for Health and Welfare. Data on all patients who had died of AAA during the same time period were obtained from Statistics Finland. The data were combined and analyzed.
The annual incidence of ruptured AAA was 16.4 per 100 000 population over 50 years and decreased significantly during the study period. Over half of the 4949 patients who had a ruptured AAA died outside the hospital. Thirty-day mortality after emergency repair was 39.4%. Intact AAA repairs numbered 4956. The absolute number of annual repairs increased during the study period, and the use of EVAR became the dominant method of elective repair. Thirty-day mortality in elective AAA repair dropped significantly from 6.3% in 2000 to 2004 to 2.7% in 2010 to 2014 mostly because of the increased number of EVAR procedures with lower mortality. Long-term mortality in patients treated with EVAR was higher than in patients treated with open repair. Mortality after elective AAA repair was primarily attributable to cardiovascular causes, but there was a slightly higher proportion of AAA-related late deaths in patients treated with EVAR.
Ruptured AAA incidence for men >65 years has declined by nearly 30% in Finland, likely because of the decrease in AAA prevalence. The treatment results have improved as well for both elective and emergency repair. Increased use of EVAR has resulted in a decrease of mortality after elective AAA repair, but results of open repair have improved as well. However, late mortality from elective EVAR is surprisingly high in comparison with open repair, which may have been exaggerated by patient selection.
Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) cause 600 deaths per year in Sweden. As most patients are without symptoms prior to rupture, and about half the patients with a ruptured AAA die before arrival to hospital, the only way to reduce mortality substantially would be by screening and prophylactic treatment. The article reviews experience of screening for AAA from other European countries, data from the Swedish vascular registry (Swedvasc) and from the official registry of the causes of death in Sweden. With these data as input, a theoretical model of inviting all 65-year-old men in Sweden to take part in a screening programme for AAA is created. When the programme is fully developed after ten years, assuming an attendance rate of 75%, mortality in AAA would decrease from 630 to 346 per year. The total cost would increase from 154 to 161 million SEK (9 SEK = 1 Euro). The reason for the relatively minor increase in cost is explained by the fact that expensive emergency operations for ruptured AAA decrease by 50%. The cost per life saved would be 3,000-4,000 SEK. In conclusion, available data suggest that screening for AAA in Sweden would save many lives at a low cost.
Comment In: Lakartidningen. 2003 May 22;100(21):1874-612815871
Recently generated randomized screening trial data have provided good evidence in favour of routine screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) to reduce AAA-related deaths in men aged 65 years and older. We developed an economic model that assessed the incremental cost-utility of AAA screening to help decision makers judge the relevance of a national screening program in Canada.
We constructed a 14 health state Markov model comparing 2 cohorts of 65-year-old men, where the first cohort was invited to attend screening for AAA using ultrasonography (US) and the second cohort followed the current practice of opportunistic detection. Lifetime outcomes included the life-years gained, AAA rupture avoided, AAA-related mortality, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and costs. Transition probabilities were derived from a systematic review of the literature, and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis was carried out to examine the effect of joint uncertainty in the variables of our analysis. The perspective adopted was that of the health care provider.
Invitations to attend screening produced an undiscounted gain in life expectancy of 0.049 years and a gain in discounted QALY of 0.019 for an estimated incremental lifetime cost of CAN$118. The estimated incremental cost-utility ratio was CAN$6194 per QALY gained (95% confidence interval [CI] 1892-10 837). The numbers needed to invite to attend screening, and the numbers needed to screen to prevent 1 AAA-related death were 187 (95% CI 130-292) and 137 (95% CI 85-213), respectively. The acceptability curve showed a greater than 95% probability of the program's being cost-effective, and the model was robust to changes in the values of key parameters within plausible ranges.
Our results support the economic viability of a national screening program for men reaching 65 years of age in Canada. More clinical studies are needed to define the role of screening in subgroups at high risk, especially in the female population.
The objective of the study was to compare emergency operations for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA) by a mobile operation team, with operation for RAAA carried out at our vascular unit. During a five year period (1993-1998), 18 emergency operations were carried out for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) with rupture at the primary receiving hospital with assistance from a mobile operation team. In the same period 82 aneurysms with rupture were resected at our vascular surgical unit. Preoperatively, patients operated at the primary receiving hospitals had significantly lower blood pressure (P
BACKGROUND: The management of infrarenal aortic aneurysms in high-risk patients remains a challenge. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is associated with superior short-term mortality rates but unclear long-term results and has not been shown to improve survival in patients unfit for open repair (OR). The aim of this population-based study was to evaluate the outcome after elective EVAR compared with OR in a high-risk patient cohort. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from January 2000 to December 2006 were retrieved from the Swedish Vascular Registry. The high-risk cohort was defined as age >or=60 years, American Anesthesiologists Association (ASA) class 3 or 4, and at least one cardiac, pulmonary, or renal comorbidity. These criteria were met by 217 of 1000 EVAR patients and 483 of 2831 OR patients. Primary end points were 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality. Kaplan-Meier curves for survival and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed. RESULTS: The crude 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality rates for EVAR vs OR for the whole treatment group (n = 3831) were 1.8% vs 2.8% and 8.0% vs 7.2%, respectively. In the high-risk cohort (n = 700), EVAR patients were approximately 2 years older and renal insufficiency and diabetes mellitus were more common, and smoking was more prevalent in the OR group. About two-thirds of EVAR procedures were performed at university hospitals and one-half of OR procedures were performed at county hospitals. In the high-risk cohort, there was no difference in mortality at 30-days (EVAR, 4.6% vs OR, 3.3%), but OR had lower 1-year mortality (8.5% vs 15.9%; P = .003). More bleeding complications occurred in the EVAR group, but more pulmonary complications occurred in the OR group; however, there was no difference in cardiac, cerebrovascular, or renal complications. The mean follow-up was 3.4 years. EVAR was associated with increased mortality risk after adjusting for age, ASA class, and comorbidities (hazard ratio, 1.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-2.12; P = .02). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed a lower mortality rate for patients undergoing OR, which remained during follow-up (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Elective OR of aortic aneurysms seems to have a better outcome compared with EVAR in this specific, population-based, high-risk patient cohort after adjusting for covariates. We cannot confirm the benefit of EVAR from previous registry studies with a similar high-risk definition. In clinical practice, OR may be at least as good as EVAR in high-risk patients fit for surgery.