Open aneurysm repair in elderly patients not candidates for endovascular repair (EVAR): Comparison with patients undergoing EVAR or preferential open repair.

Abstract

The authors reviewed a 2-year experience with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair to determine if patients who were excluded from endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) because of anatomic criteria (Group III) represented a higher risk for subsequent open aneurysm repair than either patients undergoing EVAR (Group II) or those patients who preferentially underwent open repair (Group I). Between January 2001 and December 2003, 107 patients underwent AAA repair. Open repair was recommended in patients <70 years of age and without significant comorbidities (Group I). There were 35 patients in Group I; 72 patients were evaluated for EVAR; 29 patients underwent EVAR (Group II), and 43 were excluded and underwent open repair (Group III). Exclusion criteria were those recommended by the graft manufacturers. Patients in Group I were significantly younger than those in Groups II and III (p < 0.0001). Gender, incidence of diabetes, and hypertension were similar in all groups. Patients in Group III had a greater incidence of coronary artery disease (CAD) than those in Groups I and II, trending toward statistical significance (p = 0.06). Aneurysm size in Group II was statistically smaller than in Group I or III. Group III had significantly more complications (25.6% vs 5.7% and 6.9%) than either Group I or II (p < 0.015). Cardiac complications were similar in all groups. Three patients in Group III required prolonged intubation and 3 in Group III developed renal insufficiency. A history of CAD was predictive of complications (21.8% vs 5.8%, p < 0.024), as was inclusion in Group III. There were 2 deaths in this series, both in Group III. Length of stay was significantly less in Group II (4.17 +/-2.36 days) than in Group I (6.57 +/-1.84 days) or Group III (12.30 +/-9.82 days) (p = 0.0001). Open aneurysm repair can be safely performed in younger good-risk patients (Group I) with results equivalent to EVAR (Group II) but with slightly longer length of stay (LOS). In older patients with suitable anatomy EVAR can be performed with minimal morbidity and short LOS. Older patients not suitable for EVAR (Group III) constitute a higher risk group of patients because of increased incidence of CAD and the need for more complex repairs. However, the mortality rate in this group was only 4.6%.