Age-related trends in utilization and outcome of open and endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm in the United States, 2001-2006.

OBJECTIVE This study used a large national administrative in-hospital database to compare utilization and age-specific outcomes between open repair (OAR) and endovascular (EVAR) repair for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). METHODS Discharges with the principal International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) procedure codes for EVAR and OAR and principal diagnosis code of intact AAAs were selected from the 2001 to 2006 Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS). Weighted least-square regression was used to test the trend of utilization by age. Multiple linear and logistic regression analyses were used to assess the risk-adjusted outcomes. RESULTS Nationally, the estimated number of elective AAAs treated with EVAR increased from 11,171 in 2001 to 21,725 in 2006 (P = .003). The number of elective AAAs treated with OAR declined from 17,784 to 8451 during the same period (P < .001). By 2006, EVAR was more frequently used than OAR for patients of all ages. Compared with the younger age groups, patients aged >or=85 years had a significant increase in the total number of asymptomatic AAA repairs, driven almost entirely by an increase in the use of EVAR. Compared with open patients, EVAR patients had a significantly shorter length of hospitalization (adjusted mean, 2.99 days [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.97-3.01] vs 8.78 days [95% CI, 8.53-8.57]), less in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.23; 95% CI, 0.19-0.28), fewer in-hospital complications (OR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.25-0.28), and a higher likelihood of being discharged to home (OR, 3.95; 95% CI, 3.62-4.31). The reduction of complications from the use of EVAR versus OAR was most dramatic for the oldest patients. CONCLUSIONS As short-term surgical outcomes are consistently improving for patients undergoing AAA repair, elective EVAR has replaced OAR as the more common method of repair in the United States. The introduction of this technology has been rapidly adopted, particularly for the oldest-old surgical patients, aged >or=85 years, who previously may not have been offered surgical intervention for asymptomatic AAA. Further investigation is necessary to examine whether this trend improves the long-term survival and quality of life for this elderly population.

[1]  W. Dale,et al.  Vivid bad outcome influences the decisions of older adults about treatment timing: a randomized field experiment with an abdominal aortic aneurysm analog. , 2007, Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine.

[2]  T. Huber,et al.  Perioperative outcomes after open and endovascular repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysms in the United States during 2001. , 2004, Journal of vascular surgery.

[3]  V. Bernhard,et al.  Aorto-uni-iliac endograft for complex aortoiliac aneurysms compared with tube/bifurcation endografts: results of the EVT/Guidant trials. , 2001, Journal of vascular surgery.

[4]  R. Deyo,et al.  Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases. , 1992, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[5]  EVAR trial participants,et al.  Endovascular aneurysm repair versus open repair in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR trial 1): randomised controlled trial , 2005, The Lancet.

[6]  C. H. Lyttkens,et al.  Health care for the elderly: two cases of technology diffusion. , 2002, Social science & medicine.

[7]  R. Gillum,et al.  Epidemiology of aortic aneurysm in the United States. , 1995, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[8]  Evar Trial Participants Endovascular aneurysm repair and outcome in patients unfit for open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR trial 2): randomised controlled trial , 2005, The Lancet.

[9]  J. Matsumura,et al.  A multicenter controlled clinical trial of open versus endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm. , 2003, Journal of vascular surgery.

[10]  John A. Cowan,et al.  Effect of increasing patient age on complication rates following intact abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the United States. , 2004, The Journal of surgical research.

[11]  J. Mckinsey,et al.  Multicenter pivotal trial results of the Lifepath System for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. , 2004, Journal of vascular surgery.

[12]  Ricardo Pietrobon,et al.  Laparoscopic Versus Open Appendectomy: Outcomes Comparison Based on a Large Administrative Database , 2004, Annals of surgery.

[13]  S. Muluk,et al.  Improving aneurysm-related outcomes: nationwide benefits of endovascular repair. , 2006, Journal of vascular surgery.

[14]  Richard D. Weisel,et al.  Clinical Decision Making for Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm , 2004, Circulation.

[15]  M. Koelemay,et al.  Elective surgery of abdominal aortic aneurysms in octogenarians: a systematic review. , 2008, Journal of vascular surgery.

[16]  T. Huber,et al.  Experience in the United States with intact abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. , 2001, Journal of vascular surgery.

[17]  L. Walter,et al.  Cancer screening in elderly patients: a framework for individualized decision making. , 2001, JAMA.

[18]  J. Lindholt,et al.  Psychological consequences of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm and conservative treatment of small abdominal aortic aneurysms. , 2000, European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery.

[19]  Erik Buskens,et al.  A randomized trial comparing conventional and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. , 2004, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  A. Moskowitz,et al.  Trends, complications, and mortality in peripheral vascular surgery. , 2006, Journal of vascular surgery.

[21]  A. Comerota,et al.  Elective endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in octogenarians. , 2008, Journal of vascular surgery.

[22]  Richard W. Kobylinski,et al.  Increased cholecystectomy rate after the introduction of laparoscopic cholecystectomy , 1993 .

[23]  C. H. Lyttkens,et al.  Age diffusion never stops? Carotid endarterectomy among the elderly. , 2003, Applied health economics and health policy.

[24]  M. Pfaller,et al.  Recurrent epidemics caused by a single strain of erythromycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. The importance of molecular epidemiology. , 1993, JAMA.

[25]  S. Muluk,et al.  A decade of change in abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the United States: Have we improved outcomes equally between men and women? , 2006, Journal of vascular surgery.

[26]  Endovascular Aneurysm Repair and Outcome in Patients Unfit for Open Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (EVAR Trial 2): Randomized Controlled Trial , 2006 .

[27]  A. Bradbury,et al.  Community and hospital outcome from ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm within the catchment area of a regional vascular surgical service. , 1999, Journal of vascular surgery.

[28]  Rodney A. White,et al.  AneuRx stent graft versus open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: multicenter prospective clinical trial. , 1999, Journal of vascular surgery.

[29]  J. Dimick,et al.  Endovascular technology, hospital volume, and mortality with abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery. , 2008, Journal of Vascular Surgery.

[30]  F. Setacci,et al.  Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in octogenarians: myth or reality? , 2007, Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery.

[31]  A. Moskowitz,et al.  A statewide experience with endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: rapid diffusion with excellent early results. , 2004, Journal of vascular surgery.

[32]  M. Fillinger,et al.  Life expectancy after endovascular versus open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: results of a decision analysis model on the basis of data from EUROSTAR. , 2002, Journal of vascular surgery.