Open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair is still necessary in an era of advanced endovascular repair

Abstract

Objective: Recent advances in endovascular aneurysm repair have overcome substantial anatomic barriers associated with short and challenging necks. With greater range to treat more difficult anatomy from an endovascular approach, one would assume the need of open surgical repair (OSR) would be diminished. The purpose of our study was to determine the need for OSR for abdominal aortic aneurysms, in a tertiary academic setting, with a moderate volume (10-15 cases/year) of fenestrated endografting being performed.

Methods: An Institutional Review Board approved retrospective review was performed of all patients who underwent elective aortic aneurysm repair between January 2010 and July 2014. Computed tomography scans for patients who underwent OSR were reviewed and anatomic characteristics obtained. Instructions for use of (IFU) a commercially available fenestrated device (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind) were used to determine if open repair patients had anatomy amenable to advanced endovascular repair.

Results: During the study interval, 415 patients underwent abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Of those patients who underwent elective aneurysm repair, 105 patients had OSR. The study subsequently excluded 11 patients because they underwent secondary interventions after a failed endovascular repair and thus were not further evaluated. Also excluded were 18 patients who had OSR for an emergency intervention. The remaining 76 patients (35 female, 41 male; average age, 72 ± 8 years) had OSR and were outside the IFU of the fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR) device. The average diameter of the abdominal aorta was 5.9 cm. Indications for OSR were an aneurysm neck <4 mm (71%), inclusion of at least 1 visceral vessel (69.7%), unilateral iliac artery aneurysms (15.5%), bilateral iliac artery aneurysms (14.3%), iliac artery tortuosity >40° of angulation (37.6%), extensive aortic thrombus (23.2%), and aortic neck angulation >45° (11.8%). Rejected patients had an average of 1.7 ± 0.8 anatomic constraints (range 1-4) that prevented use of the FEVAR device.

Conclusions: With evidence to support the strict adherence to IFU protocols of the FEVAR device in patients, our institution's practice has been to continue to perform open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair for patients with anatomy outside device protocols. Although it was thought that the decreased requirement of aortic neck required to deploy an endograft would lead to an increased patient population amenable to endovascular repair, there is still a clinically significant need for open aortic surgery.