Abstract:Objective: This study investigated the outcomes of a current series of patients treated with fenestrated and branched endovascular aneurysm repair (F-BEVAR) or open surgical repair (OSR) for pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysms (pr-AAAs), including juxtarenal, suprarenal, and type IV thoracoabdominal aneurysms. This study compares the outcomes of these procedures from two high-volume centers without the bias induced by a learning curve. Methods: All patients with pr-AAAs undergoing repair at two centers between January 2010 and June 2016 were included in a prospective database. Patients undergoing F-BEVAR and OSR were propensity matched for age, sex, anatomic criteria (aortic clamp site), coronary artery disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, smoking, chronic kidney disease, aneurysm diameter, and previous aortic surgery. The primary end points were mortality and dialysis. Secondary end points included any myocardial ischemia, respiratory and early procedural complications, acute kidney injury (AKI) according to RIFLE criteria (Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss of kidney function, and End-stage renal failure), spinal cord ischemia, a composite of these complications, and postoperative intensive care unit length of stay. During follow-up, all-cause survival and freedom from reintervention were compared, as was the patency of stented vessels and renal and visceral bypasses. Late renal function deterioration was evaluated. Results: In this period, 157 F-BEVAR patients and 119 OSR patients were operated on. After 1:1 propensity matching, the study cohort consisted of 102 F-BEVARs and 102 OSRs. In the matched population, an average of 2.5 vessels were treated per patient. Univariate analysis demonstrated no significant difference in 30-day mortality (2.9% vs 2.0%; P = .68), dialysis (4.9% vs 3.9%; P = 1), cardiac ischemic complications (3.8% vs 5.9%; P = .52), pulmonary complications (5.9% vs 5.9%; P = 1), or any complications (28.4% vs 30.4%; P = .63) in the F-BEVAR and OSR groups, respectively. AKI was significantly lower in the F-BEVAR group than in the OSR group (19.6% vs 52%; P < .001), as was severe AKI (>50% decrease in glomerular filtration rate, 6.9% vs 16.7%; P = .03). There was no spinal cord ischemia. The median intensive care unit length of stay was 1 day in both groups (P = .33). During follow-up, we found occlusions of five stented vessels and three surgical bypasses. Late renal function deterioration was comparable between the two groups. According to Kaplan-Meier estimates, all-cause survival at 24, 48, and 72 months was 85.6%, 66.8%, and 55.8% after F-BEVAR and 90.5%, 82.9%, and 68.5% after OSR (P = .04). Rates of freedom from reintervention were 97.6% vs 97.5% at 24 months, 90.1% vs 93.4% at 48 months, and 63.9% vs 93.4% at 72 months in the F-BEVAR and OSR groups (P = .05), respectively. Thus, both all-cause survival and freedom from reintervention were lower in the F-BEVAR group. Conclusions: This propensity score analysis in patients with pr-AAA undergoing F-BEVAR or OSR suggests no difference in terms of 30-day mortality, dialysis, or organ-specific postoperative complications, with the exception of AKI. Postoperative AKI was significantly higher after OSR, although most patients had recovered before discharge. Our data suggest similar outcomes after F-BEVAR or OSR for pr-AAA.

Propensity Score Matched Comparison of EndoSuture versus Fenestrated Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Treatment of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms with Unfavorable Neck Anatomy

A propensity-matched comparison of fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair and open surgical repair of pararenal and paravisceral aortic aneurysms

Outcomes of surgeon-modified fenestrated-branched endograft repair for acute aortic pathology

Comparison of Open and Endovascular Repair of Complex Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Infrarenal EVAR for Penetrating Aortic Ulcer: A Comparative Study with Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Mid-Term Outcomes and Aneurysm Sac Dynamics Following Fenestrated Endovascular Aneurysm Repair after Previous Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Endovascular versus open repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms with hostile neck anatomy

Early and Late Aortic-Related Mortality and Rupture After Fenestrated-Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair of Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study

Evaluation of Hemodynamic Properties After Chimney and Fenestrated Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Versus Open Surgical Repair in Treating Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

Comparative Effectiveness of Treatment Modalities for Complex Aortic Aneurysms: A Network Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

Efficacy and Safety of Endovascular Fenestrated and Branched Grafts vs open Surgery in Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Tabular review of contemporary fenestrated-branched endovascular aortic repair experiences for treatment of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Fenestrated and Chimney/Snorkel Techniques for Endovascular Repair of Juxtarenal Aortic Aneurysms

Outcomes of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair (EVAR) Compared to Open Repair in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: An Umbrella Meta-Analysis

Two-year evaluation of fenestrated and parallel branch endografts for the treatment of juxtarenal, suprarenal, and thoracoabdominal aneurysms at a single institution

Comparison of Outcomes in Elective Endovascular Aortic Repair vs Open Surgical Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Outcomes of familial abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative

Midterm Outcomes of Antegrade In Situ Laser Fenestration of Polyester Endografts for Urgent Treatment of Aortic Pathologies Involving the Visceral and Renal Arteries

Endovascular repair of acute juxtarenal and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms with surgeon-modified fenestrated endografts

Rescue of failed endovascular aortic aneurysm repair using the fenestrated Anaconda device