Contemporary Experience with Paravisceral Aortic Aneurysm (PVAAA) Repair in a Tertiary Center

Ann Vasc Surg. 2021 Aug;75:368-379. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2021.01.109. Epub 2021 Apr 2.

Abstract

Objectives: To describe contemporary outcomes from a single center capable of both complex open and endovascular aortic repair for paravisceral aortic aneurysms (PVAAA).

Methods: Data on all patients receiving open or endovascular (endo) treatment for aortic aneurysms with proximal extent at or above the renal arteries and distal to the inferior pulmonary ligament (IPL) were reviewed. Coarsened exact matching (CEM) on age, aneurysm type, gender, coronary artery disease (CAD), previous aortic surgery and symptomatic status created balanced cohorts for outcomes comparisons.

Results: Between October, 2006 and February, 2018, 194 patients were treated for juxtarenal (40%), pararenal (21%), paravisceral (6%) and Type 4 thoracoabdominal (34%) aortic aneurysms with open (81, 42%) or endo (113, 58%) at a single tertiary center. Endo repairs included renal coverage with a bifurcated graft (2%), unilateral (13%) or bilateral (4%) renal snorkels, Z-fen (15%), multi-branched graft (IDE protocol; 62%) and unique complex configurations (4%). On multivariable analysis, patients selected for open surgery were more likely to be symptomatic, whereas older patients, female patients and those with Type 4 TAAA extent were more often selected for endovascular treatment. Matching based on the significant independent covariates reduced the open and endovascular groups by one-third. Survival at 30 days was 97% for endo and 94% for open repair, 98% for both subgroups when excluding symptomatic cases, and was not different between the matched groups (98% vs 89%; P=0.23). Hospital and ICU stays were longer in open patients (8 vs. 10 days, 2 vs. 4, both P≤0.001). Post-op CVA, MI, lower extremity ischemia, surgical site infections and reoperation were not different between matched groups (all p>0.05), while pulmonary and intestinal complications, as well as grade 1/2 renal dysfunction by RIFLE criteria, were more common after open repair (all P<0.05). Spinal cord ischemia was significantly more frequent in the unmatched Endo group (11% vs. 1%, P=0.02), but this difference was not significant after matching. Composite major aortic complications was no different between treatment groups (unmatched P=0.91, matched P=0.87). Endo treatment resulted in patients more frequently discharged to home (84% vs. 66%, P=0.02). Reintervention after 30 days occurred more frequently in the endo group (P=0.002). Estimated survivals at 1 and 5 years for endo and open are 96% vs. 81% and 69% vs. 81% respectively (Log-rank P=0.57).

Conclusions: Contemporary repair of PVAAA demonstrates safe outcomes with durable survival benefit when patients are well-selected for open or complex endovascular repair. We believe these data have implications for off-label device use in the treatment of PVAAA, and that open repair remains an essential option for younger, good risk patients in experienced centers.