Morphological suitability for endovascular repair, non-intervention rates, and operative mortality in women and men assessed for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: systematic reviews with meta-analysis

Abstract

1 ArticlesMorphological suitability for endovascular repair, non-intervention rates, and operative mortality in women and men assessed for intact abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: systematic reviews with meta-analysis Pinar Ulug, Michael J Sweeting, Regula S von Allmen, Simon G Thompson, Janet T Powell, on behalf of the SWAN collaborators* Summary Background Prognosis for women with abdominal aortic aneurysm might be worse than the prognosis for men. We aimed to systematically quantify the differences in outcomes between men and women being assessed for repair of intact abdominal aortic aneurysm using data from study periods after the year 2000.Methods In these systematic reviews and meta-analysis, we identified studies (randomised, cohort, or cross-sectional) by searching MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and grey literature published between Jan 1, 2005, and Sept 2, 2016, for two systematic reviews and Jan 1, 2009, and Sept 2, 2016, for one systematic review. Studies were included if they were of both men and women, with data presented for each sex separately, with abdominal aortic aneurysms being assessed for aneurysm repair by either endovascular repair (EVAR) or open repair. We conducted three reviews based on whether studies reported the proportion morphologically suitable (within manufacturers' instructions for use) for EVAR (EVAR suitability review), non-intervention rates (non-intervention review), and 30-day mortality (operative mortality review) after intact aneurysm repair. Studies had to include at least 20 women (for the EVAR suitability review), 20 women (for the non-intervention review), and 50 women (for the operative mortality review). Studies were excluded if they were review articles, editorials, letters, or case reports. For the operative review, studies were also excluded if they only provided hazard ratios or only reported in-hospital mortality. We assessed the quality of the studies using the NewcastleOttawa scoring system, and contacted authors for the provision of additional data if needed. We combined results across studies by random-effects meta-analysis. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42016043227.Findings Five studies assessed the morphological eligibility for EVAR (1507 men, 400 women). The overall pooled proportion of women eligible (34%) for EVAR was lower than it was in men (54%; odds ratio [OR] 0·44, 95% CI 0·32-0·62). Four single-centre studies reported non-intervention rates (1365 men, 247 women). The overall pooled non-intervention rates were higher in women (34%) than men (19%; OR 2·27, 95% CI 1·21-4·23). The review of 30-day mortality included nine studies (52 018 men, 11 076 women). The overall pooled estimate for EVAR was higher in women (2·3%) than in men (1·4%; OR 1·67, 95% CI 1·38-2·04). The overall estimate for open repair also was higher in women (5·4%) than in men (2·8%; OR 1·76, 95% CI 1·35-2·30).Interpretation Compared with men, a smaller proportion of women are eligible for EVAR, a higher proportion of women are not offered intervention, and operative...

Sex differences in repair rates and outcomes of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm

“…A systematic review and meta‐analysis of sex differences in outcome in patients with intact AAA had similar results to the present study, showing that men were 2·27 times more likely to receive aneurysm repair than women. Earlier studies of patients with rAAA in the 1990s and the beginning of the 21st century reported a disadvantage for women with regard to repair rates.…”

“…Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is four to six times more common in men than in women, but women have an increased risk of rupture at smaller aneurysm diameter. For intact AAA, women are less often eligible for endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and have worse outcomes, but such sex differences are debated regarding patients with ruptured AAA (rAAA). Although the incidence of rAAA seems to be declining in general, it is unclear whether this is true for both men and women.…”

Sex differences in national rates of repair of emergency abdominal aortic aneurysm

“…It is difficult to suggest specific reasons for lower repair rates in women; further studies are needed to explore this issue. Evidence from studies that examined non‐intervention decisions for elective AAA suggest that women not offered elective repair either had unfavourable anatomy for EVAR or suffered from severe co‐morbidities that increased their risk of death after open repair. In the same interval, vascular services underwent a quality improvement programme in the UK with a focus on improving elective AAA outcomes and reducing the in‐hospital mortality rate to less than 3 per cent.…”

“…This was because the prevalence of AAA is higher in men, and the randomized controlled studies that investigated screening for AAA either did not include women or were underpowered to examine the benefit of screening in women. Evidence from observational studies has demonstrated that, when an AAA is found incidentally, the turn‐down rate for elective surgery is significantly higher in women.…”

Percutaneous endovascular abdominal aneurysm repair: State‐of‐the art

“…As with most atherosclerotic clinical trials, women have been underrepresented in AAA trials. Due to smaller iliac artery dimensions, short aortic aneurysm neck length, and excessive angulation, only 34% of women are suitable for EVAR . The ongoing LUCY Trial (TriVascular Evaluation of Females Who Are Underrepresented Candidates for AAA Repair) is a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter registry to evaluate a low‐profile endovascular treatment in female patients…”