Influence of baseline kidney dysfunction on perioperative renal outcomes after endovascular aneurysm repair with suprarenal fixation

Conflicting evidence exists regarding the comparative effects of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with and without suprarenal fixation. We compare outcomes in patients treated by EVAR with baseline normal kidney function and moderate and severe chronic kidney disease. Patients with normal kidney...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of vascular surgery 2021-01, Vol.73 (1), p.92-98
Hauptverfasser: Pujari, Amit, Ramos, Christopher R., Duwayri, Yazan, Rajani, Ravi R., Jordan Jr, William D., Crawford, Robert S., Benarroch-Gampel, Jaime
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Conflicting evidence exists regarding the comparative effects of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with and without suprarenal fixation. We compare outcomes in patients treated by EVAR with baseline normal kidney function and moderate and severe chronic kidney disease. Patients with normal kidney function (glomerular filtration rate [GFR] ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2) or moderate (GFR = 30-59 mL/min/1.73 m2) or severe (GFR 2 mg/dL without dialysis or new dialysis requirements, were analyzed within the first 30 days with results stratified by degree of kidney disease. A total of 5534 patients underwent EVAR, with 3225 (58.3%) receiving a device using a suprarenal fixation system. Suprarenal fixation systems were less commonly used for symptomatic patients (11.0% vs 13.7%; P = .002) and patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (4.5% vs 6.3%; P = .01). There was no difference in baseline kidney function between groups. EVAR with suprarenal fixation was associated with more renal complications (1.40% vs 0.65%; P = .008). In subgroup analysis, patients with moderate kidney dysfunction (n = 1780) had more renal complications (2.2% vs 0.8%; P = .02) with suprarenal fixation systems. No differences were seen in patients with normal kidney function (0.4% vs 0.2%; P = .32; n = 3597) or severe kidney dysfunction (14.3% vs 10.2%; P = .45; n = 157). This difference was driven mostly by postoperative elevation of creatinine concentration (0.6% vs 0.2%; P = .03) without requirements for new dialysis (0.8% vs 0.4%; P = .08). After adjustments with multivariate logistic regression models, EVAR with suprarenal fixation was associated with more renal complications (odds ratio, 2.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.32-5.34). In our study, EVAR with suprarenal fixation devices was associated with more perioperative renal complications in patients with moderate kidney dysfunction. Long-term evaluation of these patients undergoing EVAR should be considered.
ISSN:0741-5214
1097-6809
DOI:10.1016/j.jvs.2020.03.062