Open repair versus endovascular treatment of complex aortoiliac lesions in low risk patients

Abstract

Objective: The aim of the present study was to compare open surgical repair (OSR) versus endovascular repair (ER) using self-expanding covered stents for complex TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus II (TASC) class C or D aortoiliac lesions in low-risk patients, with a specific subanalysis for younger patients.

Methods: A single-center retrospective review of TASC C/D lesions treated from January 2008 to December 2017 was conducted. Patients with associated aortic aneurysm or lesions involving the entire infrarenal aorta were excluded. Thirty-day outcomes, long-term patency, limb salvage, and freedom from related reinterventions were compared between OSR and ER. "Low surgical risk" was defined as a Society for Vascular Surgery comorbidity score of ≤0.7 and age <75 years. Patients were considered "young" if aged ≤60 years. The follow-up results were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier curves. Major clinical and anatomic characteristics were evaluated for their association with patency using Cox proportional hazards.

Results: Overall, 114 patients (OSR, n = 56; ER, n = 58) were treated, of whom, 70 patients (63%) had bilateral iliac disease involvement, for a total of 182 limbs revascularized (OSR, n = 96; ER, n = 86). Iliac lesions were classified by limb as TASC C (n = 71; 39%) or D (n = 111; 61%). Their mean age was 61.4 ± 8.4 years, and the mean Society for Vascular Surgery comorbidity score was 0.51 ± 0.39, without statistically significant differences between the OSR and ER groups (0.48 ± 0.29 vs 0.56 ± 0.47; P = .357). At 30 days, the ER group had had a shorter length of hospitalization (8.5 ± 6.2 vs 2.6 ± 0.8 days; P < .001) and intensive care unit stay (0.1 ± 0.6 vs 0.9 ± 0.5 day; P < .001) than the OSR group. The cumulative medical (OSR, 7%; ER, 5%; P = .714) and surgical (OSR, 10%; ER, 8%; P = .759) complication rates were similar. At 5 years, the primary patency rate was similar between the two groups (OSR, 87.3%; ER, 81.4%; P = .317). This result was confirmed in the subgroup of "young" patients (OSR, 84.7; ER, 75.0; P = .272). The limb salvage (OSR, 98.9%; ER, 98.4%; P = .920) and freedom from related reintervention (OSR, 74.4%; ER, 73.0%; P = .703) rates were similar. This trend was also confirmed in the "young" patients for both limb salvage (OSR, 98.5%; ER, 97.6%; P = .896) and freedom from related reintervention (OSR, 76.9%; ER, 63.6%; P = .223). Multivariate analysis indicated that the only independent negative predictor of patency was female gender in the ER group (hazard ratio, 2.89; 95% confidence interval, 1.45-26.60; P = .024).

Conclusions: In the case of severe aortoiliac obstructive lesions in low-risk and young patients, ER using a covered stent can be considered as valid as OSR. In addition, it allows for shorter hospitalization and maintains a similar patency rate in the long term. However, for female patients, OSR remains the reference standard of treatment.

Keywords: Bypass; Endovascular treatment; Peripheral artery disease; Stent; Surgical risk; Young patient.

Copyright © 2019 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.