Predicting risk of rupture and rupture-preventing re-intervention utilising repeated measures on aneurysm sac diameter following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair
posted on 2018-07-30, 14:14authored byIsabelle Grootes, Jessica K. Barrett, Pinar Ulug, Fiona Rohlffs, Sani Laukontaus, Riikka Tulamo, Maarit Venermo, Roger Greenhalgh, Michael J. Sweeting
Background:
Clinical and imaging surveillance practices following endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for
intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) vary considerably and compliance with
recommended lifelong surveillance is poor. This study developed a dynamic prognostic model
to enable stratification of patients at risk of future secondary rupture or rupture preventing
re-intervention (RPR) to enable the development of personalised surveillance intervals.
Method:
Baseline data and repeat measurements of post-operative aneurysm sac diameter from the
EVAR-1 and EVAR-2 trials were used to develop the model with external validation in a cohort
from Helsinki. Longitudinal mixed-effects models were fitted to trajectories of sac diameter
and model-predicted sac diameter and rate of growth were used in prognostic Cox
proportional hazards models.
Results:
785 patients from the EVAR trials were included of which 155 (20%) suffered at least one
rupture or RPR during follow-up. An increased risk was associated with pre-operative AAA
size, rate of sac growth, and the number of previously detected complications. A prognostic
model using only predicted sac growth had good discrimination at 2-years (C-index = 0.68), 3-
years (C-index= 0.72) and 5-years (C-index= 0.75) post-operation and had excellent external
validation (C-indices 0.76 to 0.79). After 5-years post-operation, growth rates above
1mm/year had a sensitivity of over 80% and specificity over 50% in identifying events
occurring within 2 years.
Conclusion:
Secondary sac growth is an important predictor of rupture or RPR. A dynamic prognostic
model has the potential to tailorsurveillance by identifying a large proportion of patients who
may require less intensive follow-up.
Funding
This study was funded by the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health
Technology Assessment programme (project number 11/36/46) and Camelia Botnar Arterial
Research Foundation. We are grateful to Matti Laine for providing data on AAA patients who
underwent elective EVAR from the Helsinki University Hospital. Additional support for this
project for work done at the University of Cambridge came from the UK Medical Research
Council (MR/L003120/1), the British Heart Foundation (RG/13/13/30194), and the NIHR
(Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre). JKB was supported by the UK Medical Research
Council (grants MR/K014811/1, MR/L501566/1 and unit programme MC_UU_00002/5).
History
Citation
British Journal of Surgery, 2018, 105(10), pp. 1294-1304
Author affiliation
/Organisation/COLLEGE OF LIFE SCIENCES/School of Medicine/Department of Health Sciences