LAUSR

OBJECTIVE Although EVAR re-intervention is common, conversion to open repair(EVAR-c) occurs less frequently but can be associated with significant technical complexity and perioperative risk. There is a paucity of data highlighting the evolution of peri-procedural results surrounding EVAR-c and change in practice patterns, especially for referral centers that increasingly manage EVAR failures. The purpose of this analysis was to perform a temporal analysis of our EVAR-c experience and describe changes in patient selection, operative details and outcomes. METHODS A retrospective single center review of all open AAA repairs was performed(2002-2019) and EVAR-c procedures were subsequently analyzed. EVAR-c patients(n=184) were categorized into two different eras(2002-2009, n=21; 2010-2019, n=163) for comparison. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used for risk-adjusted comparisons. RESULTS A significant increase in EVAR-c as an indication for any type of open aneurysm repair was detected(9%→27%;p<.001). Among EVAR-c patients, no change in age or individual comorbidities was evident[mean age: 71±9 years]; however, the proportion of female subjects(p=.01) and ASA classification >3 declined(p=.05). There was no difference in prevalence[50% vs. 43%;p=.6] or number[median-1.5(0, 5)] of pre-admission EVAR re-interventions; however, time to re-intervention decreased(median: 23[6,34] vs. 0[0,22] months;p=.005). In contrast, time to EVAR-c significantly increased(median: 16[9,39]vs. 48[20,83]-months;p=.008). No difference in frequency of non-elective presentation[mean-52%;p=.9] or indication was identified but a trend toward increasing mycotic EVAR-c was observed(5% vs. 15%;p=.09). Use of retroperitoneal exposure(14% vs. 77%;p<.0001), suprarenal cross-clamp application[6286%;p=.04] and visceral-ischemia time(median: 0[0,11] vs. 5[0,20]min;p=.05) all increased. In contrast, estimated blood loss(P-trend=.03) and procedure-time(p=.008) decreased. The unadjusted elective 30-day mortality rate improved but did not reach statistical significance[elective: 10% vs. 5%;p=.5] with no change for non-elective operations[18% vs. 16%;p=.9]. However, a significantly decreased risk of complications was evident(OR 0.88, 95%CI .8-.9;p=.01). One and 3-year survival was similar over time. CONCLUSION EVAR-c is now a common indication for open AAA repair. Patients frequently present non-electively and at increasingly later intervals after their index EVAR. Despite increasing technical complexity, decreased complication risk and comparable survival can be anticipated when patients are managed at a high-volume aortic referral center.