Logo del repository
  1. Home
 
Opzioni

The Association Between Body Mass Index and Death Following Elective Endovascular and Open Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms in the Vascular Quality Initiative

D'Oria, Mario
•
Scali, Salvatore
•
Neal, Dan
altro
Stone, David H.
2023
  • journal article

Periodico
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF VASCULAR AND ENDOVASCULAR SURGERY
Abstract
Objective: The effect of body mass index (BMI) on post-operative outcomes after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair remains poorly defined. The association between BMI and death following elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open aneurysm repair (OAR) of AAA in a large national quality registry is investigated. Methods: All elective AAA repairs within the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI; 2010 to September 2021) were reviewed (EVAR, n = 53 426; OAR, n = 9 479). All analyses were conducted separately for EVAR and OAR patients. The primary end points were 30 day mortality and five year survival rates. Study cohorts were divided into World Health Organisation BMI categories (C1 < 18.5, C2 18.5 ≤ BMI < 25, C3 25 ≤ BMI < 30, C4, 30 ≤ BMI < 35, C5 35 ≤ BMI < 40, C6 ≥ 40). BMI was examined as both a categorical and continuous variable. Logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression were used for risk adjustment. Results: Among EVAR patients, BMI distribution was C1, 1 216 (2%); C2, 14 687 (28%); C3, 20 516 (38%); C4, 11 352 (21%); C5, 3 947 (7%); C6, 1 708 (3%). Class 1, 2, and 6 BMI patients experienced an increased 30 day mortality rate (C1 2.6%; C2 1.3%; C6 1.4% vs. C3 – 5 0.7%; p < .001) and C1 and C2 had correspondingly inferior long term survival (five years: C1 69 ± 3%; C2 79 ± 1% vs. C3 – 6 86 – 88 ± 2%; log rank p < .001). These survival disparities persisted after risk adjustment for multiple confounders. In the OAR cohort, BMI distribution was C1, 280 (3%); C2, 2 862 (30%); C3, 3 587 (38%); C4, 1 940 (21%); C5, 581 (6%); C6, 229 (2%). Crude 30 day mortality rates were increased for both the lowest and highest BMI patients (C1 12%, C6 7% vs. C2 – 5 3 – 4%; p < .001); these differences also persisted in long term survival (five years: C1 71 ± 6%, C6 82 ± 6% vs. C2 – 6 85 – 88 ± 3%; log rank p < .001). In risk adjusted analysis, both low and high BMI OAR patients had an increased 30 day and long term mortality rate. Conclusion: Within the VQI, both the extreme low (< 18.5) and high (≥ 40) BMI groups experienced an increased 30 day mortality rate after both elective EVAR and OAR. By comparison, while the lowest BMI cohort was significantly associated with decreased long term survival after both procedures, the highest BMI group only experienced reduced long term survival after OAR. Based upon this large real world registry analysis of elective AAA repairs, differential metabolic signatures exist within extreme BMI categories, which may inform peri-operative risk stratification and clinical decision making.
DOI
10.1016/j.ejvs.2023.01.047
WOS
WOS:001046681900001
Archivio
https://hdl.handle.net/11368/3105242
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/scopus/2-s2.0-85159921397
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078588423000813
Diritti
closed access
license:copyright editore
license uri:iris.pri02
FVG url
https://arts.units.it/request-item?handle=11368/3105242
Soggetti
  • Aortic aneurysm

  • Body mass index

  • Endovascular repair

  • Mortality

  • Open repair

  • Outcomes

google-scholar
Get Involved!
  • Source Code
  • Documentation
  • Slack Channel
Make it your own

DSpace-CRIS can be extensively configured to meet your needs. Decide which information need to be collected and available with fine-grained security. Start updating the theme to match your nstitution's web identity.

Need professional help?

The original creators of DSpace-CRIS at 4Science can take your project to the next level, get in touch!

Realizzato con Software DSpace-CRIS - Estensione mantenuta e ottimizzata da 4Science

  • Impostazioni dei cookie
  • Informativa sulla privacy
  • Accordo con l'utente finale
  • Invia il tuo Feedback