Endovascular stent grafting and open surgical replacement for chronic thoracic aortic aneurysms: a systematic review and prospective cohort study
Sharples L, Sastry P, Freeman C, Gray J, McCarthy A, Chiu Y, Bicknell C, McMeekin P, Vallabhaneni SR, Cook A, Vale L, Large S
Record ID 32018002286
English
Authors' objectives:
The management of chronic thoracic aortic aneurysms includes conservative management, watchful waiting, endovascular stent grafting and open surgical replacement. The Effective Treatments for Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms (ETTAA) study investigates timing and intervention choice. To describe pre- and post-intervention management of and outcomes for chronic thoracic aortic aneurysms.
Authors' results and conclusions:
The review identified five comparative cohort studies (endovascular stent grafting patients, n = 3955; open surgical replacement patients, n = 21,197). Pooled short-term all-cause mortality favoured endovascular stent grafting (odds ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.51 to 0.98; no heterogeneity). Data on survival beyond 30 days were mixed. Fewer short-term complications were reported with endovascular stent grafting. The Delphi study included 20 experts (13 centres). For patients with aneurysms of ≤ 6.0 cm in diameter, watchful waiting was preferred. For patients with aneurysms of > 6.0 cm, open surgical replacement was preferred in the arch, except for elderly or high-risk patients, and in the descending aorta if patients had connective tissue disorders. Otherwise endovascular stent grafting was preferred. Between 2014 and 2018, 886 patients were recruited (watchful waiting, n = 489; conservative management, n = 112; endovascular stent grafting, n = 150; open surgical replacement, n = 135). Pre-intervention death rate was 8.6% per patient-year; 49.6% of deaths were aneurysm related. Death rates were higher for women (hazard ratio 1.79, 95% confidence interval 1.25 to 2.57; p = 0.001) and older patients (age 61–70 years: hazard ratio 2.50, 95% confidence interval 0.76 to 5.43; age 71–80 years: hazard ratio 3.49, 95% confidence interval 1.26 to 9.66; age > 80 years: hazard ratio 7.01, 95% confidence interval 2.50 to 19.62; all compared with age
Authors' methods:
A systematic review of intervention effects; a Delphi study of 360 case scenarios based on aneurysm size, location, age, operative risk and connective tissue disorders; and a prospective cohort study of growth, clinical outcomes, costs and quality of life. Thirty NHS vascular/cardiothoracic units. Patients aged > 17 years who had existing or new aneurysms of ≥ 4 cm in diameter in the arch, descending or thoracoabdominal aorta. Endovascular stent grafting and open surgical replacement. The study was limited by small numbers of patients receiving interventions and because only 53% of patients were suitable for both interventions.
Authors' identified further research:
Further research should include an analysis of the risk factors for growth/rupture and long-term outcomes.
Details
Project Status:
Completed
URL for project:
https://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hta/1114703
Year Published:
2022
URL for published report:
https://www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hta/ABUT7744#/abstract
URL for additional information:
English
English language abstract:
An English language summary is available
Publication Type:
Full HTA
Country:
England, United Kingdom
DOI:
10.3310/ABUT7744
MeSH Terms
- Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic
- Stents
- Endovascular Procedures
- Aorta, Thoracic
- Watchful Waiting
- Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation
Keywords
- AORTIC ANEURYSM
- THORACIC
- TOMOGRAPHY
- X-RAY COMPUTED
- AORTA AND TREATMENT OUTCOME
Contact
Organisation Name:
NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme
Contact Address:
NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health and Care Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK
Contact Name:
journals.library@nihr.ac.uk
Contact Email:
journals.library@nihr.ac.uk
This is a bibliographic record of a published health technology assessment from a member of INAHTA or other HTA producer. No evaluation of the quality of this assessment has been made for the HTA database.