Home > Journals > International Angiology > Past Issues > Articles online first > International Angiology 2021 Jun 01



To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian


Publication history
Cite this article as



International Angiology 2021 Jun 01

DOI: 10.23736/S0392-9590.21.04654-X


language: English

Appropriateness of surgery performed for abdominal aortic aneurysm at tertiary hospitals in Spain

Xavier BONFILL 1, 2, 3 , M. Jesús QUINTANA 1, 2, 3, Jose R. ESCUDERO 3, 4, 5, Manuel MIRALLES 6, Joan FITÉ 4, Ederi MIKELARENA 7, Borja CASTEJÓN 8, Marta GARNICA 8, Inés FERNÁNDEZ DE VALDERRAMA 9, Ana RODRIGUEZ-MONTALBAN 9, José I. PIJOAN 2, 10, Sergi BELLMUNT-MONTOYA 3, 5, 11, 12, AAA Spanish study group

1 Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Public Health, University Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain; 2 CIBER for Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Madrid, Spain; 3 Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain; 4 Joint Service of Angiology, Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau-Hospital Dos de Maig, Barcelona, Spain; 5 CIBER for Cardiovascular Diseases (CIBERCV), Madrid, Spain; 6 Department of Surgery, University of Valencia, Valencia, Spain; 7 Donostia University Hospital, San Sebastián, Spain; 8 Ruber Internacional Hospital, Madrid, Spain; 9 XII de Octubre University Hospital, Madrid, Spain; 10 Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Cruces University Hospital. Biocruces-Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Barakaldo, Spain; 11 Department of Angiology, Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Vall d’Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain; 12 Vall d’Hebron Research Institute (VHIR), Barcelona, Spain


BACKGROUND: To analyze the appropriateness of the type of repair (open or endovascular) performed for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in five university hospitals in Spain, according to evidence-based recommendations.
METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective cross-sectional study of patients with AAA who underwent elective open surgical repair (OSR) or endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). Data were collected on demographic and clinical variables and type of surgical repair. A pair of vascular surgeons from each participating hospital performed a blinded assessment based on GRADE recommendations. The concordance between the two evaluators and the agreement between their evidence-based recommendation and the procedure actually performed were assessed.
RESULTS: A total of 186 patients were selected; 179 were included. Mean age was 72.5 years (standard deviation [SD], 8.4), mean Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was 2.04 (SD, 1.9). OSR was performed in 53.2% (n=99) and EVAR in 46.8% (n=87) of cases. Overall, 65.9% (118/179) of interventions performed were considered appropriate: 50% (47/94) of OSRs and 83.5% (71/85) of EVARs. The patient characteristics were similar for all the hospitals, but the chosen surgical technique did show significant differences among these centers. There were no significant differences among the hospitals in the proportion of cases judged as appropriate, either overall (p=0.346) or for each type of procedure (p=0.531 and p=0.538 for OSR and EVAR, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the majority of the AAA repairs performed were appropriate according to GRADE recommendations. A higher proportion of EVARs were considered appropriate than OSRs. Choice of AAA repair should be standardized through the use of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines, while incorporating patient preferences, to reduce the existing variability and ensure appropriate selection of AAA repair technique.

KEY WORDS: Abdominal aortic aneurysm; Endovascular aneurysm repair; Open surgical aneurysm repair; Appropriate

top of page