Raquel Vicario-Feliciano, Ahsan Zil-E-Ali, Faisal Aziz
{"title":"血管内腹主动脉修补术(EVAR)后,β受体阻滞剂会增加死亡率,但不会减少再介入治疗。","authors":"Raquel Vicario-Feliciano, Ahsan Zil-E-Ali, Faisal Aziz","doi":"10.1016/j.avsg.2024.07.104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Predictors of sac behavior after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and the impact of sac behavior on long-term survival are not well known. There are limited multicenter trials studying the impact of beta blockers (BBs) on sac behavior. BBs have consistently failed to show a benefit on abdominal aortic aneurysm sac regression in patients with connective tissue disorders and the general population. This study aims to assess the association between BBs and sac behavior after EVAR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients undergoing EVAR registered in Vascular Quality Initiative (2003-2021) stratified by BB and no BB on discharged after an index procedure were assessed at follow-up of 30 days and 1 year. The primary outcomes included mortality and reintervention at 30 days and 1 year. The causes of reintervention were also studied at the defined time endpoints. Categorical and continuous variables were analyzed separately for association between the 2 groups. A P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 50,411 patients, stratified by BB (28,866; 57.3%), and no BB (21,545; 42.7%) were studied. Patients with hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, prior history of coronary artery bypass graft or percutaneous coronary intervention, prior angioplasty or stent, lower extremity bypass, carotid surgery, major amputation, and smokers were more likely to be on a BB at the time of discharge (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in reinterventions when comparing patients with and without BB (P = 0.061). At 30-day follow-up, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups for any cause of reintervention. At 1-year follow-up, patients on BB were less likely to need reintervention for graft occlusion (no BB 18.70%, BB 11.77%, P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in reintervention for all other causes at 1-year follow-up. There was an increase in 30-day (no BB 0.20%, BB 0.33%, P = 0.007) and 1-year mortality (no BB 2.35%, BB 3.19%, P < 0.001) in patients on BBs. A time to event adjusted analysis based on Cox proportional hazard model revealed a 26% higher risk of 1-year mortality for patients on BB (hazard ratio: 1.26 [1.10-1.41] P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite theoretical benefits of BBs on aneurysm behavior, review of the largest national vascular surgery database shows that patients on BBs do not have lower incidence of endovascular reinterventions after EVAR while additionally showing a higher mortality in this patient population.</p>","PeriodicalId":8061,"journal":{"name":"Annals of vascular surgery","volume":" ","pages":"395-404"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Beta Blockers are Associated with Increased Mortality Without a Decrease in Reinterventions After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Repair (EVAR).\",\"authors\":\"Raquel Vicario-Feliciano, Ahsan Zil-E-Ali, Faisal Aziz\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.avsg.2024.07.104\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Predictors of sac behavior after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and the impact of sac behavior on long-term survival are not well known. There are limited multicenter trials studying the impact of beta blockers (BBs) on sac behavior. BBs have consistently failed to show a benefit on abdominal aortic aneurysm sac regression in patients with connective tissue disorders and the general population. This study aims to assess the association between BBs and sac behavior after EVAR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients undergoing EVAR registered in Vascular Quality Initiative (2003-2021) stratified by BB and no BB on discharged after an index procedure were assessed at follow-up of 30 days and 1 year. The primary outcomes included mortality and reintervention at 30 days and 1 year. The causes of reintervention were also studied at the defined time endpoints. Categorical and continuous variables were analyzed separately for association between the 2 groups. A P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 50,411 patients, stratified by BB (28,866; 57.3%), and no BB (21,545; 42.7%) were studied. Patients with hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, prior history of coronary artery bypass graft or percutaneous coronary intervention, prior angioplasty or stent, lower extremity bypass, carotid surgery, major amputation, and smokers were more likely to be on a BB at the time of discharge (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in reinterventions when comparing patients with and without BB (P = 0.061). At 30-day follow-up, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups for any cause of reintervention. At 1-year follow-up, patients on BB were less likely to need reintervention for graft occlusion (no BB 18.70%, BB 11.77%, P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in reintervention for all other causes at 1-year follow-up. There was an increase in 30-day (no BB 0.20%, BB 0.33%, P = 0.007) and 1-year mortality (no BB 2.35%, BB 3.19%, P < 0.001) in patients on BBs. A time to event adjusted analysis based on Cox proportional hazard model revealed a 26% higher risk of 1-year mortality for patients on BB (hazard ratio: 1.26 [1.10-1.41] P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite theoretical benefits of BBs on aneurysm behavior, review of the largest national vascular surgery database shows that patients on BBs do not have lower incidence of endovascular reinterventions after EVAR while additionally showing a higher mortality in this patient population.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8061,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of vascular surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"395-404\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of vascular surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avsg.2024.07.104\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of vascular surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avsg.2024.07.104","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Beta Blockers are Associated with Increased Mortality Without a Decrease in Reinterventions After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Repair (EVAR).
Introduction: Predictors of sac behavior after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and the impact of sac behavior on long-term survival are not well known. There are limited multicenter trials studying the impact of beta blockers (BBs) on sac behavior. BBs have consistently failed to show a benefit on abdominal aortic aneurysm sac regression in patients with connective tissue disorders and the general population. This study aims to assess the association between BBs and sac behavior after EVAR.
Methods: Patients undergoing EVAR registered in Vascular Quality Initiative (2003-2021) stratified by BB and no BB on discharged after an index procedure were assessed at follow-up of 30 days and 1 year. The primary outcomes included mortality and reintervention at 30 days and 1 year. The causes of reintervention were also studied at the defined time endpoints. Categorical and continuous variables were analyzed separately for association between the 2 groups. A P value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results: A total of 50,411 patients, stratified by BB (28,866; 57.3%), and no BB (21,545; 42.7%) were studied. Patients with hypertension, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, coronary artery disease, prior history of coronary artery bypass graft or percutaneous coronary intervention, prior angioplasty or stent, lower extremity bypass, carotid surgery, major amputation, and smokers were more likely to be on a BB at the time of discharge (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in reinterventions when comparing patients with and without BB (P = 0.061). At 30-day follow-up, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups for any cause of reintervention. At 1-year follow-up, patients on BB were less likely to need reintervention for graft occlusion (no BB 18.70%, BB 11.77%, P = 0.002). There was no significant difference in reintervention for all other causes at 1-year follow-up. There was an increase in 30-day (no BB 0.20%, BB 0.33%, P = 0.007) and 1-year mortality (no BB 2.35%, BB 3.19%, P < 0.001) in patients on BBs. A time to event adjusted analysis based on Cox proportional hazard model revealed a 26% higher risk of 1-year mortality for patients on BB (hazard ratio: 1.26 [1.10-1.41] P < 0.001).
Conclusions: Despite theoretical benefits of BBs on aneurysm behavior, review of the largest national vascular surgery database shows that patients on BBs do not have lower incidence of endovascular reinterventions after EVAR while additionally showing a higher mortality in this patient population.
期刊介绍:
Annals of Vascular Surgery, published eight times a year, invites original manuscripts reporting clinical and experimental work in vascular surgery for peer review. Articles may be submitted for the following sections of the journal:
Clinical Research (reports of clinical series, new drug or medical device trials)
Basic Science Research (new investigations, experimental work)
Case Reports (reports on a limited series of patients)
General Reviews (scholarly review of the existing literature on a relevant topic)
Developments in Endovascular and Endoscopic Surgery
Selected Techniques (technical maneuvers)
Historical Notes (interesting vignettes from the early days of vascular surgery)
Editorials/Correspondence