Systematic review of mortality risk prediction models in the era of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has reduced perioperative mortality after abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) surgery. The objective of this systematic review was to assess existing mortality risk prediction models, and identify which are most useful for patients undergoing AAA repair by either EVAR or open surgical repair. METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was conducted for perioperative mortality risk prediction models for patients with AAA published since 2006. PRISMA guidelines were used; quality was appraised, and data were extracted and interpreted following the CHARMS guidelines. RESULTS: Some 3903 studies were identified, of which 27 were selected. A total of 13 risk prediction models have been developed and directly validated. Most models were based on a UK or US population. The best performing models regarding both applicability and discrimination were the perioperative British Aneurysm Repair score (C-statistic 0·83) and the preoperative Vascular Biochemistry and Haematology Outcome Model (C-statistic 0·85), but both lacked substantial external validation. CONCLUSION: Mortality risk prediction in AAA surgery has been modelled extensively, but many of these models are weak methodologically and have highly variable performance across different populations. New models are unlikely to be helpful; instead case-mix correction should be modelled and adapted to the population of interest using the relevant mortality predictors.

Adjusted Hospital Outcomes of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Surgery Reported in the Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: The Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA) is mandatory for all patients with primary abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in the Netherlands. The aims are to present the observed outcomes of AAA surgery against the predicted outcomes by means of V-POSSUM (Vascular-Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and Morbidity). Adjusted mortality was calculated by the original and re-estimated V(physiology)-POSSUM for hospital comparisons. METHODS: All patients operated on from January 2013 to December 2014 were included for analysis. Calibration and discrimination of V-POSSUM and V(p)-POSSUM was analysed. Mortality was benchmarked by means of the original V(p)-POSSUM formula and risk-adjusted by the re-estimated V(p)-POSSUM on the DSAA. RESULTS: In total, 5898 patients were included for analysis: 4579 with elective AAA (EAAA) and 1319 with acute abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAAA), acute symptomatic (SAAA; n = 371) or ruptured (RAAA; n = 948). The percentage of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) varied between hospitals but showed no relation to hospital volume (EAAA: p = .12; AAAA: p = .07). EAAA, SAAA, and RAAA mortality was, respectively, 1.9%, 7.5%, and 28.7%. Elective mortality was 0.9% after EVAR and 5.0% after open surgical repair versus 15.6% and 27.4%, respectively, after AAAA. V-POSSUM overestimated mortality in most EAAA risk groups (p < .01). The discriminative ability of V-POSSUM in EAAA was moderate (C-statistic: .719) and poor for V(p)-POSSUM (C-statistic: .665). V-POSSUM in AAAA repair overestimated in high risk groups, and underestimated in low risk groups (p < .01). The discriminative ability in AAAA of V-POSSUM was moderate (.713) and of V(p)-POSSUM poor (.688). Risk adjustment by the re-estimated V(p)-POSSUM did not have any effect on hospital variation in EAAA but did in AAAA. CONCLUSION: Mortality in the DSAA was in line with the literature but is not discriminative for hospital comparisons in EAAA. Adjusting for V(p)-POSSUM, revealed no association between hospital volume and treatment or outcome. Risk adjustment for case mix by V(p)-POSSUM in patients with AAAA has been shown to be important.