Advertisement

Editor's Choice – Assessment of Correlation Between Mean Size of Infrarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm at Time of Intact Repair Against Repair and Rupture Rate in Nine Countries

Open ArchivePublished:March 23, 2020DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2020.01.024

      Objective

      This study aimed to analyse the mean abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) diameter for repair in nine countries, and to determine variation in mean AAA diameter for elective AAA repair and its relationship to rupture AAA repair rates and aneurysm related mortality in corresponding populations.

      Methods

      Data on intact (iAAA) and ruptured infrarenal AAA (rAAA) repair for the years 2010–2012 were collected from Denmark, England, Finland, Germany, Hungary, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, and the USA. The rate of iAAA repair and rAAA per 100 000 inhabitants above 59 years old, mean AAA diameter for iAAA repair and rAAA repair, and the national rates of rAAA were assessed. National cause of death statistics were used to estimate aneurysm related mortality. Direct standardisation methods were applied to the national mortality data. Logistic regression and analysis of variance model adjustments were made for age groups, sex, and year.

      Results

      There was a variation in the mean diameter of iAAA repair (n = 34 566; range Germany = 57 mm, Denmark = 68 mm). The standardised iAAA repair rate per 100000 inhabitants varied from 10.4 (Hungary) to 66.5 (Norway), p<.01, and the standardised rAAA repair rate per 100 000 from 5.8 (USA) to 16.9 (England), p<.01. Overall, there was no significant correlation between mean diameter of iAAA repair and standardised iAAA rate (r2 = 0.04, p = .3). There was no significant correlation between rAAA repair rate (n = 12 628) with mean diameter of iAAA repair (r2 = 0.2, p = .1).

      Conclusion

      Despite recommendations from learned society guidelines, data indicate variations in mean diameter for AAA repair. There was no significant correlation between mean diameter of AAA repair and rates of iAAA repair and rAAA repair. These analyses are subject to differences in disease prevalence, uncertainties in rupture rates, validations of vascular registries, causes of death and registrations.

      Keywords

      Introduction

      The guidelines by learned societies recommend that intervention should be considered once the maximum diameter reaches 55 mm.
      • Chaikof E.L.
      • Dalman R.L.
      • Eskandari M.K.
      • Jackson B.M.
      • Lee W.A.
      • Mansour M.A.
      • et al.
      The society for vascular surgery practice guidelines on the care of patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm.
      • Ferket B.S.
      • Grootenboer N.
      • Colkesen E.B.
      • Visser J.J.
      • van Sambeek M.R.
      • Spronk S.
      • et al.
      Systematic review of guidelines on abdominal aortic aneurysm screening.
      • Wanhainen A.
      • Verzini F.
      • Van Herzeele I.
      • Allaire E.
      • Bown M.
      • Cohnert T.
      • et al.
      Editor's Choice – European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2019 clinical practice guidelines on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms.
      In women, consideration for repair should be done when an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) reaches 50 mm in diameter.
      • Chaikof E.L.
      • Dalman R.L.
      • Eskandari M.K.
      • Jackson B.M.
      • Lee W.A.
      • Mansour M.A.
      • et al.
      The society for vascular surgery practice guidelines on the care of patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm.
      ,
      • Wanhainen A.
      • Verzini F.
      • Van Herzeele I.
      • Allaire E.
      • Bown M.
      • Cohnert T.
      • et al.
      Editor's Choice – European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2019 clinical practice guidelines on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms.
      These treatment strategies are largely based on trials including patients with small AAA (40–55 mm) who were randomised to open surgery or surveillance, the UK Small Aneurysm Trial (UKSAT),
      • Powell J.T.
      • Brady A.R.
      • Brown L.C.
      • Fowkes F.G.
      • Greenhalgh R.M.
      • Ruckley C.V.
      • et al.
      Long-term outcomes of immediate repair compared with surveillance of small abdominal aortic aneurysms.
      and the Aneurysm Detection and Management (ADAM) trial.
      • Lederle F.A.
      • Wilson S.E.
      • Johnson G.R.
      • Reinke D.B.
      • Littooy F.N.
      • Acher C.W.
      • et al.
      Immediate repair compared with surveillance of small abdominal aortic aneurysms.
      These studies did not find a statistically significant difference in long term survival between immediate open repair and surveillance for aneurysms < 55 mm in diameter. Two trials performed in the endovascular era, the Comparison of Surveillance vs. Aortic Endografting for Small Aneurysm Repair (CAESAR)
      • Cao P.
      • De Rango P.
      • Verzini F.
      • Parlani G.
      • Romano L.
      • Cieri E.
      Comparison of surveillance versus aortic endografting for small aneurysm repair (CAESAR): results from a randomised trial.
      and Positive Impact of Endovascular Options for Treating Aneurysms Early (PIVOTAL)
      • Ouriel K.
      • Clair D.G.
      • Kent K.C.
      • Zarins C.K.
      Endovascular repair compared with surveillance for patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysms.
      trials, compared immediate EVAR with surveillance for AAAs between 4.1 and 5.4 cm (CAESAR) and 4.0 and 5.0 cm (PIVOTAL) and found no survival benefit for early EVAR. This was confirmed by a Cochrane database review
      • Filardo G.
      • Powell J.T.
      • Martinez M.A.
      • Ballard D.J.
      Surgery for small asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms.
      that did not demonstrate an advantage to immediate repair by open surgery or EVAR for small AAAs.
      Published “real world” data however show that countries operate on AAAs at a much larger diameter.
      • Beck A.W.
      • Sedrakyan A.
      • Mao J.
      • Venermo M.
      • Faizer R.
      • Debus S.
      • et al.
      Variations in abdominal aortic aneurysm care: a report from the international consortium of vascular registries.
      Furthermore, considerable international variation exists in clinical practice where the proportion of AAAs that are repaired at a diameter of less than 55 mm has been reported to range from 6.4% to 29.0% in various countries.
      • Mani K.
      • Venermo M.
      • Beiles B.
      • Menyhei G.
      • Altreuther M.
      • Loftus I.
      • et al.
      Regional differences in case mix and peri-operative outcome after elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the VASCUNET database.
      This highlights the potential equipoise that may exist as to when to offer surgery. The ultimate goal of elective AAA repair is to reduce the risk of rupture and burden of disease in AAA related mortality, but assessment of rupture rate and incidence of aortic rupture mortality is challenging. Studies suggest that increasing the number of small AAA repairs due to a lowered threshold for intact repair will in turn increase the overall denominator, reducing the proportion of patients treated for rAAA even though the incidence of ruptures may remain unchanged.
      • Beck A.W.
      • Sedrakyan A.
      • Mao J.
      • Venermo M.
      • Faizer R.
      • Debus S.
      • et al.
      Variations in abdominal aortic aneurysm care: a report from the international consortium of vascular registries.
      This study aimed to analyse the practice of AAA repair in different European and non-European countries, to determine variation in mean AAA diameter for iAAA repair and its impact on corresponding aneurysm related mortality.
      • Chaikof E.L.
      • Blankensteijn J.D.
      • Harris P.L.
      • White G.H.
      • Zarins C.K.
      • Bernhard V.M.
      • et al.
      Reporting standards for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.
      The guidelines by learned societies recommend that for men, intervention should be considered for an intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) once the maximum diameter reaches 55 mm. This study highlights the variation in the mean diameter of intact AAA repair when nine different European and non-European countries were analysed. However, there were no significant correlations between AAA size at the time of intact repair and rupture AAA repair rates or death from ruptured AAA across the participating countries. Thus this study does not validate previous reports suggesting that a lower mean diameter at time of intact AAA repair would reduce AAA related mortality at a national level.

      Materials and methods

       Participating countries

      This project was carried out in collaboration with the VASCUNET quality improvement network of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS). Data on iAAA and rAAA between 1 January 2010 and 31 December 2012 were collected from nine countries (Denmark, England, Finland, Germany, Hungary, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, and USA). Ethics approval was obtained for this analysis as required based on national regulations for participating countries, who provided the following data:
      • 1.
        In hospital data for infrarenal iAAA and rAAA repair. Data collected involved the age, gender, date of surgery, AAA diameter at repair and in hospital death (pre-discharge) or within 30 days of surgery.
      • 2.
        National rAAA mortality data using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes I71.3 and I71.8 and on iAAA using the ICD-10 codes I71.4 and I71.9.

       In hospital data source

      In hospital data were provided from vascular registries or administrative data (hospital episode statistics) when not available. These registries consisted of national (Denmark, Hungary, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, England), regional (Finland), and multicentre (Germany, USA) databases. The estimated coverage of the participating vascular registries was > 90% for aortic procedures performed in Denmark, Hungary, New Zealand, Sweden, England, and the Helsinki region in Finland, and 80% in Norway. The German data were based on population based hospital episode statistics. Data on diameter in Denmark were provided as aggregate mean for the years 2014–2016. US data were obtained from National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) for period 1 January 2011 till 31 December 2012.

       Data source for aneurysm related mortality

      Data on the frequency of aneurysm related deaths during the period from 2010 through 2012 in the USA were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (www.cdc.gov), and data in England were obtained from the Office of National Statistics (www.ons.gov.uk). Data from Germany were obtained from causes of death statistics of the Federal Statistical Office (www.destatis.de). Data from European Countries were obtained from Eurostat (http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat) while data from New Zealand was obtained from the Ministry of Health Mortality Collection.

       Outcome

      The primary outcome of the study was to determine whether the mean iAAA diameter correlates with the rAAA repair rate. The secondary outcomes of the study were to determine whether the mean iAAA repair diameter is related to the nations' standardised rAAA incidence rate. The national rAAA rate was determined by combining the number of patients surviving rAAA repair and the number of deaths due to rAAA (including deaths after attempt at rAAA repair) based on the data on aneurysm related mortality per country. Gender adjusted population for older than 59 years per country was used as the denominator for calculation of all incidence rates per 100 000 inhabitants. Subgroup analyses were carried out to analyse the effect of gender on outcome. For subgroup gender analysis, data from Germany and Denmark were not available (i.e. data provided was a combination with no identifier) while data from Norway could not be standardised by age of patients.

       Statistical analysis

      Direct standardisation methods were applied to the national mortality data using the over 59 year old English population in 2012 (obtained from Office of National Statistics) as a reference. This was done to enable comparison of the results with other published studies using the English population.
      • Karthikesalingam A.
      • Vidal-Diez A.
      • Holt P.J.
      • Loftus I.M.
      • Schermerhorn M.L.
      • Soden P.A.
      • et al.
      Thresholds for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in England and the United States.
      Logistic regression models were applied based on country frequency data by 10 year age groups, sex, and year. An analysis of variance model was fitted to look at the differences in mean AAA diameter at the time of repair between countries, adjusted by age groups and gender. A p value < .05 was regarded as statistically significant. Statistical analysis was carried out using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA) and R 3.3.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).

       Assumptions

      To avoid analysing data with potential erroneous AAA diameter values, AAA diameter ≤ 20 mm and ≥ 150 mm were excluded from the analyses (38 patients). Missing AAA diameter values (105 patients) were handled by case deletion.

      Results

      During the period 2010–2012 there was a variation in the mean diameter of iAAA repair across the countries (n = 34 566; range from 57 mm in Germany to 68 mm in Denmark) (Table 1). A variation in the percentage of male patients operated on for AAA with a diameter < 55 mm and female patients operated on with a diameter < 52 mm (to account for previous version guidelines
      • Moll F.L.
      • Powell J.T.
      • Fraedrich G.
      • Verzini F.
      • Haulon S.
      • Waltham M.
      • et al.
      Management of abdominal aortic aneurysms clinical practice guidelines of the European Society for Vascular Surgery.
      ) was noted (Table S1). In hospital and 30 day all cause mortality following iAAA repair was comparable between participating countries (r
      • Ferket B.S.
      • Grootenboer N.
      • Colkesen E.B.
      • Visser J.J.
      • van Sambeek M.R.
      • Spronk S.
      • et al.
      Systematic review of guidelines on abdominal aortic aneurysm screening.
       = 0.1, p = .1). The standardised iAAA repair rate per 100 000 inhabitants varied from 10.4 (Hungary) to 66.5 (Norway), p <.01, and the standarised rAAA repair rate per 100 000 from 5.8 (US) to 16.9 (England), p <.01. The standardised rates of iAAA and rAAA repair per country are presented in Table 1. Overall, despite an apparent higher rate of iAAA repair in countries where iAAA was operated at a lower mean diameter, there was no statistically significant correlation (Fig. 1) (r2 = 0.04, p = .3). Similarly, there was no significant correlation towards lower rates of rAAA repair (n = 12 628) with decreasing mean diameter of iAAA repair (Fig. 1) (r2 = 0.2, p = .1). These results persisted when analysing the national rAAA rate (rAAA repairs + deaths due to rAAA) per country (Fig. 2).
      Table 1The intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (iAAA) and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) standardised repair rates and the mean diameter of iAAA repair per participating country
      CountryDiameter of iAAA at repair*Number of patients with AAA diameteriAAA standardised repair rate (per 100 000 inhabitants)rAAA standardised repair rate (per 100 000 inhabitants)
      Germany57 ± 121024951.36.9
      USA58 ± 12300561.45.8
      Sweden61 ± 13373137.59.7
      Norway61 ± 16146266.513.1
      New Zealand62 ± 13101043.59.8
      Hungary61 ± 1376410.42.7
      England64 ± 131391433.516.9
      Finland64 ± 12317297.9
      Denmark68 ± 1911443.213.8
      * presented as mean ± standard deviation.
      Figure 1
      Figure 1The standardised intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (iAAA) repair and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair rate for all patients (combined male and female patients) per country. The mean diameter for iAAA repair in each country is visualised on the X axis. The standardised intact AAA repair rate per country is visualised with a blue circle and the correlation with other countries is noted by the blue (dashed) line of best fit. The standardised ruptured AAA repair rate per country is visualised with a red triangle while the correlation with other countries is noted by the red (dashed) line of best fit. SE = standard error.
      Figure 2
      Figure 2The standardised intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (iAAA) repair and standardised national rate of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA). (Standardised national rate of rAAA is the combined rAAA operation rate and the overall deaths due to ruptured AAA.) The mean diameter for iAAA repair in each country is visualised on the X axis. The standardised intact AAA repair rate per country is visualised with a blue circle and the correlation with other countries is noted by the blue (dashed) line of best fit. The standardised national ruptured AAA rate per country is visualised with a red triangle and the correlation with other countries is noted by the red (dashed) line of best fit.

       Subgroup analysis

      When stratifying the results based on gender, similar observations were noted in male patients (Table 2, Table 3, and Fig. 3). However for female patients, in countries where the mean diameter of iAAA repair was smaller (i.e. closer to 55 mm), there was a statistically significant correlation towards higher incidence of iAAA repair (r2 = 0.8 p = .005) (Table 4, Table 5, and Fig. 4).
      Table 2Intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (iAAA) and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) standardised repair rates and the mean diameter of iAAA repair per participating country in male patients
      CountryMean iAAA diameter – mmNumber of patients with AAA diameteriAAA standardised repair rate (per 100 000 male inhabitants)rAAA standardised repair rate (per 100 000 male inhabitants)
      USA581849105.89.7
      Norway621219119.922.9
      Sweden62318165.415.1
      New Zealand6380474.316.7
      Hungary6265318.74.9
      England64352563.627.1
      Finland6427455.115.3
      Table 3Intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (iAAA) standardised repair rates and standardised national ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) rate and the mean diameter of iAAA repair per participating country in male patients
      CountryMean iAAA diameter – mmiAAA standardised repair rate (per 100 000 male inhabitants)Standardised national rAAA rate
      Standardised national rAAA rate is the combined rAAA operation rate and the overall deaths due to ruptured AAA.
      (per 100 000 male inhabitants)
      USA58105.816.2
      Norway62119.94.3
      Sweden6265.41.1
      New Zealand6374.342.5
      Hungary6218.727.6
      England6463.658.2
      Finland6455.127.8
      Standardised national rAAA rate is the combined rAAA operation rate and the overall deaths due to ruptured AAA.
      Figure 3
      Figure 3The standardised intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (iAAA) repair and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair rate for male patients per country. The mean diameter for iAAA repair in each country is visualised on the X axis. The standardised intact AAA repair rate per country is visualised with a blue circle and the correlation with other countries is noted bythe blue (dashed) line of best fit. The standardised ruptured AAA repair rate per country is visualised with a red triangle and the correlation with other countries is noted by the red (dashed) line of best fit. SE = standard error.
      Table 4Intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (iAAA) and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) standardised repair rates and the mean diameter of iAAA repair per participating country in female patients
      CountryMean iAAA diameter – mmNumber of patients with AAA diameteriAAA standardised repair rate (per 100 000 female inhabitants)rAAA standardised repair rate (per 100 000 female inhabitants)
      USA5747722.92.0
      Norway5824820.14.7
      Sweden5854813.24.7
      New Zealand5920616.74.0
      Hungary611113.21.4
      England624997.38.0
      Finland62436.21.6
      Table 5Intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (iAAA) standardised repair rates and standardised national ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) rate and the mean diameter of iAAA repair per participating country in female patients
      CountryMean iAAA diameter – mmiAAA standardised repair rate (per 100 000 female inhabitants)Standardised national rAAA rate
      Standardised national rAAA rate is the combined rAAA operation rate and the overall deaths due to ruptured AAA.
      (per 100,000 female inhabitants)
      USA5722.96.4
      Norway5820.10.4
      Sweden5813.27.5
      New Zealand5916.721.5
      Hungary613.20.8
      England627.320.6
      Finland626.25.0
      Standardised national rAAA rate is the combined rAAA operation rate and the overall deaths due to ruptured AAA.
      Figure 4
      Figure 4The standardised intact abdominal aortic aneurysm (iAAA) repair and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) repair rate for female patients per country. The mean diameter for iAAA repair in each country is visualised on the X axis. The standardised intact AAA repair rate per country is visualised with a blue circle and the correlation with other countries is noted by the blue (dashed) line of best fit. The standardised ruptured AAA repair rate per country is visualised with a red triangle and the correlation with other countries is noted by the red (dashed) line of best fit. SE = standard error.

      Discussion

      The study results highlight the variation in management of iAAA in various countries in terms of mean iAAA repair diameter.
      • Beck A.W.
      • Sedrakyan A.
      • Mao J.
      • Venermo M.
      • Faizer R.
      • Debus S.
      • et al.
      Variations in abdominal aortic aneurysm care: a report from the international consortium of vascular registries.
      Despite the assumption that operating on iAAA closer to the mean 55 mm AAA diameter will increase the apparent iAAA operation rate and decrease the apparent rAAA rate as per the paper by Beck et al.,
      • Beck A.W.
      • Sedrakyan A.
      • Mao J.
      • Venermo M.
      • Faizer R.
      • Debus S.
      • et al.
      Variations in abdominal aortic aneurysm care: a report from the international consortium of vascular registries.
      this study showed no statistically significant evidence to back this assumption.
      This result does not echo the findings of the study by Karthikesalingam et al.,
      • Karthikesalingam A.
      • Vidal-Diez A.
      • Holt P.J.
      • Loftus I.M.
      • Schermerhorn M.L.
      • Soden P.A.
      • et al.
      Thresholds for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in England and the United States.
      which showed that in the USA, where more iAAAs were carried out at a mean diameter closer to 55 mm, there was a higher rate of iAAA repair and fewer aneurysm related deaths compared with England. Reasons for this could be that when analysing just two countries, differences in coding systems, AAA national reporting methods, AAA prevalence, population structure, and healthcare expenditure may contribute to the stark differences.
      Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in England and the United States [letters to the editor].
      Thus, the effects mentioned could be less influential when analysing more countries as in the current analysis. Furthermore, the two outliers with national mean of iAAA diameter < 60 mm (USA and Germany) have a fee for service re-imbursement system while the other six countries have population based re-imbursement further highlighting potential confounders. This could potentially be due to an increased rate of imaging resulting in an increased rate of diagnosis and potentially repair rate.
      This study also shows that despite the recommended threshold of 55 mm for elective AAA repair, the mean diameter of AAA at time of repair was 59 mm in females and 62 mm in males. There are several reasons why the mean diameter at the time of repair is higher than the recommended threshold for repair. Only Sweden and England offer AAA screening to men aged 65 and above, while in the USA screening is offered to Medicare men aged 65–75 years who have smoked, thereby patients may remain undiagnosed until they present with incidental AAA at a larger diameter. However, screening in Sweden started in the County of Uppsala in 2006 and reached nationwide cover in 2015,
      • Wanhainen A.
      • Bjorck M.
      The Swedish experience of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm.
      in England, screening was launched in 2009 and reached nationwide cover in 2013,
      • Jacomelli J.
      • Summers L.
      • Stevenson A.
      • Lees T.
      • Earnshaw J.J.
      Impact of the first 5 years of a national abdominal aortic aneurysm screening programme.
      and in the USA, screening was started in 2007.
      • Lederle F.A.
      Screening for AAA in the USA.
      As a result, the data presented in this study (including data from England, Sweden, and the USA) may not reflect analysis influenced by screening as screening needs a minimum of six to ten years for any benefit in reduction in rAAA.
      • Johansson M.
      • Zahl P.H.
      • Siersma V.
      • Jørgensen K.J.
      • Marklund B.
      • Brodersen J.
      Benefits and harms of screening men for abdominal aortic aneurysm in Sweden: a registry-based cohort study.
      Thus, the larger than recommended mean diameter of iAAA repair may partly be due to lack of screen detected AAA. Clinicians may also increase the individual threshold for iAAA repair to 60 mm or more in elderly patients or those with important co-morbidities or technically challenging aneurysms, in order to balance the increased peri-operative risk against the risk of rupture.
      • Parkinson F.
      • Ferguson S.
      • Lewis P.
      • Williams I.M.
      • Twine C.P.
      Rupture rates of untreated large abdominal aortic aneurysms in patients unfit for elective repair.
      ,
      • Scott S.W.M.
      • Batchelder A.J.
      • Kirkbride D.
      • Naylor A.R.
      • Thompson J.P.
      Late survival in nonoperated patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm.
      Furthermore, once patients are diagnosed with AAA, delays from referral to surgery
      • Sadat U.
      • Hayes P.D.
      • Gaunt M.E.
      • Varty K.
      • Boyle J.R.
      Assessment of pre-operative delays in the management of elective abdominal aortic aneurysms.
      and delays to optimise patients to improve non-AAA complication outcomes after surgery
      • Dawson J.
      • Vig S.
      • Choke E.
      • Blundell J.
      • Horne G.
      • Downham C.
      • et al.
      Medical optimisation can reduce morbidity and mortality associated with elective aortic aneurysm repair.
      may occur with a potential subsequent increase in AAA diameter and potential for rAAA.
      • Noronen K.
      • Laukontaus S.
      • Kantonen I.
      • Aho P.
      • Albäck A.
      • Venermo M.
      Quality assessment of elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair from referral to surgery.
      Another potential reason for the variation in mean diameter may be partially explained by the imaging modality used to capture the size of iAAA in the registries. The diameter of large AAAs obtained through computed tomography scans are usually larger than those obtained by ultrasound;
      • Manning B.J.
      • Kristmundsson T.
      • Sonesson B.
      • Resch T.
      Abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter: a comparison of ultrasound measurements with those from standard and three-dimensional computed tomography reconstruction.
      ,
      • Sprouse L.R.
      • Meier G.H.
      • LeSar C.J.
      • DeMasi R.J.
      • Sood J.
      • Parent F.N.
      • et al.
      Comparison of abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter measurements obtained with ultrasound and computed tomography: is there a difference?.
      however, the registries do not state the imaging modality used to capture the AAA diameter. Furthermore, if the data inputted in the registries were captured from the ultrasound findings, there remains no consensus on which aortic boundaries were used to define the diameter (i.e. whether outer, inner, or leading edge, or combinations of these were used). Among those patients who had a screen detected AAA on ultrasound and were referred for surgery once the diameter reached 55 mm, given the difference in AAA size between imaging modalities, the planning computed tomography angiography may result in a larger AAA diameter. This may explain the larger mean diameter than the recommended 55 mm. It was also noted that despite the variation in iAAA repair rate, the percentage of patients operated on with a small AAA (Table S1), age at repair (Table S2), operative modality (Table S3), and variation in the mean iAAA diameter, there was no difference in all cause in hospital death or death within 30 days.
      There are several limitations of this study. Data were obtained from a variety of datasets including a population sample (NSQIP). Only the vascular registries of Hungary, Sweden, Denmark, and New Zealand have been internationally validated so far and, as a result, data provided might not be entirely reliable due to potential selection bias.
      • Venermo M.
      • Mani K.
      • Kolh P.
      The quality of a registry based study depends on the quality of the data – without validation, it is questionable.
      • Khashram M.
      • Thomson I.A.
      • Jones G.T.
      • Roake J.A.
      Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in New Zealand: a validation of the Australasian vascular audit.
      • Bergqvist D.
      • Björck M.
      • Lees T.
      • Menyhei G.
      Validation of the VASCUNET registry – pilot study.
      • Troëng T.
      • Malmstedt J.
      • Björck M.
      • Jansson I.
      • Karlström L.
      • Kragsterman B.
      • et al.
      External validation of the SWEDVASC registry: a first-time individual cross-matching with the unique personal identity number.
      However, this is offset by the large number of patients analysed.
      • Björck M.
      • Mani K.
      Publication of vascular surgical registry data: strengths and limitations.
      Another limitation of the study is that due to constraints from registry data including data protection issues, in some countries it was not possible to obtain patient level data from the required time period such as diameter data from Denmark. Furthermore, not all registries covered the whole population, such as the data from Finland which only reflects regional data. Obtaining large numbers of data from different sources, however, may lead to enhanced understanding of the subject and may improve the validity of the data collected through triangulation.
      • Carter N.
      • Bryant-Lukosius D.
      • DiCenso A.
      • Blythe J.
      • Neville A.J.
      The use of triangulation in qualitative research.
      ,
      • Noble H.
      • Heale R.
      Triangulation in research, with examples.
      Aneurysm related mortality figures are highly uncertain, as post mortem examinations are not performed routinely
      • Turnbull A.
      • Osborn M.
      • Nicholas N.
      Hospital autopsy: endangered or extinct?.
      • Hoyert D.L.
      The changing profile of autopsied deaths in the United States, 1972–2007. Nchs Data Brief, No 67.
      leading to potential misdiagnosis of the cause of death.
      • Laine M.T.
      • Laukontaus S.J.
      • Kantonen I.
      • Venermo M.
      Population-based study of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.
      Therefore, the correlation between iAAA repair and rAAA repair rate was chosen as primary endpoint of this study, as registration of rAAA repairs can be expected to be more accurate than rAAA related deaths. However, the results were similar when assessing the correlation between iAAA diameter and rAAA repair rate as well as the national rAAA rate (rAAA operations + rAAA deaths) in this study. Difference in AAA national reporting methods, AAA prevalence, population structure and healthcare expenditure
      Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in England and the United States [letters to the editor].
      exist and ethnic and/or cultural difference within the same country also may have confounded the results.
      • Khashram M.
      • Pitama S.
      • Williman J.A.
      • Jones G.T.
      • Roake J.A.
      Survival disparity following abdominal aortic aneurysm repair highlights inequality in ethnic and socio-economic status.
      Other study limitations were that potential different pathologies, including surgery for iliac artery disease and other aortic pathologies may have been included in the study. Despite adjusting for age and gender, it was not possible to adjust for comorbidities, smoking and ethnic/racial differences in different countries.

      Conclusion

      This study is an analysis of real world evidence of AAA repair practice to determine the impact of mean iAAA repair diameter on corresponding aneurysm related mortality. There was variation in the mean diameter of iAAA repair, iAAA repair rate and rAAA repair rates across countries, however, no significant correlation could be found between mean iAAA diameter at time of repair and rAAA repair rate in different countries.

      Acknowledgements

      Data from the National Vascular Registry (England) is based on data collected by or on behalf of the Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership, who have no responsibility or liability for the accuracy, currency, reliability and/or correctness of this publication.

      Appendix A. Supplementary data

      The following is the Supplementary data to this article:

      References

        • Chaikof E.L.
        • Dalman R.L.
        • Eskandari M.K.
        • Jackson B.M.
        • Lee W.A.
        • Mansour M.A.
        • et al.
        The society for vascular surgery practice guidelines on the care of patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm.
        J Vasc Surg. 2018; 67: 2-77
        • Ferket B.S.
        • Grootenboer N.
        • Colkesen E.B.
        • Visser J.J.
        • van Sambeek M.R.
        • Spronk S.
        • et al.
        Systematic review of guidelines on abdominal aortic aneurysm screening.
        J Vasc Surg. 2012; 55: 1296-1304
        • Wanhainen A.
        • Verzini F.
        • Van Herzeele I.
        • Allaire E.
        • Bown M.
        • Cohnert T.
        • et al.
        Editor's Choice – European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2019 clinical practice guidelines on the management of abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms.
        Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2019; 57: 8-93
        • Powell J.T.
        • Brady A.R.
        • Brown L.C.
        • Fowkes F.G.
        • Greenhalgh R.M.
        • Ruckley C.V.
        • et al.
        Long-term outcomes of immediate repair compared with surveillance of small abdominal aortic aneurysms.
        N Engl J Med. 2002; 346: 1445-1452
        • Lederle F.A.
        • Wilson S.E.
        • Johnson G.R.
        • Reinke D.B.
        • Littooy F.N.
        • Acher C.W.
        • et al.
        Immediate repair compared with surveillance of small abdominal aortic aneurysms.
        N Engl J Med. 2002; 346: 1437-1444
        • Cao P.
        • De Rango P.
        • Verzini F.
        • Parlani G.
        • Romano L.
        • Cieri E.
        Comparison of surveillance versus aortic endografting for small aneurysm repair (CAESAR): results from a randomised trial.
        Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011; 41: 13-25
        • Ouriel K.
        • Clair D.G.
        • Kent K.C.
        • Zarins C.K.
        Endovascular repair compared with surveillance for patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysms.
        J Vasc Surg. 2010; 51: 1081-1087
        • Filardo G.
        • Powell J.T.
        • Martinez M.A.
        • Ballard D.J.
        Surgery for small asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012; CD001835
        • Beck A.W.
        • Sedrakyan A.
        • Mao J.
        • Venermo M.
        • Faizer R.
        • Debus S.
        • et al.
        Variations in abdominal aortic aneurysm care: a report from the international consortium of vascular registries.
        Circulation. 2016; 134: 1948-1958
        • Mani K.
        • Venermo M.
        • Beiles B.
        • Menyhei G.
        • Altreuther M.
        • Loftus I.
        • et al.
        Regional differences in case mix and peri-operative outcome after elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the VASCUNET database.
        Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2015; 49: 646-652
        • Chaikof E.L.
        • Blankensteijn J.D.
        • Harris P.L.
        • White G.H.
        • Zarins C.K.
        • Bernhard V.M.
        • et al.
        Reporting standards for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.
        J Vasc Surg. 2002; 35: 1048-1060
        • Karthikesalingam A.
        • Vidal-Diez A.
        • Holt P.J.
        • Loftus I.M.
        • Schermerhorn M.L.
        • Soden P.A.
        • et al.
        Thresholds for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in England and the United States.
        N Engl J Med. 2016; 375: 2051-2059
        • Moll F.L.
        • Powell J.T.
        • Fraedrich G.
        • Verzini F.
        • Haulon S.
        • Waltham M.
        • et al.
        Management of abdominal aortic aneurysms clinical practice guidelines of the European Society for Vascular Surgery.
        Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011; 41: S1-S58
      1. Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in England and the United States [letters to the editor].
        N Engl J Med. 2017; 376: 997-998
        • Wanhainen A.
        • Bjorck M.
        The Swedish experience of screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm.
        J Vasc Surg. 2011; 53: 1164-1165
        • Jacomelli J.
        • Summers L.
        • Stevenson A.
        • Lees T.
        • Earnshaw J.J.
        Impact of the first 5 years of a national abdominal aortic aneurysm screening programme.
        Br J Surg. 2016; 103: 1125-1131
        • Lederle F.A.
        Screening for AAA in the USA.
        Scand J Surg. 2008; 97: 139-141
        • Johansson M.
        • Zahl P.H.
        • Siersma V.
        • Jørgensen K.J.
        • Marklund B.
        • Brodersen J.
        Benefits and harms of screening men for abdominal aortic aneurysm in Sweden: a registry-based cohort study.
        Lancet. 2018; 391: 2441-2447
        • Parkinson F.
        • Ferguson S.
        • Lewis P.
        • Williams I.M.
        • Twine C.P.
        Rupture rates of untreated large abdominal aortic aneurysms in patients unfit for elective repair.
        J Vasc Surg. 2015; 61: 1606-1612
        • Scott S.W.M.
        • Batchelder A.J.
        • Kirkbride D.
        • Naylor A.R.
        • Thompson J.P.
        Late survival in nonoperated patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm.
        Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2016; 52: 444-449
        • Sadat U.
        • Hayes P.D.
        • Gaunt M.E.
        • Varty K.
        • Boyle J.R.
        Assessment of pre-operative delays in the management of elective abdominal aortic aneurysms.
        Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2008; 90: 65-68
        • Dawson J.
        • Vig S.
        • Choke E.
        • Blundell J.
        • Horne G.
        • Downham C.
        • et al.
        Medical optimisation can reduce morbidity and mortality associated with elective aortic aneurysm repair.
        Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2007; 33: 100-104
        • Noronen K.
        • Laukontaus S.
        • Kantonen I.
        • Aho P.
        • Albäck A.
        • Venermo M.
        Quality assessment of elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair from referral to surgery.
        Vasa. 2015; 44: 115-121
        • Manning B.J.
        • Kristmundsson T.
        • Sonesson B.
        • Resch T.
        Abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter: a comparison of ultrasound measurements with those from standard and three-dimensional computed tomography reconstruction.
        J Vasc Surg. 2009; 50: 263-268
        • Sprouse L.R.
        • Meier G.H.
        • LeSar C.J.
        • DeMasi R.J.
        • Sood J.
        • Parent F.N.
        • et al.
        Comparison of abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter measurements obtained with ultrasound and computed tomography: is there a difference?.
        J Vasc Surg. 2003; 38: 466-471
        • Venermo M.
        • Mani K.
        • Kolh P.
        The quality of a registry based study depends on the quality of the data – without validation, it is questionable.
        Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017; 53: 611-612
        • Khashram M.
        • Thomson I.A.
        • Jones G.T.
        • Roake J.A.
        Abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in New Zealand: a validation of the Australasian vascular audit.
        ANZ J Surg. 2017; 87: 394-398
        • Bergqvist D.
        • Björck M.
        • Lees T.
        • Menyhei G.
        Validation of the VASCUNET registry – pilot study.
        Vasa. 2014; 43: 141-144
        • Troëng T.
        • Malmstedt J.
        • Björck M.
        • Jansson I.
        • Karlström L.
        • Kragsterman B.
        • et al.
        External validation of the SWEDVASC registry: a first-time individual cross-matching with the unique personal identity number.
        Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2008; 36: 705-712
        • Björck M.
        • Mani K.
        Publication of vascular surgical registry data: strengths and limitations.
        Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017; 54: 788
        • Carter N.
        • Bryant-Lukosius D.
        • DiCenso A.
        • Blythe J.
        • Neville A.J.
        The use of triangulation in qualitative research.
        Oncol Nurs Forum. 2014; 41: 545-547
        • Noble H.
        • Heale R.
        Triangulation in research, with examples.
        Evid Based Nurs. 2019; 22: 67-68
        • Turnbull A.
        • Osborn M.
        • Nicholas N.
        Hospital autopsy: endangered or extinct?.
        J Clin Pathol. 2015; 68: 601-604
        • Hoyert D.L.
        The changing profile of autopsied deaths in the United States, 1972–2007. Nchs Data Brief, No 67.
        National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD2011
      2. Autopsy Rate (%) for All Deaths – European Health Information Gateway. WHO Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark2018 (Available from:)
        • Laine M.T.
        • Laukontaus S.J.
        • Kantonen I.
        • Venermo M.
        Population-based study of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.
        Br J Surg. 2016; 103: 1634-1639
        • Khashram M.
        • Pitama S.
        • Williman J.A.
        • Jones G.T.
        • Roake J.A.
        Survival disparity following abdominal aortic aneurysm repair highlights inequality in ethnic and socio-economic status.
        Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017; 54: 689-696