Derivation and Validation of a Risk Score for Abdominal Compartment Syndrome after Endovascular Aneurysm Repair for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

Autor:	DeCarlo C; Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. Electronic address: csdecarlo@partners.org., Boitano LT; Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA., Latz CA; Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA., Kim Y; Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA., Mohapatra A; Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA., Mohebali J; Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA., Eagleton MJ; Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	Annals of vascular surgery [Ann Vasc Surg] 2022 Aug; Vol. 84, pp. 47-54. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Mar 23.
DOI:	10.1016/j.avsg.2022.03.014
Abstrakt:	Background: Abdominal compartment syndrome (ACoS) is a devastating complication after endovascular aneurysm repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rEVAR). This study sought to develop a risk score for ACoS to identify patients who would benefit from early decompressive laparotomy. Methods: Model derivation was performed with Vascular Quality Initiative data for rEVAR from 2013 to 2020. The primary outcome was evacuation of abdominal hematoma. A multivariable logistic regression was used to create and validate a scoring system to predict ACoS. The model was validated using institutional data for rEVAR from 1998 to 2019. Results: The derivation cohort included 2,310 patients with rEVAR. Abdominal hematoma evacuation occurred in 265 patients (11.5%). Factors associated with abdominal hematoma evacuation on a multivariable analysis included transfer from an outside hospital, preoperative creatinine ≥1.4 mg/dL, preoperative systolic blood pressure ≤85 mmHg, preoperative altered mental status, ≥3.0 liters intraoperative crystalloid, and ≥4 units of red blood cells transfused intraoperatively. The validation cohort consisted of 67 rEVAR; ACoS occurred in 8 patients (11.9%). The c-statistic was 0.84 in the derivation and 0.87 in the validation cohort, whereas Hosmer-Lemeshow was P = 0.15 in the derivation and 0.84 in the validation cohorts, suggesting good model discrimination and calibration. Points were applied based on β-coefficients to produce a risk score ranging from -1 to 13. A cutoff of risk score ≥8 resulted in a sensitivity and specificity of 87.5% and 83.1% for detecting patients with ACoS, respectively. ACoS conveyed a significantly higher mortality in both the derivation (ACoS: 49.8% vs. No ACoS: 17.8%; P < 0.001) and validation cohorts (ACoS: 75.0% vs. No ACoS: 15.2%; P < 0.001). Conclusions: In patients with equivocal signs/symptoms of ACoS, this scoring system can be used to guide surgeons on when to perform decompressive laparotomy prior to leaving the operating room for rEVAR. Patients with a risk score ≥8 would benefit from decompressive laparotomy at index rEVAR. (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu