Sex Influence on Fenestrated and Branched Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair: Outcomes From a National Multicenter Registry
Authors: Isernia Giacomo , Simonte Gioele , Gallitto Enrico , Bertoglio Luca , Fargion Aaron , Melissano Germano , Chiesa Roberto , Lenti Massimo , Pratesi Carlo , Faggioli Gianluca , Gargiulo Mauro , Luigi Baccani , Luca Bertoglio , Roberto Chiesa , Gianluca Faggioli , Aaron Fargion , Cecilia Fenelli , Gianluigi Fino , Enrico Gallitto , Mauro Gargiulo , Giacomo Isernia , Andrea Kahlberg , Massimo Lenti , Antonino Logiacco , Chiara Mascoli , Germano Melissano , Andrea Melloni , Gianpalolo Reboldi , Gianbattista Parlani , Rodolfo Pini , Carlo Pratesi , Enrico Rinaldi , Gioele Simonte , Sara Speziali 
Published: November 2022

Introduction: Women are generally underrepresented in trials focusing on aortic aneurysm. Nevertheless, sex-related differences have recently emerged from several studies and registries. The aim of this research was to assess whether sex-related anatomical disparities existed in fenestrated and branched aortic repair candidates and whether these discrepancies could influence endovascular repair outcomes. Methods: Data from all consecutive patients treated during the 2008–2019 period within the Italian Multicenter fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR) Registry were included in the present study. Propensity matching was performed using a logistic regression model adjusted for demographic data and comorbidities to obtain comparable male and female samples. The selection model led to a final study population of 176 patients (88 women and 88 men) among the total initial cohort of 596. Study endpoints were technical and clinical success, overall survival, aneurysm-related death, and reintervention rates evaluated at 30 days and during follow-up. Results: Twenty-eight patients (15.9%) received urgent/emergent repair. In most of the cases (71.6%), women received treatment for extensive thoracoabdominal pathology (Crawford type I, II, or III aneurysm rather than type IV or juxta-pararenal) versus 46.6% of men (p=0.001). Female patients presented with more challenging iliac accesses with at least one side considered hostile in 27.3% of the cases (vs 13.6% in male patients, p=0.039). Finally, women had significantly smaller visceral vessels. Women had significantly worse operative outcomes, with an 86.2% technical success rate versus 96.6% in the male population (p=0.016). No differences were recorded in terms of 30-day reinterventions between men and women. The 5-year estimate of freedom from late reintervention, according to Kaplan-Meier analysis, was 85.6% in men versus 81.6% in women (p=ns). No aneurysm-related death was recorded during follow-up (median observational time, 23 months [interquartile range, 7–45 months]). Conclusion: Women presented a significantly higher incidence of thoracoabdominal aneurysms, smaller visceral vessels, and more complex iliofemoral accesses, resulting in a significantly lower technical success after F/BEVAR. Further studies assessing sex-related differences are needed to properly determine the impact on outcomes and stratify procedural risks. Clinical Impact Women are generally underrepresented in trials focusing on aortic aneurysms. Aiming to assess whether sex may affect outcomes after a complex endovascular aortic repair, a propensity score selection was applied to a total population of 596 patients receiving F/BEVAR aortic repair with the Cook platform, matching each treated female patient with a corresponding male patient. Women presented more frequently a thoracoabdominal aneurysm extent, smaller visceral vessels, and complex iliofemoral accesses, resulting in significantly worse operative outcomes, with an 86.2% technical success versus 96.6% (p=0.016). No differences were recorded in terms of short-term and mid-term reinterventions. According to these results, careful and critical assessment should be posed in case of female patients receiving complex aortic repair, especially regarding preoperative anatomical evaluation and clinical selection with appropriate surgical risk stratification.