Secondary Interventions and Mortality Following Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair: Device-specific Results from the UK EVAR Trials

ObjectivesTo compare secondary intervention rate, aneurysm-related mortality and all-cause mortality for patients receiving elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for large abdominal aortic aneurysms with different commercially available endografts.Design, materials & methodsIn the EVAR 1 and 2 multi-centre trials, the principal endografts used were Zenith and Talent and these are compared in 505 patients from EVAR 1 and 143 patients from EVAR 2 followed-up for an average of 3.8 years until 31st December 2005. Outcomes were analysed by Cox proportional hazards regression, with adjustments for potential confounding risk factors and centre. Gore/Excluder graft outcomes also are reported.ResultsAcross the two trials the secondary intervention rates were 7.0 and 9.4 per 100 patient years for Zenith and Talent grafts respectively, adjusted hazard ratio 0.77 [95%CI 0.52–1.12]. Aneurysm-related mortality was 1.2 and 1.4 per 100 patient years for Zenith and Talent grafts respectively, adjusted hazard ratio 0.90 [95%CI 0.37–2.19]. All-cause mortality was 8.5 and 10.3 per 100 patient years for Zenith and Talent grafts respectively, adjusted hazard ratio 0.81 [95%CI 0.58–1.14]. The direction of all results was similar when the two trials were analysed separately.ConclusionThere was no significant difference in the performance of the two endografts but the direction of results was slightly in favour of patients with Zenith (versus Talent) endografts