Factors Affecting Follow-Up Compliance in Patients After Endovascular Aneurysm Repair

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate potential factors affecting patient non-compliance after endovascular aneurysm repair.

Method: We performed a retrospective review of patients undergoing elective or emergency endovascular repair for thoracic, abdominal aorta, or iliac artery aneurysm at a single institution from November 2007 to March 2014. Compliance to follow-up at 1, 6, and 12 months was assessed. Factors evaluated included patient demographics, size of aneurysm, distance between the patient’s residence and outpatient clinic, urgency of surgery, and time of year in which the follow-up visits were scheduled.

Results: During the study period, 205 patients (75% male and 25% female) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. One-month mortality was 1.1% for elective procedures and 16.1% for emergency procedures (p = 0.001). Overall mortality at 12 months was 6.3% and 32.3% for elective and emergency procedures, respectively (p = 0.0002). Highest compliance was observed at 1 month, with 184 patients (93%) attending. A significant decrease was seen at 6 (n = 102, 54%) and 12 (n = 89, 48%) months. At the 12-month mark, a larger proportion of minority patients were non-compliant compared with Caucasian patients. Confounders for non-compliance were analyzed using multivariate analysis, and statistical significance was found for widowed marital status (p = 0.008), travel distance >25 miles to the outpatient clinic (p = 0.032), and emergency repair of aneurysms (p = 0.022).

Conclusion: Despite emphasizing the importance of follow-up after endovascular aortic procedures, almost half of the treated patients were non-compliant. Our study identified travel distance, marital status, and urgency of surgery as factors that may affect patients’ compliance to scheduled follow-up visits.

Key Words

EVAR - Follow-up - Compliance - Adherence - Non-compliance - Aneurysm repair

• References

• 1 Dua A, Kuy S, Lee CJ, Upchurch GR Jr, Desai SS. Epidemiology of aortic aneurysm repair in the United States from 2000 to 2010. J Vasc Surg 2014; 59: 1512-1517 . DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2014.01.007
• 2 Newman AB, Arnold AM, Burke GL, O’Leary DH, Manolio TA. Cardiovascular disease and mortality in older adults with small abdominal aortic aneurysms detected by ultrasonography: the cardiovascular health study. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134: 182-190 . PMID: 11177330
• 3 Davidovic L. Treatment strategy for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms. Rozhl Chir 2014; 93: 357-365 . PMID: 25263471
• 4 Chaikof EL, Brewster DC, Dalman RL, Makaroun MS, Illig KA, Sicard GA. , et al. SVS practice guidelines for the care of patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm: executive summary. J Vasc Surg 2009; 50: 880-896 . DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2009.07.001
• 5 The U.K. Small Aneurysm Trial: design, methods and progress. The UK Small Aneurysm Trial participants. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1995; 9: 42-48 . PMID: 7664011
• 6 Lederle FA, Johnson GR, Wilson SE, Chute EP, Hye RJ, Makaroun MS. , et al. The aneurysm detection and management study screening program: validation cohort and final results. Aneurysm Detection and Management Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Investigators. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160: 1425-1430 . PMID: 10826454
• 7 Huang Y, Gloviczki P, Oderich GS, Duncan AA, Kalra M, Fleming MD. , et al. Outcome after open and endovascular repairs of abdominal aortic aneurysms in matched cohorts using propensity score modeling. J Vasc Surg 2015; 62: 304-311.e2 . DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.02.039
• 8 Stather PW, Sidloff D, Dattani N, Choke E, Bown MJ, Sayers RD. Systematic review and meta-analysis of the early and late outcomes of open and endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Br J Surg 2013; 100: 863-872 . DOI: 10.1002/bjs.9101
• 9 Schermerhorn ML, O’Malley AJ, Jhaveri A, Cotterill P, Pomposelli F, Landon BE. Endovascular vs. open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in the Medicare population. N Engl J Med 2008; 358: 464-474 . DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0707348
• 10 Lederle F, Freischlag J, Kyriakides TC, Padberg FT Jr, Matsumura JS, Kohler TR. , et al. Outcomes following endovascular vs open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm: a randomized trial. JAMA 2009; 302: 1535-1542 . DOI: 10.1001/jama.2009.1426
• 11 Mell M, Baker L, Dalman R, Hlatky MA. Gaps in preoperative surveillance and rupture of abdominal aortic aneurysms among Medicare beneficiaries. J Vasc Surg 2014; 59: 583-588 . DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2013.09.032
• 12 Kret MR, Azarbal AF, Mitchell EL, Liem TK, Landry GJ, Moneta GL. Compliance with long-term surveillance recommendations following endovascular aneurysm repair or type B aortic dissection. J Vasc Surg 2013; 58: 25-32 . DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2012.12.046
• 13 Wu CY, Chen H, Gallagher KA, Eliason JL, Rectenwald JE, Coleman DM. Predictors of compliance with surveillance after endovascular aneurysm repair and comparative survival outcomes. J Vasc Surg 2015; 62: 27-35 . DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.02.023
• 14 Godfrey AD, Morbi AH, Nordon IM. Patient compliance with surveillance following elective endovascular aneurysm repair. Cardiovasc Interv Radiol 2015; 38: 1130-1136 . DOI: 10.1007/s00270-015-1073-8
• 15 Jones WB, Taylor SM, Kalbaugh CA, Joels CS, Blackhurst DW, Langan 3rd EM. , et al. Lost to follow-up: a potential under-appreciated limitation of endovascular aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 2007; 46: 434-440 . DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2007.05.002
• 16 Waduud MA, Choong WL, Ritchie M, Williams C, Yadavali R, Lim S. , et al. Endovascular aneurysm repair: is imaging surveillance robust, and does it influence long-term mortality?. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2015; 38: 33-39 . DOI: 10.1007/s00270-014-0890-5
• 17 Bureau USC. Suffolk County, New York – Population estimates. July 1, 2016, (V2016) [Internet]. Available from: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/table/PST045216/36103
• 18 Sarangarm D, Knepper J, Marek J, Biggs KL, Robertson D, Langsfeld M. Post-endovascular aneurysm repair patient outcomes and follow-up are not adversely impacted by long travel distance to tertiary vascular surgery centers. Ann Vasc Surg 2010; 24: 1075-1081 . DOI: 10.1016/j.avsg.2010.05.009
• 19 Nelson LA, Mulvaney SA, Gebretsadik T, Ho YX, Johnson KB, Osborn CY. Disparities in the use of a mHealth medication adherence promotion intervention for low-income adults with type 2 diabetes. J Am Med Informatics Assoc 2016; 23: 12-18 . DOI: 10.1093/jamia/ocv082
• 20 Dickson VV, Knafl GJ, Riegel B. Predictors of medication nonadherence differ among black and white patients with heart failure. Res Nurs Heal 2015; 38: 289-300 . DOI: 10.1002/nur.21663
• 21 van den Born BJ, Koopmans RP, Groeneveld JO, van Montfrans GA. Ethnic disparities in the incidence, presentation and complications of malignant hypertension. J Hypertens 2006; 24: 2299-2304 . DOI: 10.1097/01.hjh.0000249710.21146.38
• 22 Morgenstern LB, Steffen-Batey L, Smith MA, Moye LA. Barriers to acute stroke therapy and stroke prevention in Mexican Americans. Stroke 2001; 32: 1360-1364 . PMID: 11387499
• 23 Schanzer A, Messina LM, Ghosh K, Simons JP, Robinson 3rd WP, Aiello FA. , et al. Follow-up compliance after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in Medicare beneficiaries. J Vasc Surg 2015; 61: 16-22 . DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2014.06.006
• 24 Peterss S, Charilaou P, Ziganshin BA, Elefteriades JA. Assessment of survival in retrospective studies: the Social Security Death Index is not adequate for estimation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2017; 153: 899-901 . DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.09.014