• Mario Louis Lachat, Felice Pecoraro, Dieter Mayer, Carole Guillet, Michael Glenck, Zoran Rancic, Christian Alexander Schmidt, Gilbert Puippe, Frank Junior Veith, Jacques Bleyn, and Dominique Bettex.
• *Clinic for Cardiovascular Surgery †Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology ‡Division of Cardiovascular Anesthesia, University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland §Vascluar Surgery Unit, University Hospital "P. Giaccone," Palermo, Italy ¶Division of Vascular Surgery, New York University Medical Center, New York, NY ‖Department of Vascular Surgery, Monica Hospital, Antwerp (Deurne), Belgium.
• Ann. Surg.. 2013 Nov 1;258(5):754-8; discussion 758-9.

ObjectivesTo present the safety, feasibility, costs, and patient satisfaction of outpatient endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR).BackgroundOur experience in more than 1000 patients indicated that in technically uncomplicated EVAR procedures, the only need for hospitalization was for access vessel complications (bleeding or occlusion) requiring secondary procedures. These complications could always be identified within the first 3 hours after EVAR.MethodsTwo-center retrospective analysis of prospectively gathered data on 100 consecutive elective outpatient EVAR cases (Outpt EVAR). Inclusion criteria for Outpt EVAR were as follows: asymptomatic clinical state, informed consent, travel time to the hospital if readmission was required of less than 60 minutes, adult observer assistance for the first 24 hours, and a technically uncomplicated EVAR procedure. EVAR was mostly performed under local anesthesia and with percutaneous access. Patients were discharged home after 4 to 6 hours of observation and checked the next morning and on the fifth postoperative day in the outpatient clinic.ResultsFrom 104 patients selected, 4 (3.8%) preferred primary hospitalization and were excluded from further analysis. Four patients (4%) with access vessel complications required additional procedures and had to be hospitalized overnight. The 30-day readmission rate was 4% (4), all due to access vessel stenosis (2) or false aneurysm (2). There was no 30-day mortality. From the 96 outpatients who completed Outpt EVAR, 93 (97%) would undergo Outpt EVAR again and would recommend it to others. Cost comparison showed in 42 matched contemporary patients treated with just a standard stent graft that costs were significantly lower in 21 Outpt EVAR patients than in 21 inpatient EVAR.ConclusionsElective Outpt EVAR can be performed safely, provided certain criteria are fulfilled and specific precautions are taken. In this series, Outpt EVAR morbidity was minimal, especially delirium common in elderly patients recovering from inpatient vascular surgery and nosocomial infections did not occur. Finally, patient satisfaction was high and costs were less than with standard inpatient EVAR.

20 keywords...

hide…