Cost-effective aortic exposure: a retroperitoneal experience

In this study we investigated whether the surgical approach to infrarenal aortic aneurysm (IAA) repair significantly affects in-hospital morbidity and cost. The study comprised a consecutive series of 96 patients with elective repair of an IAA by two vascular surgeons using an established protocol from March 1995 to March 1999. The outcomes and costs for 50 patients with transperitoneal (TP) exposure were compared with those for 46 patients with retroperitoneal (RP) exposure, all of whom were in a tertiary care center, in a university hospital. Hospital and ICU days, perioperative complications, and cost were measured. All patients followed the same protocol except for intraoperative aortic exposure. There was no significant difference between TP and RP groups with regard to demographic features (all p-values > 0.12), mean IAA size (p = 0.41) or mean operative blood loss (p = 0.89). Incidence of postoperative complications was similar between the groups (11 in TP and 6 in RP; p = 0.29). However, a trend without statistical significance was noted in the incidence of pulmonary complications (7 in TP and 2 in RP; p = 0.11). Mean ICU days (4 vs. 2; p = 0.004) and hospital days (11 vs. 6; p = 0.002) were significantly longer after TP aortic exposure than after the RP approach. Mean total hospital cost was significantly reduced for patients having RP IAA repair compared to TP IAA repair (mean cost difference = $5,527; p = 0.016). Retroperitoneal exposure for IAA repair is associated with decreased pulmonary complications, significantly shorter ICU and hospital days, and significantly decreased hospital cost compared to transperitoneal aortic exposure. In the future, RP exposure for IAA repair should be the benchmark for comparison of any new techniques.