Endovascular Versus Surgical Revascularization for Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia: Insights From the National Inpatient Sample Database

Abstract Objectives This study sought to compare in-hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) following endovascular therapy with open surgery for chronic mesenteric ischemia (CMI). Background There are limited contemporary data on in-hospital cardiovascular outcomes among patients with CMI undergoing revascularization via endovascular therapy versus open surgery in the United States. Methods Patients with CMI undergoing endovascular or surgical (mesenteric bypass or endarterectomy) revascularization between 2007 and 2014 were identified from the National Inpatient Sample. Weighted national estimates were obtained. Primary and secondary endpoints were MACCE (death, myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiac post-operative complications) and composite in-hospital complications (MACCE + post-operative peripheral vascular complications, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, major bleeding, and bowel resection), respectively. Propensity score matching was used to obtain a balanced cohort of 880 unweighted patients in each group. Results Of 4,150 patients with CMI, 3,206 (77.2%) underwent endovascular therapy and 944 (22.8%) underwent surgery (weighted national estimates of 15,850 and 4,687, respectively). In the propensity-matched cohort, MACCE and composite in-hospital complications occurred significantly less often after endovascular therapy than surgery (8.6% vs. 15.9%; p  Conclusions In a large, retrospective analysis of patients with CMI, endovascular therapy remained the dominant revascularization modality, and was associated with lower rates of MACCE, composite in-hospital complications, lower costs, and shorter length of stay compared with surgery.