Elsevier

Journal of Vascular Surgery

Volume 47, Issue 2, February 2008, Pages 287-295.e2
Journal of Vascular Surgery

Clinical research study
From the New England Society for Vascular Surgery
Informed consent for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: Assessing variations in surgeon opinion through a national survey

Presented at the Annual Meeting of the New England Society for Vascular Surgery, Ledyard, Conn, Oct 6, 2007.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2007.10.050Get rights and content
Under an Elsevier user license
open archive

Objective

Informed consent discussions for elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair should reflect appropriate risks of the open or endovascular repair (EVAR), but few guidelines exist describing what surgeons should discuss. This study examines expert opinion regarding what constitutes informed consent.

Methods

Design. We conducted an anonymous, web-based, national survey of vascular surgeons. Associations between surgeon characteristics and opinions regarding informed consent were measured using bivariate statistics; multivariable logistic regression was performed to estimate effects adjusted for covariates. Setting. Academic and private practice surgeons were surveyed. Subjects. United States members of the International Society for Vascular Surgery membership. Main Outcome Measure. Surgeons’ self-reported opinions regarding the content of informed consent for AAA repair.

Results

A total of 199 surgeons completed the survey (response rate 51%). More than 90% of respondents reported that it was essential to discuss mortality risk for both procedures. However, only 60% and 30% of respondents reported that it was essential to discuss the risk of myocardial infarction and stroke, respectively. Opinions varied by procedure regarding the risks of impotence (32% vs 62%; EVAR vs open repair), reintervention (78% vs 17%), and rupture during long-term follow-up (57% vs 17%). Younger and private practice surgeons were more likely to discuss complications compared with older surgeons and those in academic practice. Surgeons who perform predominantly EVAR were more likely to quote higher mortality rates for open repair (odds ration [OR] = 3.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.4-6.4) and lower reintervention rates for EVAR (OR = 0.3, 95% CI = 0.1-0.7) compared with other surgeons.

Conclusions

This is the first study of the practice of informed consent for AAA repair. The only risk that the vast majority of surgeons agreed should be included in informed consent for AAA repair was mortality. Significant variation exists regarding whether other complications should be discussed and what complication rates should be quoted. Surgeon characteristics may influence how risks are presented to patients. Further efforts are needed to develop guidelines to ensure consistent communication of appropriate risk during informed consent for AAA repair.

Cited by (0)

Competition of interest: none.

Additional material for this article may be found online at www.jvascsurg.org

1

Dr Berman is supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program and the Foundation for Informed Medical Decision-Making George Bennett Postdoctoral grant.

2

Dr Dardik is supported by the National Institutes of Health Career Development award HL079927/American Vascular Association William J. von Liebig Award, as well as with resources and the use of facilities at the VA Connecticut Healthcare System in West Haven, Conn.

3

Dr Bradley is supported by the Patrick and Catherine Weldon Donaghue Medical Research Foundation Investigator Award.

4

Dr Fraenkel is supported by the K23 Award AR048826-01 A1.