The pro and cons of yearly imaging after minimally invasive aorta repair according to patients

Rationale: Evidence suggests that standardised imaging surveillance may not be beneficial to all patients after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). Therefore, when weighing the benefits and harms of yearly standardised imaging surveillance after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), it is important to include the patients’ perspective.

Objective: Defining the negative or positive impact of standardised imaging surveillance in EVAR-patients.

Study design: a multicentre prospective cohort study in 4 medical centres.

Study population: All adult patients, with an infrarenal asymptomatic abdominal aneurysm (AAA) visiting the outpatient clinic of a participating vascular surgery department or vascular medical centre for EVAR follow-up.

Intervention (if applicable): Our study does not entail a (new) medicinal or surgical intervention. Patients will be asked to fill out standardized questionnaires after follow-up imaging and in between two follow-up visits.

Main study parameters/endpoints: The level of anxiety at different times during follow-up.

We hypothesize that anxiety symptoms worsen after follow-up imaging compared to patients baseline anxiety levels.

All adult patients, with an infrarenal asymptomatic abdominal aneurysm (AAA) visiting the outpatient clinic of a participating vascular surgery department for EVAR follow-up

Our study does not entail a (new) medicinal or surgical intervention. Patients will be asked to fill out standardised questionnaires.