Methodological challenges when quantifying a mortality reduction with screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm when incidence is falling: a registry study

Article type
Year
Authors
Johansson M1, Brodersen J2, Siersma V2, Marklund B1, Juhl Jørgensen K3
1University of Gothenburg, Sweden
2University of Copenhagen, Denmark
3Nordic Cochrane Centre, Denmark
Abstract
Background: Screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) has been implemented in Sweden, the UK and the USA based on a relative reduction in disease-specific mortality of about 50% in randomised trials, which translates into a 0.5% absolute mortality reduction (1) However, these estimates were based on populations with a much higher disease prevalence than today; due to reduced smoking, the incidence of AAA has fallen over 70% (2), resulting in reduced absolute benefit and probably a worsened benefit/harm-ratio (3). Additionally, AAA screening has been claimed to result in reduced mortality from other diseases due to life-style modifications and treatment of cardiovascular risk factors following a AAA-diagnosis. However, these claims are debated (4), and meta-analyses have not shown a significant reduction in total mortality (1).

Objectives: To estimate the effect of organised AAA screening in Sweden on disease-specific and total mortality.

Methods: We are conducting a study based on national Swedish registry data using anonymised, individual patient data for disease-specific AAA mortality and total mortality. The Swedish screening programme was gradually implemented from 2006 to 2015, which makes it possible to compare a screened versus a non-screened cohort.

Results: We will discuss the methodological challenges created by substantially diminishing disease incidence in our on-going register study, and how we have tackled them. Preliminary results will be presented.

Conclusions: The balance of benefits and harms of AAA screening today is unknown. The gradual implementation of AAA screening in Sweden presents a unique possibility for evaluation of the screening programme, but substantially declining disease incidence complicates analyses.

1. Guirguis-Blake JM, et al. Ann Intern Med 2014; 160: 321–9.
2. Darwood R, et al. J Vasc Surg 2012; 56: 8–13.
3. Johansson M, et al. BMJ 2015; 350: h825.
4. Johansson M, et al. Lancet 2016; 387: 308-10.