Validity of the Hardman Index to Predict Outcome in Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm

This study assessed the validity of the Hardman index in predicting outcome following open repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm and whether this scoring system can be used reliably to select patients for surgical repair. Patients undergoing open repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm in two university teaching hospitals over a 5-year period were identified from a computerized hospital database. Thirty-day mortality was the main outcome measure. Five Hardman index factors were calculated and related to outcome retrospectively. There were 178 patients with a mean age of 73.9 years (range 51–94) and a male to female ratio of 5.4:1. The overall in-hospital mortality was 57.3% (102/178). Univariate analysis of risk factors showed that age >76 years (P = 0.007, odds ratio [OR] 2.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.26-4.37) and electrocardiograghic evidence of ischemia on admission (P = 0.002, OR 3.75, 95% CI 1.57-8.93) were associated with high mortality. However, loss of consciousness (P = 0.155, OR 1.56, 95% CI 0.85-2.86), hemoglobin <9 g/dL (P = 0.118, OR 1.89, 95% CI 0.85-4.22), and serum creatinine >0.19 mmol/L (P = 0.691, OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.42-3.70) were not significant predictors of mortality. Using a multivariate analysis, age >76 years (P = 0.043, OR 2.29, 95% CI 1.03-5.11) and myocardial ischemia (P = 0.029, OR 2.93, 95% CI 1.12-7.67) were again found to be the significant predictors of mortality. The operative mortality was 44%, 46%, 68%, 79%, and 100% for Hardman scores of 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, respectively. No patient had a score of 5. The Hardman index is not a reliable predictor of outcome following repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. High-risk patients may still survive and should not be denied surgical repair based on the scoring system alone. Further evaluation of the risk factors is required to reliably and justifiably exclude those patients in whom the intervention is inappropriate.