These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed


  • Title: Comparison of open and endovascular repair of juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms.
    Author: Steffen M, Schmitz-Rixen T, Böckler D, Grundmann RT, DIGG gGmbH.
    Journal: Langenbecks Arch Surg; 2020 Mar; 405(2):207-213. PubMed ID: 32266530.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: This study compares the perioperative outcome in elective repair of the juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), depending upon whether patients received an open (OAR) or endovascular procedure (EVAR). METHODS: The database stems from the 2013-2017 AAA registry of the German Institute for Vascular Health Research (DIGG) of the German Society for Vascular Surgery and Vascular Medicine (DGG), with a total of 1603 juxtarenal AAAs. 786 patients (49.0%) were treated with an endovascular (EVAR) procedure, and 817 (51.0%) with an open (OAR) procedure. RESULTS: Patients receiving EVAR had a median age of 73 years and those receiving OAR a median age of 71 years (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients over 80 years of age was 17.0% for EVAR and 9.9% for OAR (p < 0.001). The proportion of women receiving EVAR (16.9%) was slightly lower than that receiving OAR (18.6%). Aneurysm diameter differed significantly (EVAR mean 57.80 mm, OAR 59.07 mm; p = 0.038). Preoperatively impaired renal function stages 3 to 5 were not significantly different (EVAR 12.5%, OAR 14.4%, p = 0.158). Postoperative complications were significantly less with EVAR (31%) than with OAR at 45.7% (p = 0.001). In regard to MACE (major adverse cardiac events = perioperative death, stroke, or myocardial infarction), there were no significant differences between EVAR (8.8%) and OAR (10.3%) (p = 0.191). Hospital mortality was only in trend lower with EVAR than with OAR (5.7% vs. 7.7%, respectively; p = 0.068). This held true for the hospital mortality in the group above 80 years of age as well. Inpatient stay was 9 (13.3) days for EVAR and 14 (18.8) days for OAR (p < 0.001). The hospital mortality for women receiving EVAR was 10.5%, and significantly higher (p = 0.008) than that for men (4.7%). The same held true for OAR (hospital mortality for women was 11.8%, for men 6.8%; p = 0.030). CONCLUSION: In terms of perioperative outcome, the endovascular procedure for treating juxtarenal AAA is more favorable than that documented for OAR. Further investigation is necessary to determine whether EVAR is comparable with OAR in the long term when treating juxtarenal AAA.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]