OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of eligibility among patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) considered for endovascular repair and to examine the effect of an endovascular program on the institutional pattern of AAA repair. METHODS: All patients evaluated for endovascular AAA repair since the inception of an endovascular program were reviewed for determination of eligibility rates and eventual treatment. Open AAA repairs were categorized as simple (uncomplicated infrarenal), complex (juxtarenal, suprarenal, thoracoabdominal, infected), or ruptured, and their rates before and after initiation of an endovascular program were compared. RESULTS: Over 3 years, 324 patients were considered for endovascular AAA repair; 176 (54%) were candidates, 138 (43%) were not candidates, and 10 (3%) did not complete the evaluation. The rate of eligibility increased significantly from 45% (66/148 patients) during the first half of this period to 63% (110/176 patients) during the second half (P <. 001). Candidates were significantly younger (74.4 +/- 7.6 years) than noncandidates (78.3 +/- 6.7 years) (P <.01), and their aneurysm diameter tended to be smaller (57.6 +/- 9.2 mm compared with 60.8 +/- 12.3 mm; P =.06). The most common reason for ineligibility was an inadequate proximal aortic neck. Of 176 candidates, 78% underwent endovascular repair, and 6% underwent open repair. Of 138 noncandidates, 56% underwent surgical repair. Over a period of 6 years, 542 patients with AAAs (429 simple, 86 complex, 27 ruptured) underwent open repair. The total number and ratio of simple to complex open repairs for nonruptured aneurysms during the 3 years before the initiation of the endovascular program (213 simple, 44 complex) were not significantly different from the repairs over the subsequent 3-year period (216 simple, 42 complex). Similarly, no difference in the total number and the ratio of simple to complex open repairs was found between the first and the second 18-month periods since the initiation of the endovascular program. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of eligibility of patients with AAA for endovascular repair appears to be higher than previously reported. The presence of an active endovascular program has not decreased the number or shifted the distribution of open AAA repair.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of eligibility among patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) considered for endovascular repair and to examine the effect of an endovascular program on the institutional pattern of AAA repair. METHODS: All patients evaluated for endovascular AAA repair since the inception of an endovascular program were reviewed for determination of eligibility rates and eventual treatment. Open AAA repairs were categorized as simple (uncomplicated infrarenal), complex (juxtarenal, suprarenal, thoracoabdominal, infected), or ruptured, and their rates before and after initiation of an endovascular program were compared. RESULTS: Over 3 years, 324 patients were considered for endovascular AAA repair; 176 (54%) were candidates, 138 (43%) were not candidates, and 10 (3%) did not complete the evaluation. The rate of eligibility increased significantly from 45% (66/148 patients) during the first half of this period to 63% (110/176 patients) during the second half (P <. 001). Candidates were significantly younger (74.4 +/- 7.6 years) than noncandidates (78.3 +/- 6.7 years) (P <.01), and their aneurysm diameter tended to be smaller (57.6 +/- 9.2 mm compared with 60.8 +/- 12.3 mm; P =.06). The most common reason for ineligibility was an inadequate proximal aortic neck. Of 176 candidates, 78% underwent endovascular repair, and 6% underwent open repair. Of 138 noncandidates, 56% underwent surgical repair. Over a period of 6 years, 542 patients with AAAs (429 simple, 86 complex, 27 ruptured) underwent open repair. The total number and ratio of simple to complex open repairs for nonruptured aneurysms during the 3 years before the initiation of the endovascular program (213 simple, 44 complex) were not significantly different from the repairs over the subsequent 3-year period (216 simple, 42 complex). Similarly, no difference in the total number and the ratio of simple to complex open repairs was found between the first and the second 18-month periods since the initiation of the endovascular program. CONCLUSIONS: The rate of eligibility of patients with AAA for endovascular repair appears to be higher than previously reported. The presence of an active endovascular program has not decreased the number or shifted the distribution of open AAA repair.
Authors: Leonard W Tse; Oren K Steinmetz; Cherrie Z Abraham; David A Valenti; Kent S Mackenzie; Daniel I Obrand; Timothy A Chuter Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2004-08 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Jiusong Sun; Jie Zhang; Jes S Lindholt; Galina K Sukhova; Jian Liu; Aina He; Magnus Abrink; Gunnar Pejler; Richard L Stevens; Robert W Thompson; Terri L Ennis; Michael F Gurish; Peter Libby; Guo-Ping Shi Journal: Circulation Date: 2009-08-31 Impact factor: 29.690