Literature DB >> 12223004

Endovascular versus conventional open repair of acute abdominal aortic aneurysm: feasibility and preliminary results.

Marc R H M van Sambeek1, Lukas C van Dijk, Johanna M Hendriks, Martine van Grotel, Jan-Willem Kuiper, Peter M T Pattynama, Hero van Urk.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility of endovascular treatment of acute abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) with commercially prepared bifurcated systems.
METHODS: From January through July 2001, 22 patients (17 men; mean age 73.6 years, range 59-89) were referred with an acute (symptomatic/ruptured) AAA. Six patients were treated with emergent open surgery because of hemodynamic instability, but the other 16 patients underwent computed tomographic angiography with multidirectional reconstruction. Six (27%) aneurysms were suitable for endovascular repair (EVR) and were successfully treated. Procedural variables, morbidity, and mortality were compared between the EVR group and 6 patients of equivalent hemodynamic status from among the conventionally treated patients.
RESULTS: There was no mortality in either group. The median aneurysm diameter in the EVR group was 63 mm (range 48-84) versus 80 mm (45-82) in the matched surgically treated AAAs (p=0.628). Procedural duration was 193 minutes (150-265) for the EVR group compared to 203 minutes (130-270) for the matched group (p=0.630). Median blood loss was significantly less (p=0.010) in the EVR group (125 versus 3400 mL). Median length of stay (LOS) in intensive care was 8 hours (0-21) versus 62 hours (48-112) for the surgical group (p=0.004). Hospital LOS was significantly reduced (p=0.024) for the EVR patients (7.5 [2-16] versus 15.5 [10-34] days).
CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment of acute aneurysm is feasible, and preliminary results are promising.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12223004     DOI: 10.1177/152660280200900410

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Endovasc Ther        ISSN: 1526-6028            Impact factor:   3.487


  5 in total

1.  Endovascular techniques for the treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms: 7-year intention-to-treat results.

Authors:  Ilias Dalainas; Giovanni Nano; Paolo Bianchi; Silvia Stegher; Renato Casana; Giovanni Malacrida; Domenico G Tealdi
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2006-10       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Endovascular treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms: aorto-uni-iliac or bifurcated endograft?

Authors:  G Carrafiello; G Piffaretti; D Laganà; F Fontana; M Mangini; A M Ierardi; F Piacentino; A Canì; G Mariscalco; A Di Massa; S Cuffari; P Castelli; C Fugazzola
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2011-09-02       Impact factor: 3.469

3.  Long-term outcome of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: impact of treatment and age.

Authors:  Jelle W Raats; Hans C Flu; Gwan H Ho; Eelco J Veen; Louwerens D Vos; Ewout W Steyerberg; Lijckle van der Laan
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2014-10-13       Impact factor: 4.458

Review 4.  Endovascular repair or open repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: a Cochrane systematic review.

Authors:  S A Badger; D W Harkin; P H Blair; P K Ellis; F Kee; R Forster
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-02-12       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 5.  Effects of study design and trends for EVAR versus OSR.

Authors:  Robert Hopkins; James Bowen; Kaitryn Campbell; Gord Blackhouse; Guy De Rose; Teresa Novick; Daria O'Reilly; Ron Goeree; Jean-Eric Tarride
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2008
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.