INTRODUCTION: Successful endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) requires detailed pre-operative imaging to allow device planning. This process may delay surgery and some aneurysms may rupture prior to intervention. The aim of this study was to quantify these delays. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected prospectively on all patients presenting with non-ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) between January 2003 and October 2005. The delay between referral, the first out-patient visit, CT-scan, follow-up appointment and surgery were quantified in all patients and compared between two groups undergoing open repair and EVAR. RESULTS: A total of 146 patients underwent AAA repair during the study (48 EVAR versus 98 open repair). There was no significant differences in the wait for CT scans between the groups (median 42 days for EVAR versus 47 days for open repairs [P = 0.48]) or the median interval between decision to operate and surgery (56 days versus 42 days [P = 0.075]). However, the median delay between referral and surgery was significantly longer in those patients undergoing EVAR at 129 days versus 77 days for open repair (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Patients presenting electively with AAAs experienced significant delay from referral to surgery. This delay was significantly greater in those patients undergoing endovascular repair. Inevitably, some patients will rupture whilst waiting and strategies aimed at reducing delay should be pursued.
INTRODUCTION: Successful endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) requires detailed pre-operative imaging to allow device planning. This process may delay surgery and some aneurysms may rupture prior to intervention. The aim of this study was to quantify these delays. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected prospectively on all patients presenting with non-ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) between January 2003 and October 2005. The delay between referral, the first out-patient visit, CT-scan, follow-up appointment and surgery were quantified in all patients and compared between two groups undergoing open repair and EVAR. RESULTS: A total of 146 patients underwent AAA repair during the study (48 EVAR versus 98 open repair). There was no significant differences in the wait for CT scans between the groups (median 42 days for EVAR versus 47 days for open repairs [P = 0.48]) or the median interval between decision to operate and surgery (56 days versus 42 days [P = 0.075]). However, the median delay between referral and surgery was significantly longer in those patients undergoing EVAR at 129 days versus 77 days for open repair (P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS:Patients presenting electively with AAAs experienced significant delay from referral to surgery. This delay was significantly greater in those patients undergoing endovascular repair. Inevitably, some patients will rupture whilst waiting and strategies aimed at reducing delay should be pursued.
Authors: C J Callaghan; A G Lynch; I Amin; M Fazel; M J Lindop; M E Gaunt; K Varty Journal: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg Date: 2005-04-15 Impact factor: 7.069
Authors: Frank A Lederle; Gary R Johnson; Samuel E Wilson; David J Ballard; William D Jordan; John Blebea; Fred N Littooy; Julie A Freischlag; Dennis Bandyk; Joseph H Rapp; Atef A Salam Journal: JAMA Date: 2002-06-12 Impact factor: 56.272