OBJECTIVE: Endovascular repair of popliteal artery aneurysms is a relatively new technique that is still undergoing evaluation. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes following open and endovascular approaches. METHODS: All published studies comparing outcomes following open and endovascular popliteal aneurysm were included. Endpoints included operative duration, length of stay, and postoperative complications including short-term patency rates. Outcomes were combined using a random-effects meta-analytical technique and differences assessed using odds ratios (OR), weighted mean difference (WMD) and log hazards ratio (HR). RESULTS: Three studies comprising 141 patients (37 endovascular; 104 open) were included. No significant differences in patient characteristics were seen. Operative duration was significantly longer for endovascular repair (WMD 120 minutes, p<0.001). Thirty day graft thrombosis (OR 5.05, p=0.06) and reintervention (OR 18.80, p=0.03) were more likely following endovascular repairs. Postoperative length of stay was shorter in the endovascular group (WMD--3.9 days, p<0.001). There was no significant difference in long-term primary patency rates (HR 1.70, p=0.53). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular repair of popliteal artery aneurysms offers similar medium-term benefits as an open repair. However, short-term graft thrombosis and reintervention rates are significantly greater. With the current technology it is difficult to justify endovascular treatment of popliteal aneurysms.
OBJECTIVE: Endovascular repair of popliteal artery aneurysms is a relatively new technique that is still undergoing evaluation. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes following open and endovascular approaches. METHODS: All published studies comparing outcomes following open and endovascular popliteal aneurysm were included. Endpoints included operative duration, length of stay, and postoperative complications including short-term patency rates. Outcomes were combined using a random-effects meta-analytical technique and differences assessed using odds ratios (OR), weighted mean difference (WMD) and log hazards ratio (HR). RESULTS: Three studies comprising 141 patients (37 endovascular; 104 open) were included. No significant differences in patient characteristics were seen. Operative duration was significantly longer for endovascular repair (WMD 120 minutes, p<0.001). Thirty day graft thrombosis (OR 5.05, p=0.06) and reintervention (OR 18.80, p=0.03) were more likely following endovascular repairs. Postoperative length of stay was shorter in the endovascular group (WMD--3.9 days, p<0.001). There was no significant difference in long-term primary patency rates (HR 1.70, p=0.53). CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular repair of popliteal artery aneurysms offers similar medium-term benefits as an open repair. However, short-term graft thrombosis and reintervention rates are significantly greater. With the current technology it is difficult to justify endovascular treatment of popliteal aneurysms.
Authors: Mohammad H Eslami; Gheorghe Doros; Philip P Goodney; Jens Elderup-Jorgenson; Jack L Cronenwett; Marina Malikova; Alik Farber Journal: Ann Vasc Surg Date: 2014-10-12 Impact factor: 1.466
Authors: G Guzzardi; R Fossaceca; P Cerini; M Di Terlizzi; C Stanca; I Di Gesù; F Martino; P Brustia; A Carriero Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2012-06-28 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Umar Sadat; Peter J Kullar; Ayesha Noorani; Jonathan H Gillard; David G Cooper; Jonathan R Boyle Journal: World J Emerg Surg Date: 2008-07-21 Impact factor: 5.469
Authors: Rodrigo Nóbrega Bandeira; Daniel Guimarães Cacione; Francisco Chavier Vieira Bandeira; Ariane de Sousa Pelissoni; Cibele Ohany Nogueira Leite; Luis Carlos Uta Nakano Journal: J Vasc Bras Date: 2018 Jan-Mar