Literature DB >> 22791195

Institutional differences in endovascular aneurysm repair and aneurysm morphology.

Andrew L Tambyraja1, Julio A Rodriguez-Lopez, Venkatesh Ramaiah, Edward B Diethrich, Roderick T Chalmers.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Variability exists between institutions in the application of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). This study compares patient-specific variables from a high-volume North American institution with one from the UK.
METHODS: One hundred consecutive patients from each institution were studied. All were treated for an intact, infrarenal aortic aneurysm. Patient characteristics and aneurysm-related variables, measured from computed tomography according to Society for Vascular Surgery (USA) reporting standards, were examined.
RESULTS: The median (range) age of the American patients was 74 (55-97) years and that of the British patients, 73 (49-89) years. There were 78 men in the American group and 79 men in the British group. All American patients were treated by EVAR compared to 11 % of the British group. Mean (SD) aneurysm diameter for the former was 55 (9) mm and for the latter 64 (11) mm (P < 0.001). While there was no difference in mean diameter of the infrarenal aortic neck (P = 0.918), the aneurysms of British patients (22 %) were more likely to be angulated >60° than those of the American patients (11 %) (P = 0.039). Furthermore, the mean (SD) length of infrarenal aortic neck was shorter in the British patients [21 (11) mm] compared to the American group [25 (12) mm] (P = 0.003). The mean diameter of the common iliac arteries was larger in the British patients than in the American group (P < 0.001). Mean external iliac artery diameter was no different between the groups (P = 0.507).
CONCLUSIONS: This group of British patients have a more advanced pattern of aneurysm morphology than American patients of similar age. This difference may, in part, explain variability in the application of EVAR.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22791195     DOI: 10.1007/s00268-012-1706-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World J Surg        ISSN: 0364-2313            Impact factor:   3.352


  16 in total

Review 1.  Reporting standards for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

Authors:  Elliot L Chaikof; Jan D Blankensteijn; Peter L Harris; Geoffrey H White; Christopher K Zarins; Victor M Bernhard; Jon S Matsumura; James May; Frank J Veith; Mark F Fillinger; Robert B Rutherford; K Craig Kent
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.268

2.  High rates of ischaemic heart disease in Scotland are not explained by conventional risk factors.

Authors:  Richard Mitchell; Gerry Fowkes; David Blane; Mel Bartley
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 3.710

3.  Evidence from cross-sectional imaging indicates abdominal but not thoracic aortic aneurysms are local manifestations of a systemic dilating diathesis.

Authors:  Ian Nordon; Ranjeet Brar; Jeremy Taylor; Robert Hinchliffe; Ian M Loftus; Matt M Thompson
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 4.268

4.  Immediate repair compared with surveillance of small abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Authors:  Frank A Lederle; Samuel E Wilson; Gary R Johnson; Donovan B Reinke; Fred N Littooy; Charles W Acher; David J Ballard; Louis M Messina; Ian L Gordon; Edmund P Chute; William C Krupski; Steven J Busuttil; Gary W Barone; Steven Sparks; Linda M Graham; Joseph H Rapp; Michel S Makaroun; Gregory L Moneta; Robert A Cambria; Raymond G Makhoul; Darwin Eton; Howard J Ansel; Julie A Freischlag; Dennis Bandyk
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-05-09       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Endovascular aneurysm repair versus open repair in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR trial 1): randomised controlled trial.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2005 Jun 25-Jul 1       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Endovascular repair compared with surveillance for patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Authors:  Kenneth Ouriel; Daniel G Clair; K Craig Kent; Christopher K Zarins
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2010-03-20       Impact factor: 4.268

7.  Patient preference for surgical method of abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: postal survey.

Authors:  J A Reise; H Sheldon; J Earnshaw; A R Naylor; F Dick; J T Powell; R M Greenhalgh
Journal:  Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg       Date:  2009-09-22       Impact factor: 7.069

8.  Mortality results for randomised controlled trial of early elective surgery or ultrasonographic surveillance for small abdominal aortic aneurysms. The UK Small Aneurysm Trial Participants.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1998-11-21       Impact factor: 79.321

9.  Diameter of abdominal aortic aneurysm and outcome of endovascular aneurysm repair: does size matter? A report from EUROSTAR.

Authors:  Noud Peppelenbosch; Jacob Buth; Peter L Harris; Corine van Marrewijk; Gerdine Fransen
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 4.268

10.  Effect of endovascular aneurysm repair on the volume-outcome relationship in aneurysm repair.

Authors:  Peter J E Holt; Jan D Poloniecki; Usman Khalid; Robert J Hinchliffe; Ian M Loftus; Matt M Thompson
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2009-09-22
View more
  1 in total

1.  Variation in the choice of elective surgical procedure for abdominal aortic aneurysm in Spain.

Authors:  M Jesús Quintana; Ignasi Gich; Julián Librero; Sergi Bellmunt-Montoya; José R Escudero; Xavier Bonfill
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2019-04-08
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.