R M Sandford1, E Choke2, M J Bown2, R D Sayers2. 1. University Hospitals of Leicester, Leicester Royal Infirmary, Leicester, UK. Electronic address: Becky.sandford@uhl-tr.nhs.uk. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Sciences and the NIHR Leicester Cardiovascular Biomedical Research Unit, RKCSB, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The lower procedural risk associated with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open aneurysm repair (OAR) is well known. Younger patients are likely to represent a group at low perioperative risk. The long-term durability and late complications following EVAR may have more significance when considering the optimal treatment for young patients with a longer life expectancy. This study examined perioperative and long-term outcomes of young patients undergoing aneurysm repair by either open surgical or endovascular means. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively collated database was performed. Patients undergoing elective aneurysm repair at the age of 65 years or younger between January 2000 and September 2010 were included. All EVAR patients were followed up in a nurse-led clinic. Data regarding long-term outcomes for patients undergoing open repair were gathered from case note review. RESULTS: There were 99 patients who underwent open repair and 59 patients who underwent endovascular repair. Groups were well matched in terms of demographics and co-morbidities. 30-day mortality was 1% after open repair. There were no perioperative deaths after endovascular repair. Overall, 30-day complication rates were 15% after open repair and 12% after EVAR. The nature of complications differed between the two groups with the EVAR group experiencing endoleaks and the OAR group demonstrating more cardiorespiratory complications. Mean follow-up was 75.5 months and there was a 14% reintervention rate after EVAR compared with 7% after OAR. CONCLUSION: Young patients are likely to have a lower procedural risk for EVAR and OAR than described in published figures. Although mortality and complication rates in these two groups were similar, the nature of complications occurring following open surgery were often more significant than those occurring after EVAR. There remains a risk of late reintervention following either form of repair.
OBJECTIVE: The lower procedural risk associated with endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) compared with open aneurysm repair (OAR) is well known. Younger patients are likely to represent a group at low perioperative risk. The long-term durability and late complications following EVAR may have more significance when considering the optimal treatment for young patients with a longer life expectancy. This study examined perioperative and long-term outcomes of young patients undergoing aneurysm repair by either open surgical or endovascular means. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively collated database was performed. Patients undergoing elective aneurysm repair at the age of 65 years or younger between January 2000 and September 2010 were included. All EVAR patients were followed up in a nurse-led clinic. Data regarding long-term outcomes for patients undergoing open repair were gathered from case note review. RESULTS: There were 99 patients who underwent open repair and 59 patients who underwent endovascular repair. Groups were well matched in terms of demographics and co-morbidities. 30-day mortality was 1% after open repair. There were no perioperative deaths after endovascular repair. Overall, 30-day complication rates were 15% after open repair and 12% after EVAR. The nature of complications differed between the two groups with the EVAR group experiencing endoleaks and the OAR group demonstrating more cardiorespiratory complications. Mean follow-up was 75.5 months and there was a 14% reintervention rate after EVAR compared with 7% after OAR. CONCLUSION: Young patients are likely to have a lower procedural risk for EVAR and OAR than described in published figures. Although mortality and complication rates in these two groups were similar, the nature of complications occurring following open surgery were often more significant than those occurring after EVAR. There remains a risk of late reintervention following either form of repair.
Authors: Piotr Kulig; Krzysztof Lewandowski; Bogusław Rudel; Maciej Chwała; Marek Piwowarczyk; Wojciech Mrowiecki Journal: Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne Date: 2020-03-27 Impact factor: 1.195
Authors: Piotr Kulig; Krzysztof Lewandowski; Bartłomiej Banaś; Piotr Piekorz; Andrzej Kostka; Maciej Zaniewski Journal: Wideochir Inne Tech Maloinwazyjne Date: 2018-02-07 Impact factor: 1.195