Jan Gnus1, Stanisław Ferenc1, Małgorzata Dziewiszek2, Lesław Rusiecki3, Wojciech Witkiewicz1. 1. Department of General and Vascular Surgery, Research and Development Centre, Voivodship Specialist Hospital in Wroclaw, Poland. 2. Faculty of Medicine, Wroclaw Medical University, Poland. 3. Laboratory of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Wroclaw Medical University, Poland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair has become an alternative to open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm since the early 1990s. The conventional method remains the gold standard in the treatment of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (AAA); however, a large percentage of patients do not qualify for this treatment due to the high risk of perioperational death and complications. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this work was to compare AAA surgeries performed by both classical and endovascular methods in years 2002-2011. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Medical documentation of elective AAA patients undergoing surgical treatment was retrospectively analyzed on the basis of archive- and computer database data. The analysis included the patients' demographics, internal disease burden, as well as causes of deaths and complications within 30 days after the procedure and 1 year follow-up. RESULTS: Thirty-day and 1-year mortality rates in patients treated in the elective setting were 1.5% and 8.7% for endovascular method and 4.0% and 15.7% for the open method. The comparison of mortality rates in 115 high-risk patients undergoing elective OR treatment with 275 high-risk treatment patients undergoing EVAR surgery (7.8% vs. 1.5%, 8.7% vs. 15.7%, p<.01) showed that the endovascular method significantly reduced the mortality in the latter group. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment is an attractive option in AAA; especially in heavily burdened patients, because it definitely reduces mortality. EVAR was found to be advantageous over OR in case of high-risk patients.
BACKGROUND: Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair has become an alternative to open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm since the early 1990s. The conventional method remains the gold standard in the treatment of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (AAA); however, a large percentage of patients do not qualify for this treatment due to the high risk of perioperational death and complications. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this work was to compare AAA surgeries performed by both classical and endovascular methods in years 2002-2011. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Medical documentation of elective AAA patients undergoing surgical treatment was retrospectively analyzed on the basis of archive- and computer database data. The analysis included the patients' demographics, internal disease burden, as well as causes of deaths and complications within 30 days after the procedure and 1 year follow-up. RESULTS: Thirty-day and 1-year mortality rates in patients treated in the elective setting were 1.5% and 8.7% for endovascular method and 4.0% and 15.7% for the open method. The comparison of mortality rates in 115 high-risk patients undergoing elective OR treatment with 275 high-risk treatment patients undergoing EVAR surgery (7.8% vs. 1.5%, 8.7% vs. 15.7%, p<.01) showed that the endovascular method significantly reduced the mortality in the latter group. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment is an attractive option in AAA; especially in heavily burdened patients, because it definitely reduces mortality. EVAR was found to be advantageous over OR in case of high-risk patients.
Authors: Lazar B Davidovic; Milanko Maksic; Igor Koncar; Nikola Ilic; Marko Dragas; Nikola Fatic; Miroslav Markovic; Igor Banzic; Perica Mutavdzic Journal: World J Surg Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Ties L Janssen; Christina A Mosk; Chantal C H A van Hoof-de Lepper; Daphne Wielders; Tom C J Seerden; Ewout W Steyerberg; Adriaan J van Gammeren; Dominique C de Lange; René van Alphen; Martine van der Zee; René M de Bruijn; Jolanda de Vries; Jan H Wijsman; Gwan H Ho; Paul D Gobardhan; Lijckle van der Laan Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2019-03-20 Impact factor: 3.921
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