| Literature DB >> 28828934 |
Hilin Yildirim1, Guus W van Lammeren1, Çagdas Ünlü2, Eric P van Dongen3, Rob Hw van de Mortel1, Jean-Paul Pm de Vries1.
Abstract
Objectives To evaluate long-term outcome and quality of life after open and endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms. Methods All consecutive ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm patients at the St. Antonius Hospital treated for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm between January 2005 and January 2015 were included. Mortality, morbidity, and re-interventions within 30 days and during follow-up were registered. Quality of life was measured with Short Form-36 questionnaire among survivors. Additional subgroup analysis between open repair and endovascular repair was performed. Results A total of 192 patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm were included: 76.6% (147/192) underwent open repair and 23.4% (45/192) endovascular repair. All-cause 30-day mortality rate was 31.3% (60/192), and 30-day morbidity rate was 70.3% (135/192). Median stay at the intensive care unit was two days for endovascular repair and four days for open repair ( p = 0.002). No other statistically significant differences between endovascular repair and open repair were observed. After a mean follow-up period of 62 months (range 9-126), 72.4% (76/105) of the responders had equivalent Short Form-36 scores as compared to the age-matched general Dutch population, and 84.2% (64/76) of the responders would choose surgery again if they would have a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Conclusions Survivors of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm have similar long-term quality of life scores compared to the age-matched general population. The majority of all survivors would choose to undergo acute abdominal aortic aneurysm repair again.Entities:
Keywords: Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm; Short Form-36; long term; outcome; quality of life
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28828934 DOI: 10.1177/1708538117727360
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Vascular ISSN: 1708-5381 Impact factor: 1.285