Endovascular Versus Open Repair as Primary Strategy for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A National Population-based Study

被引:51
|
作者
Gunnarsson, K. [1 ,2 ]
Wanhainen, A. [1 ]
Gidlund, K. Djavani [1 ,2 ]
Bjorck, M. [1 ]
Mani, K. [1 ]
机构
[1] Uppsala Univ, Vasc Surg Sect, Dept Surg Sci, Uppsala, Sweden
[2] Uppsala Univ, Cty Council Gavleborg, Ctr Res & Dev, Gavle, Sweden
基金
瑞典研究理事会;
关键词
Abdominal aortic aneurysm; Endovascular repair; Rupture; Surgical outcome; SURGERY; LESSONS; TRIAL;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejvs.2015.07.001
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective/Background: In randomized trials, no peri-operative survival benefit has been shown for endovascular (EVAR) repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) when compared with open repair. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of primary repair strategy on early and midterm survival in a non-selected population based study. Methods: The Swedish Vascular Registry was consulted to identify all rAAA repairs performed in Sweden in the period 2008-12. Centers with a primary EVAR strategy (treating > 50% of rAAA with EVAR) were compared with centers with a primary open repair strategy. Peri-operative outcome, midterm survival, and incidence of rAAA repair/100,000 inhabitants aged > 50 years were assessed. Results: In total, 1,304 patients were identified. Three primary EVAR centers (pEVARc) operated on 236 patients (74.6% EVAR). Twenty-six primary open repair centers (pORc) operated 1,068 patients (15.6% EVAR). Patients treated at pEVARc were more often referrals (28.0% vs. 5.3%; p < .01), had a higher rate of respiratory comorbidity (36.5% vs. 21.9%; p < .01), and higher pre-operative systolic blood pressure (84.3 vs. 72.3 mmHg; p < .01). There was no difference in mortality based on primary treatment strategy at 30 days (pEVARc 28.0%, n = 66; pORc 27.4%, n = 296 [p = .87]), 1 year (pEVARc 39.9%, n = 93; pORc 34.7%, n = 366 [p = .19]), or 2 years (42.1%, n = 94; 38.3%, n = 394 [p = .28]), either overall or in subgroups based on age or referral status. Overall, patients treated with EVAR were older (mean age.76.4 vs. 74.0 years; p <.01), and had a lower 30 day mortality (EVAR 21.6%, n = 74; odds ratio 29.6%, n = 288 [p = < .01]). Incidence of rAAA repair was lower in pEVARc regions (6.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.01-7.13) when compared with pORc regions (8.15, 95% CI 7.64-8.66). Conclusion: There was no difference in mortality after rAAA repair among centers with a primary EVAR approach when compared with a primary open repair strategy, either peri-operatively or in the midterm. The study supports the early findings of the randomized controlled trials in a national population based setting. (C) 2015 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:22 / 28
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Commentary on 'Endovascular Versus Open Repair as Primary Strategy for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A National Population -based Study'
    Archie, J. P.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF VASCULAR AND ENDOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2016, 51 (01) : 29 - 29
  • [2] Endovascular versus open repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm
    McHugh, S. M.
    Aherne, T.
    Goetz, T.
    Byrne, J.
    Boyle, E.
    Allen, M.
    Leahy, A.
    Moneley, D.
    Naughton, P.
    SURGEON-JOURNAL OF THE ROYAL COLLEGES OF SURGEONS OF EDINBURGH AND IRELAND, 2016, 14 (05): : 274 - 277
  • [3] Endovascular Versus Open Repair for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm
    Nedeau, April E.
    Pomposelli, Frank B.
    Hamdan, Allen
    Wyers, Mark C.
    Hsu, Richard
    Sachs, Teviah
    Siracuse, Jeffrey J.
    Schermerhorn, Marc
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 2010, 52 (04) : 1116 - 1116
  • [4] Treatment Strategy of Endovascular versus Open Repair for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Based on the Fitzgerald Classification
    Sato, Koji
    Kurimoto, Yoshihiko
    Kuroda, Yosuke
    Makino, Yutaka
    Kubota, Suguru
    Maruyama, Ryushi
    Hanawa, Makoto
    Morishita, Kiyofumi
    ANNALS OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 2020, 69 : 324 - 331
  • [5] Comparative effectiveness of endovascular versus open repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm in the Medicare population
    Edwards, Samuel T.
    Schermerhorn, Marc L.
    O'Malley, A. James
    Bensley, Rodney P.
    Hurks, Rob
    Cotterill, Philip
    Landon, Bruce E.
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 2014, 59 (03) : 575 - +
  • [6] COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF ENDOVASCULAR VERSUS OPEN REPAIR OF RUPTURED ABDOMINAL AORTIC ANEURYSM IN THE MEDICARE POPULATION
    Edwards, Samuel T.
    Schermerhorn, Marc
    O'Malley, A. James
    Bensley, Rodney P.
    Hurks, Rob
    Cotterill, Philip
    Landon, Bruce E.
    JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2012, 27 : S145 - S146
  • [7] Endovascular or open repair for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm?
    Bjorck, Martin
    BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2017, 359
  • [8] Treatment of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: open surgical repair versus endovascular repair
    Ucles Cabeza, Oscar
    Martinez Lopez, Isaac
    Pla Sanchez, Ferran
    Baturone Blanco, Adriana
    Serrano Hernando, Francisco Javier
    ANGIOLOGIA, 2021, 73 (04): : 173 - 181
  • [9] Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: A retrospective assessment of open versus endovascular repair
    Vaddineni, SK
    Russo, GC
    Patterson, MA
    Taylor, SM
    Jordan, WD
    ANNALS OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 2005, 19 (06) : 782 - 786
  • [10] Population-based long-term outcomes of open versus endovascular aortic repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms
    Salata, Konrad
    Hussain, Mohamad A.
    de Mestral, Charles
    Greco, Elisa
    Awartani, Hadeel
    Aljabri, Badr A.
    Mamdani, Muhammad
    Forbes, Thomas L.
    Bhatt, Deepak L.
    Verma, Subodh
    Al-Omran, Mohammed
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 2020, 71 (06) : 1867 - +