Endovascular aortic repair or minimal incision aortic surgery: Which procedure to choose for treatment of high-risk aneurysms?

BACKGROUND

This study evaluates use of endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) and minimal incision aortic surgery (MIAS) for treatment of high-risk patients with infrarenal aneurysms.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients treated with EVAR or MIAS between 2000 and 2002 was performed. High-risk criteria included age older than 80 years, creatinine level greater than 3.0 mg/dL, recent myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hostile abdomen, or morbid obesity (body mass index greater than 30). Patient demographics, duration of stay, morbidity, and mortality were compared. Exclusionary criteria for EVAR treatment included neck less than 1.5 cm or greater than 26 mm in diameter, densely calcified iliac arteries less than 6 mm, or creatinine level greater than 3.0 mg/dL. Exclusionary criteria for MIAS included pararenal abdominal aortic aneurysm, aneurysm greater than 10 cm, and morbid obesity.

RESULTS

Eighty-four patients were treated (61 EVAR, 23 MIAS). Average age for EVAR was 74 years and 72 years for MIAS. Average aneurysm size was 6 cm for both. American Society of Anesthesiologists score was 3.1 for EVAR and 3.0 for MIAS patients. Thirty-two of 61 EVAR patients (52%) had 2 risk factors, and 12 of 61 (20%) had 3 risk factors. Seven of 23 MIAS patients (30%) had 2 risk factors, and 7 had more than 3 risk factors (30%). There were 2 EVAR deaths (3%) from multiorgan failure and 1 MIAS death (4%) from myocardial infarction. Average duration of stay was 5.1 days for both EVAR and MIAS. Thirty-day morbidity was 18% for EVAR and 17% for MIAS patients.

CONCLUSIONS

EVAR and MIAS are comparable for the treatment of high-risk aneurysm patients.