Department of Surgery, Atrium Medical Center Parkstad, Heerlen, The Netherlands.
J Vasc Surg. 2010 Jul;52(1):13-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2010.02.014. Epub 2010 May 14.
Efficacy results of endovascular repair (rEVAR) for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (rAAA) compared with open surgery are based on several observational studies containing selection bias. The present study compared rEVAR with open surgery in EVAR-suitable patients with an rAAA who all underwent the same preoperative imaging protocol.
Our policy is to perform a computed tomography angiography on all patients with a suspected rAAA. rEVAR was performed when the rEVAR-vascular surgeon was on call and the patient was suitable for EVAR. Afterwards, two experienced independent blinded experts assessed all computed tomography angiography (CTA) scans on EVAR-suitability. Only EVAR-suitable patients were included in the main analyses. Outcome parameters included mortality (intraoperative, 30-day, and 6-month), complications, reinterventions, and length of hospital stay.
From April 2002 until March 2008, 132 consecutive patients with suspected rAAAs were presented. Preoperative CTA confirmed rAAA in 104 patients, of whom 25 underwent rEVAR, and 79 underwent open surgery. In retrospect, the 25 rEVAR patients and 33 patients in the open group were judged EVAR-suitable by the experts. At baseline, there was an equal distribution of physiologic and anatomic characteristics as well as comorbidity. In EVAR-suitable patients, the intraoperative, 30-day, and 6-month mortality was 4.0% (1 of 25), 20.0% (5 of 25), and 28.0% (7 of 25) after rEVAR compared with 6.1% (2 of 33; P >.99), 45.5% (15 of 33; P = .04), and 54.5% (18 of 33; P = .04) after open surgery, respectively. Median length of hospital stay was 9.5 days (interquartile range, 5.0-20.5) after rEVAR and 17.0 days (interquartile range, 9.5-28.0) after open surgery (P = .03).
In EVAR-suitable patients, an absolute perioperative mortality reduction of 25.5% of rEVAR over open surgery was found, which was still present at 6 months of follow-up. These data suggest that rEVAR is a superior treatment option for EVAR-suitable patients with an rAAA compared with an open surgery.
与开放手术相比,血管内修复(rEVAR)治疗破裂腹主动脉瘤(rAAA)的疗效结果基于几项包含选择偏倚的观察性研究。本研究比较了 rEVAR 与接受相同术前影像学方案的 rAAA 且适合 EVAR 的患者的开放手术。
我们的政策是对所有疑似 rAAA 的患者进行计算机断层血管造影(CTA)检查。当 rEVAR 血管外科医生值班且患者适合 EVAR 时,进行 rEVAR。之后,两名经验丰富的独立盲法专家对所有 CTA 进行 EVAR 适用性评估。仅将适合 EVAR 的患者纳入主要分析。结局参数包括死亡率(术中、30 天和 6 个月)、并发症、再干预和住院时间。
2002 年 4 月至 2008 年 3 月,连续收治了 132 例疑似 rAAA 患者。术前 CTA 确诊了 104 例 rAAA,其中 25 例行 rEVAR,79 例行开放手术。回顾性地,专家认为 25 例 rEVAR 患者和开放组的 33 例患者适合 EVAR。基线时,生理和解剖特征以及合并症的分布相等。在适合 EVAR 的患者中,rEVAR 后术中、30 天和 6 个月的死亡率分别为 4.0%(25 例中的 1 例)、20.0%(25 例中的 5 例)和 28.0%(25 例中的 7 例),而开放手术后分别为 6.1%(33 例中的 2 例;P>.99)、45.5%(33 例中的 15 例;P=.04)和 54.5%(33 例中的 18 例;P=.04)。rEVAR 后住院时间中位数为 9.5 天(四分位距,5.0-20.5),开放手术后为 17.0 天(四分位距,9.5-28.0)(P=.03)。
在适合 EVAR 的患者中,rEVAR 较开放手术的绝对围手术期死亡率降低了 25.5%,6 个月随访时仍存在这种情况。这些数据表明,与开放手术相比,rEVAR 是适合 EVAR 的 rAAA 患者的一种更好的治疗选择。