Suppr超能文献

无症状腘动脉瘤的开放修复术比血管腔内修复术的疗效更好。

Open repair of asymptomatic popliteal artery aneurysm is associated with better outcomes than endovascular repair.

作者信息

Eslami Mohammad H, Rybin Denis, Doros Gheorghe, Farber Alik

机构信息

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Mass.

Department of Biostatistics, Boston School of Public Health, Boston, Mass.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg. 2015 Mar;61(3):663-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2014.09.069. Epub 2014 Nov 6.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Open (OPAR) and endovascular (EPAR) repair are both used to treat popliteal artery aneurysm (PAA). We assessed outcomes of both modalities in the treatment of asymptomatic PAAs.

METHODS

Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) databases (2010 to 2013) were queried for patients undergoing asymptomatic PAA repair using OPAR and EPAR. The groups were compared with respect to demographics, medical history, and procedural characteristics. Outcomes of interest were length of stay (LOS), major adverse limb events (MALE), MALE or perioperative death (MALE-POD), and loss of primary patency compared using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Proportional hazard Cox regression was used to compare the outcomes across the treatment groups. Multivariable regression with backward elimination procedure (α = .5) was used to construct parsimonious models to predict MALE and MALE-POD. Gamma regression was used to compare LOS.

RESULTS

From 2010 to 2013, 390 patients with asymptomatic PAAs were identified (221 OPAR, 169 EPAR) and included in this study. Preoperative comorbidities were similar between the two groups, except for a higher rate of congestive heart failure (19.5% vs 11.8%, P = .042) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (19.5% vs 11.8%, P = .042) in the EPAR group. No in-hospital mortality was observed. LOS was significantly longer in the OPAR group (3.8 ± 2.5 vs 1.4 ± 1.9 days; P < .001). OPAR patients had a significantly higher MALE-free survival (95% vs 80%; P < .001) as was MALE-POD-free survival (93% vs 80%; P < .001) rates at 1 year after the procedure. OPAR was associated with lower hazard of MALE (hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15-0.86; P < .05), MALE-POD (HR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.13-0.63; P < .05), and primary patency loss (HR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.10-0.58; P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective analysis suggests that OPAR is associated with better outcomes than EPAR. Ultimately, the ongoing, adequately powered Open versus Endovascular Popliteal Artery Aneurysm Repair (OVERPAR) trial will definitively compare these procedures.

摘要

目的

开放手术修复(OPAR)和血管腔内修复(EPAR)均用于治疗腘动脉瘤(PAA)。我们评估了这两种治疗方式在无症状PAA治疗中的疗效。

方法

查询血管质量倡议(VQI)数据库(2010年至2013年)中接受OPAR和EPAR治疗无症状PAA的患者。比较两组患者的人口统计学、病史和手术特征。感兴趣的结局指标包括住院时间(LOS)、主要肢体不良事件(MALE)、MALE或围手术期死亡(MALE-POD),并使用Kaplan-Meier估计值比较原发性通畅率的丧失情况。使用比例风险Cox回归比较各治疗组的结局。采用向后逐步淘汰法(α = 0.5)的多变量回归构建简约模型,以预测MALE和MALE-POD。使用伽马回归比较LOS。

结果

2010年至2013年,共识别出390例无症状PAA患者(221例行OPAR,169例行EPAR)并纳入本研究。两组患者术前合并症相似,但EPAR组充血性心力衰竭发生率较高(19.5%对11.8%,P = 0.042),慢性阻塞性肺疾病发生率较高(19.5%对11.8%,P = 0.042)。未观察到院内死亡。OPAR组的LOS显著更长(3.8±2.5天对1.4±1.9天;P < 0.001)。OPAR患者术后1年的无MALE生存率(95%对80%;P < 0.001)和无MALE-POD生存率(93%对80%;P < 0.001)显著更高。OPAR与较低的MALE风险(风险比[HR],0.35;95%置信区间[CI],0.15 - 0.86;P < 0.05)、MALE-POD风险(HR,0.28;95% CI,0.13 - (此处原文有误,应是0.63)0.63;P < 0.05)和原发性通畅率丧失风险(HR,0.25;95% CI,0.10 - 0.58;P < 0.05)相关。

结论

这项回顾性分析表明,OPAR比EPAR的疗效更好。最终,正在进行的、有足够样本量的开放手术与血管腔内修复腘动脉瘤(OVERPAR)试验将明确比较这两种手术方式。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验