Sirignano Pasqualino, Speziale Francesco, Montelione Nunzio, Pranteda Chiara, Galzerano Giuseppe, Mansour Wassim, Sbarigia Enrico, Setacci Carlo
Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Unit, Department of Surgery "Paride Stefanini", Policlinico Umberto I, "Sapienza" University of Rome, 00161 Rome, Italy.
Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Unit, Department of Medicine Surgery and Neurological Sciences, Policlinico Le Scotte, University of Siena, 53100 Siena, Italy.
Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016:7893413. doi: 10.1155/2016/7893413. Epub 2016 Sep 29.
To compare durability and survival after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open repair (OR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) in young patients. A retrospective study was conducted between 2005 and 2014 on all consecutive patients of 60 years of age or younger. Measures considered for analysis were reintervention related to AAA, laparotomy and access vessel injury during EVAR, and all-cause mortality during hospitalization and follow-up. Seventy out of 119 patients were treated by OR (58.8%) and 49 (41.2%) by EVAR, 9 in off-label fashion (18.3%). Technical success was achieved in all cases. No AAA-related death was recorded. Overall in-hospital mortality was zero and the reintervention rate was 2.5% (3/119: 1/70 OR, 2/49 EVAR, = 0.36). There is no death at 30-day or 1-year follow-up. Thirty-day reintervention rate was 1.6% (2/119; 0/70 OR, 2/49 EVAR, = 0.16), while the 1-year rate was 2.5% (3/119; 1/70 OR, 2/49 EVAR, = 0.36). At the mean follow-up of 56.8 ± 42.7 months, mortality and reintervention rates were 5.8% (7/119; 3/70 OR, 4/49 EVAR, = 0.38) and 10% (12/119; 8/70 OR, 4/49 EVAR, = 0.39), respectively. The overall reintervention rate, mortality, and freedom from adverse events did not differ between the two groups. No differences in outcome were recorded between patients treated by EVAR in on-label versus off-label fashion. Our (albeit limited) experience suggests that, in an unselected young patient population undergoing elective AAA repair, OR or EVAR can be performed safely with similar immediate and long term outcomes.
比较年轻患者腹主动脉瘤(AAA)血管内修复术(EVAR)和开放修复术(OR)后的耐久性和生存率。对2005年至2014年间所有60岁及以下的连续患者进行了一项回顾性研究。分析所考虑的指标包括与AAA相关的再次干预、EVAR期间的剖腹手术和入路血管损伤,以及住院期间和随访期间的全因死亡率。119例患者中,70例接受了OR治疗(58.8%),49例接受了EVAR治疗(41.2%),9例为非标准方式(18.3%)。所有病例均取得技术成功。未记录到与AAA相关的死亡。总体住院死亡率为零,再次干预率为2.5%(3/119:OR组1/70,EVAR组2/49,P = 0.36)。30天或1年随访时无死亡。30天再次干预率为1.6%(2/119;OR组0/70,EVAR组2/49,P = 0.16),而1年率为2.5%(3/119;OR组1/70,EVAR组2/49,P = 0.36)。在平均56.8±42.7个月的随访中,死亡率和再次干预率分别为5.8%(7/119;OR组3/70,EVAR组4/49,P = 0.38)和10%(12/119;OR组8/70,EVAR组4/49,P = 0.39)。两组的总体再次干预率、死亡率和无不良事件发生率无差异。接受标准方式与非标准方式EVAR治疗的患者在结局上无差异。我们(尽管有限)的经验表明,在未经过选择的接受择期AAA修复的年轻患者群体中,OR或EVAR可以安全地进行,近期和长期结局相似。