Suppr超能文献

择期修复完整腹主动脉瘤的长期结果:使用链接行政和临床登记数据的开放式手术和血管内修复的比较。

Long-Term Outcomes Following Elective Repair of Intact Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Comparison Between Open Surgical and Endovascular Repair Using Linked Administrative and Clinical Registry Data.

机构信息

Center for Big Data Research in Health, UNSW Sydney, Australia.

Biostatistics Training Program, NSW Ministry of Health, Sydney, Australia.

出版信息

Ann Surg. 2023 Apr 1;277(4):e955-e962. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000005259. Epub 2021 Oct 20.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Compare long-term mortality, secondary intervention and secondary rupture following elective endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR).

BACKGROUND

EVAR has surpassed OSR as the most common procedure used to repair abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), but evidence regarding long-term outcomes is inconclusive.

METHODS

We included patients in linked clinical registry and administrative data undergoing EVAR or OSR for intact AAA between January 2010 and June 2019. We used an inverse probability of treatment-weighted survival analysis to compare all-cause mortality, cause-specific mortality, secondary interventions and secondary rupture, and evaluate the impact of secondary interventions and secondary rupture on all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

The study included 3460 EVAR and 427 OSR patients. Compared to OSR, the EVAR all-cause mortality rate was lower in the first 30 days [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 0.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.140.33], but higher between 1 and 4 years (HR = 1.29, 95% CI 1.12-1.48) and after 4years (HR = 1.41, 95% CI 1.23-1.63). Secondary intervention rates were higher over the first 30 days (HR = 2.26, 95% CI 1.11-4.59), but lower between 1 and 4years (HR = 0.59, 95% CI 0.48-0.74). Secondary aortic intervention rates were higher across the entire follow-up period (HR = 2.52, 95% CI 2.06-3.07). Secondary rupture rates did not differ significantly (HR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.73-1.55). All-cause mortality beyond 1 year remained significantly higher for EVAR after adjusting for any secondary interventions, or secendary rupture.

CONCLUSIONS

EVAR has an early survival benefit compared to OSR. However, elevated long-term mortality and higher rates of secondary aortic interventions and subsequent aneurysm repair suggest that EVAR may be a less durable method of aortic aneurysm exclusion.

摘要

目的

比较择期血管内腹主动脉瘤修复术(EVAR)和开放手术修复术(OSR)的长期死亡率、二次干预和二次破裂。

背景

EVAR 已超过 OSR,成为修复腹主动脉瘤(AAA)最常用的方法,但关于长期结果的证据尚无定论。

方法

我们纳入了 2010 年 1 月至 2019 年 6 月期间在临床注册和行政数据中接受 EVAR 或 OSR 治疗的完整 AAA 患者。我们使用逆概率治疗加权生存分析比较全因死亡率、病因特异性死亡率、二次干预和二次破裂,并评估二次干预和二次破裂对全因死亡率的影响。

结果

研究纳入了 3460 例 EVAR 和 427 例 OSR 患者。与 OSR 相比,EVAR 的全因死亡率在 30 天内较低[校正后的风险比(HR)=0.22,95%置信区间(CI)0.14-0.33],但在 1-4 年(HR=1.29,95%CI 1.12-1.48)和 4 年后(HR=1.41,95%CI 1.23-1.63)较高。二次干预率在 30 天内较高(HR=2.26,95%CI 1.11-4.59),但在 1-4 年(HR=0.59,95%CI 0.48-0.74)较低。二次主动脉干预率在整个随访期间均较高(HR=2.52,95%CI 2.06-3.07)。二次破裂率无显著差异(HR=1.06,95%CI 0.73-1.55)。在调整任何二次干预或二次破裂后,EVAR 治疗 1 年后的全因死亡率仍显著升高。

结论

EVAR 与 OSR 相比具有早期生存优势。然而,长期死亡率升高、二次主动脉干预率升高以及随后的动脉瘤修复率表明,EVAR 可能是一种不太持久的主动脉瘤排除方法。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验