The endovascular repair or open surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysm / 中华普通外科杂志

ABSTRACT

Objective To compare the therapeutic effect of endovascular repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair(OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm in high-risk patients. Methods The clinical data of 55 patients from 1998 to 2008 with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm who received surgical treatment were analyzed by using the customized probability index. The perioperative and short term advantages and disadvantages of OSR group (n=20) were compared with EVAR group (n=35). Results All patients in OSR group were followed up, 94% patients in EVAR group were followed up, the mean follow up time were 75 and 70 months respectively. (1) Compared to OSR group, the EVAR group had shorter operation time [(3.1±0.6) h vs (4.9±0.9) h, P<0.05], (2) EVAR group had shorter ICU and hospital stay after operation and less blood loss (P<0.01), (3) Compared to OSR group, the EVAR group had lower mortality within 30 d(2.86% vs 15%), (4)the EVAR group had lower peri-operative complications(17% vs 40%), (5) The main complications of EVAR were endoleak (8.57%), (6) The main complications of OSR was cadiovascular incidence(25%). Conclusions Endovascular treatment, indicated for AAA in high-risk patients, can cut down the perioperative incidence of cadiovascular events, mortality and complications. CPI is useful to estimate the perioperative incidence of cadiovascular events, mortality and complications, and can be used to guide the therapeutic method.