Comparação entre os tratamentos aberto e endovascular dos aneurismas da aorta abdominal em pacientes de alto risco cirúrgico Comparison between open and endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms in high surgical risk patients

Abstract

OBJETIVO: Comparar os resultados dos tratamentos aberto e endovascular de aneurismas da aorta abdominal em pacientes de alto risco cirúrgico. MÉTODOS: O tratamento aberto foi realizado em 31 pacientes, e o endovascular, em 18. Sucesso no tratamento endovascular foi definido como perviedade da endoprótese sem endoleaks ou conversão para tratamento aberto. RESULTADOS: Não houve diferença na mortalidade perioperatória entre o tratamento aberto (dois óbitos [6,45%] em 31) e o endovascular (um óbito [5,55%] em 18) (P = 0,899); também não houve diferença entre a mortalidade tardia no tratamento aberto (dois óbitos [6,9%] em 29) e no endovascular (dois óbitos [11,7%] em 17) (P = 0,572). A taxa de sucesso imediato foi de 100% (31/31) no tratamento aberto e de 66,7% (12/18) no endovascular (P = 0,0006); a taxa de sucesso tardio foi de 100% (27/27) no tratamento aberto e de 73,3% (11/15) no endovascular (P = 0,0047). Os valores médios do tempo de internação na UTI, tempo de internação hospitalar e da perda de sangue para os grupos dos tratamentos aberto e endovascular foram: 65,6 versus 34,1 horas*, 9 versus 5,6 dias* e 932 versus 225 ml*, respectivamente (*P OBJECTIVE: To compare the results of open repair and endoluminal repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in high surgical risk patients. METHODS: Open repair was performed in 31 patients, and endoluminal repair was performed in 18. Success in the endoluminal repair group was defined as continuing graft function without endoleak or conversion to open repair. RESULTS: No significant difference was found between the perioperative mortality rate for open repair (two deaths [6.45%] in 31 patients) and endoluminal repair (one death [5.55%] in 18 patients) (P = 0.899); similarly, no significant difference was seen in late mortality between open repair (two deaths [6.9%] in 29 patients) and endoluminal repair (two deaths [11.7%] in 17 patients) (P = 0.572); The rate of immediate success was 100% (31/31) for open repair and 66.7% (12/18) for endoluminal repair (P = 0.0006); the rate of late success was 100% (27/27) for open repair and 73.3% (11/15) for endoluminal repair (P = 0.0047). The mean values for intensive care stay, hospital stay and blood loss for open repair and endoluminal repair groups were: 65.6 vs. 34.1 hours*, 9 vs. 5.6 days* and 932 vs. 225 ml*, respectively (P < 0.05). Endoluminal repair was 436% more expensive than open repair. CONCLUSIONS: In this series, conventional open repair was the most reliable method of successfully managing abdominal aortic aneurysms, sharing the same perioperative and late mortality rates as endoluminal repair.

Keywords

• aneurisma da aorta abdominal
• cirurgia
• prótese vascular
• enxertos
• abdominal aortic aneurysm
• surgery
• vascular prosthesis
• grafts