Asian Journal of Surgery (Jan 2022)

Outcomes of abdominal aortic aneurysm repairs: Endovascular vs open surgical repairs

  • Boonying Siribumrungwong,
  • Jiro Kurita,
  • Tatsuo Ueda,
  • Daisuke Yasui,
  • Ken-ichiro Takahashi,
  • Takashi Sasaki,
  • Yasuo Miyagi,
  • Shun-ichiro Sakamoto,
  • Yosuke Ishii,
  • Tetsuro Morota,
  • Takashi Nitta

Journal volume & issue
Vol. 45, no. 1
pp. 346 – 352

Abstract

Read online

Background: Operative mortality after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been reported as lower than open surgical repair (OSR) for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in randomized controlled trials. However, many cohort studies have demonstrated similar mortality rates for both procedures. We compared operative mortality between EVAR and OSR, at our institution. Methods: All AAA operations from 2012 to 2017 were reviewed, and baseline characteristics were collected. Outcomes included 30-day mortality, operative data, complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), costs, re-intervention, and survival rates were compared. A multivariable analysis with unbalanced characteristics was performed. Results: We had a total of 162 patients, 100 having OSR and 62 for EVAR. The EVAR group was older, with higher ASA classification. Thirty-day mortality rate did not significantly differ (0/100 for OSR and 2/62 (3%) for EVAR; p = 0.145), while the EVAR group had less blood loss, shorter operative times, and LOS, but higher re-intervention rates (adjusted hazard ratio 6.4 (95%CI: 1.4, 26.8)). Survival rates did not significantly differ between the groups. EVAR cost approximately 1-million yen more. Conclusions: OSR had low 30-day mortality rate in selected low-risk patients whereas EVAR had less blood loss, shorter operative times, LOS and could be done in high-risk patients with low 30-day mortality but with higher re-intervention rate.

Keywords