Editor's Choice - Nationwide Analysis of Patients Undergoing Iliac Artery Aneurysm Repair in the Netherlands.
Aneurysm repair
EVAR
Iliac artery aneurysm
Open repair
Journal
European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery
ISSN: 1532-2165
Titre abrégé: Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9512728
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2020
Jul 2020
Historique:
received:
28
01
2019
revised:
04
02
2020
accepted:
25
02
2020
pubmed:
26
4
2020
medline:
24
7
2020
entrez:
26
4
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The new 2019 guideline of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) recommends consideration for elective iliac artery aneurysm (eIAA) repair when the iliac diameter exceeds 3.5 cm, as opposed to 3.0 cm previously. The current study assessed diameters at time of eIAA repair and ruptured IAA (rIAA) repair and compared clinical outcomes after open surgical repair (OSR) and endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR). This retrospective observational study used the nationwide Dutch Surgical Aneurysm Audit (DSAA) registry that includes all patients who undergo aorto-iliac aneurysm repair in the Netherlands. All patients who underwent primary IAA repair between 1 January 2014 and 1 January 2018 were included. Diameters at time of eIAA and rIAA repair were compared in a descriptive fashion. The anatomical location of the IAA was not registered in the registry. Patient characteristics and outcomes of OSR and EVAR were compared with appropriate statistical tests. The DSAA registry comprised 974 patients who underwent IAA repair. A total of 851 patients were included after exclusion of patients undergoing revision surgery and patients with missing essential variables. eIAA repair was carried out in 713 patients, rIAA repair in 102, and symptomatic IAA repair in 36. OSR was performed in 205, EVAR in 618, and hybrid repairs and conversions in 28. The median maximum IAA diameter at the time of eIAA and rIAA repair was 43 (IQR 38-50) mm and 68 (IQR 58-85) mm, respectively. Mortality was 1.3% (95% CI 0.7-2.4) after eIAA repair and 25.5% (95% CI 18.0-34.7) after rIAA repair. Mortality was not significantly different between the OSR and EVAR subgroups. Elective OSR was associated with significantly more complications than EVAR (intra-operative: 9.8% vs. 3.6%, post-operative: 34.0% vs. 13.8%, respectively). In the Netherlands, most eIAA repairs are performed at diameters larger than recommended by the ESVS guideline. These findings appear to support the recent increase in the threshold diameter for eIAA repair.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32331994
pii: S1078-5884(20)30162-3
doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2020.02.027
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
49-55Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.