Comparison of open and endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm.
- Author:
Xiao-Bin TANG
1
;
Zhong CHEN
;
Sheng WANG
;
Zhang-Min WU
;
Lei KOU
;
Hui LIU
;
Qing LI
;
Qing-Hua WU
Author Information
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- MeSH: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal; surgery; Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome; Vascular Surgical Procedures; methods
- From: Chinese Journal of Surgery 2009;47(9):661-663
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
OBJECTIVETo compare the effects of open and endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm.
METHODSFrom January 2002 to July 2007, clinical data of 223 patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm undergoing open (141 patients) or endovascular repair (82 patients) were retrospectively reviewed. The intra- and post-operative complications, mortality, complications, survival, life quality, and cost during follow-up were analyzed.
RESULTSOperative time in endovascular group was significantly shorter than open repair group. Blood loss and transfusion in endovascular group were significantly less than open repair group (P < 0.01). There was no significant difference of intra- and post-operation complications (P > 0.05). Six-month total SF-36 scores were significantly higher in open repair group compared with endovascular group. There was no significant difference of survival rate at 2 years (P > 0.05), but endovascular group had fewer complications (P < 0.01).
CONCLUSIONSEndovascular repair is mini-invasive, but has more complications of long-term follow-up. The life quality in open repair group is better than endovascular group, and a prospective random trial is required.
