Key result
EVAR shows no significant mortality benefit over open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms.
Why the study?
Intraoperative failure and long-term complications with EVAR highlight the continued significance of open surgical repair and the need for improved risk assessment.
Does EVAR reduce mortality compared to OSR in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms?
Cohort (n=210)
No
Does EVAR reduce mortality compared to OSR in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms?
Absolute Event Rate: 7.3% vs 17%
p-value: p=0.085
EVAR and OSR demonstrated comparable mortality rates, emphasizing the need to maintain open surgical expertise for complex anatomies and EVAR failures.
Background: Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) are life-threatening conditions that require timely intervention to prevent rupture. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) is preferred due to faster recovery and lower perioperative risk; however, intraoperative failure and long-term complications highlight the continued significance of open surgical repair (OSR) and the need for improved risk assessment. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed data from 210 patients who underwent EVAR (n = 163) or OSR (n = 47) at a single center. Clinical characteristics, complications, reintervention rates, and 30-day mortality were recorded. EVAR-to-OSR conversion and mortality predictors in AAA treatments were identified. Results: The overall mortality rate was 9.5% (20/210 patients), with 12 patients (7.3%) in the EVAR group and 8 patients (17%) in the OSR group (p = 0.085). Five patients required early and six required late conversion to open surgery. In follow-ups beyond 30 days, the reintervention rate for EVAR was higher (HR: 1.2, 95% CI: 0.4–3.6; p = 0.754). According to the multivariable analysis, rupture (p = 0.045), female sex (p = 0.018), body weight (p = 0.003), and aortic size index (p = 0.019) were significant predictors of mortality, whereas OSR was not (p = 0.212). Conclusions: Treatment optimization requires a balanced approach, integrating both EVAR and OSR based on patient-specific factors. Maintaining expertise in both techniques is essential to ensure the best possible outcomes, and OSR should remain a viable option when clinically indicated.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arslan et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm (AAA) (n=210). Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) vs. Open surgical repair (OSR) was evaluated on Overall mortality (p=0.085). Endovascular aneurysm repair resulted in a 7.3% overall mortality rate compared to 17.0% for open surgical repair (p=0.085) in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: