Why the study?
Does endovascular repair improve outcomes compared to conventional open repair in patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms?
Does endovascular repair improve outcomes compared to conventional open repair in patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms?
This article reviews the available literature comparing endovascular and conventional open repair for the management of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Existing literature leaves comparative effectiveness of endovascular vs open repair for ruptured AAA unresolved; randomized trials needed.
Although major improvement has occurred to make elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms a safe procedure, the incidence of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms and mortality rates are still disappointing. Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair has produced quantum changes in aneurysm treatment. The successful application of the endovascular approach for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms in the elective setting has prompted a strong interest regarding its possible use in dealing with the long-standing challenge of a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Since the first report, several centers have reported results and a wide spectrum of opinion regarding its application, with special consideration to logistical and practical barriers for appropriate utilization. The purpose of this article is to review all the available literature on the endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms and to analyze the most recent trends in their management, with special consideration given to comparing results of conventional and endovascular approaches.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Piffaretti et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: