Why the study?
Does endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) provide a safe and effective alternative to open surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysm?
Does endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) provide a safe and effective alternative to open surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysm?
EVAR offers a less invasive alternative to open surgery for AAA with low initial mortality, though mid-term re-intervention and endoleaks remain challenges.
Supports EVAR in select high-risk patients; leaves open long-term durability versus open repair.
n recent years, the interest in minimally invasive surgery has grown, and the same trend is observed in vascular surgery and interventional radiology, leading to what is called endovascular surgery. Since the first use of a stent-graft for the endovascular exclusion of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has greatly expanded, and more than 50,000 devices have been implanted until now. The endovascular graft can be implanted from a remote access site in the groin with a less anesthetic requirement. The endovascular graft is advanced over guidewires up the femoral and iliac arteries. Once in position, the graft is deployed immediately distal from the renal arteries. The aorta is not clamped and the blood loss is less than with open surgery. EVAR for AAA offers an important new alternative to open surgical procedure. The mortality rates after EVAR are reported between 0~5%. Long-term follow-up reports are not available, but mid-term follow-up of EVAR reveals an incidence of re-intervention between 10~20% and a rate of late rupture of between 0.5~1.5% per year. The problems of endoleaks and graft failure continue to be the challenges that require technological innovations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hong et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: