Key result
Resection of unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms resulted in 5- and 10-year survival rates of 54% and 22%, appearing to nearly double life expectancy compared to no operation.
Why the study?
Does resection of unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms improve long-term survival in patients with this condition?
Cohort (n=240)
No
Does resection of unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms improve long-term survival in patients with this condition?
Resection of unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms appears to nearly double life expectancy compared to non-operative management, with a 5-year survival of 54% for the entire cohort.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support resection for unruptured AAA; leaves open whether survival benefit is causal without randomized confirmation.
Long-term results of resection of unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms confirm the value of this operation. The conditions of 240 such patients from the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania were followed up for a minimum of three years. Since the operative mortality has been consistently falling, the early high mortality figures unrealistically lower present long-term survival. Therefore, data including and excluding operative mortality were studied. For the entire series, the five- and ten-year survivals were 54% and 22%. For the 217 operative survivors, the percentages were 61% and 25%. These results appear to show a nearly doubled life expectancy of patients subjected to operation when compared to those not operated upon.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Arthur G. Baker (1970) conducted a cohort in Unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (n=240). Resection of unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms vs. Patients not operated upon was evaluated on Five- and ten-year survival. Resection of unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms resulted in 5- and 10-year survival rates of 54% and 22%, appearing to nearly double life expectancy compared to no operation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: