Key result
Retroperitoneal open repair with a clinical pathway and endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm both resulted in 0% mortality.
Why the study?
Does open repair using a retroperitoneal approach and clinical pathway provide competitive outcomes compared to EVAR in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm?
Population
150 patients undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm repair between January 2001 and December 2002.
Comparison
Open repair using a retroperitoneal approach and… vs Endovascular repair (EVAR).
Design
Cohort
Authors
Loading...
May support retroperitoneal open repair with pathway as alternative to EVAR in AAA; leaves open confirmation by randomized trials.
Cohort (n=150)
Does open repair using a retroperitoneal approach and clinical pathway provide competitive outcomes compared to EVAR in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm?
Absolute Event Rate: 0% vs 0%
Open repair using a retroperitoneal approach and a clinical pathway is a safe and effective alternative to EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm, with zero mortality observed in this cohort.
David A. Rigberg (2004) conducted a cohort in Abdominal aortic aneurysm (n=150). Retroperitoneal (RP) open repair with a clinical pathway vs. Endovascular repair (EVAR) was evaluated on Mortality. Retroperitoneal open repair with a clinical pathway and endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm both resulted in 0% mortality.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: