Key result
Endovascular aneurysm repair is increasingly used as an alternative to open surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysms, prompting evaluation of its durability and cost in randomized trials.
Why the study?
Does endovascular aneurysm repair provide durable outcomes compared to open surgery in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm?
Does endovascular aneurysm repair provide durable outcomes compared to open surgery in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm?
This editorial discusses the trade-offs between endovascular repair and open surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysms, focusing on durability and invasiveness.
Abdominal aortic aneurysm is a lethal condition associated with an 85% risk of death after rupture. Optimal treatment relies on early detection followed by prophylactic surgical intervention. Although aneurysms are traditionally treated with open surgery, the use of endovascular repair has increased dramatically and is the most frequent form of therapy in the United States.1 As is often the case with new surgical techniques, there may be trade-offs, including reduced invasiveness, durability, and cost. To weigh these trade-offs, two randomized trials comparing endovascular repair with open surgery have been conducted, the United Kingdom Endovascular Aneurysm Repair 1 (EVAR-1) trial2 and . . .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
K. Craig Kent (2010) conducted an editorial in Abdominal aortic aneurysm. Endovascular aneurysm repair vs. Open surgery was evaluated. Endovascular aneurysm repair is increasingly used as an alternative to open surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysms, prompting evaluation of its durability and cost in randomized trials.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: