Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the differences in technical outcomes and secondary interventions between elective endovascular aneurysm repair (el-EVAR) procedures and those for ruptured aneurysms (r-EVAR). Methods: Of the 906 patients treated with primary EVAR from September 1998 until July 2012, 43 cases were excluded owing to the use of first-generation stent-grafts. Among the remaining 863 patients, 773 (89.6%) patients (mean age 72 years; 697 men) with asymptomatic or symptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) were assigned to the el-EVAR group; 90 (10.4%) patients (mean age 73 years; 73 men) were assigned to the r-EVAR group based on blood outside the aortic wall on preoperative imaging. The primary study outcome was technical success; secondary endpoints, including freedom from secondary interventions and late survival, were examined with Kaplan-Meier analyses. Results: At baseline, r-EVAR patients had larger aneurysms on average (p
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 566-573 |
Journal | Journal of Endovascular Therapy |
Volume | 23 |
Issue number | 4 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Aug 2016 |
Keywords
- abdominal aortic aneurysm
- complications
- endoleak
- endovascular aneurysm repair
- ruptured aneurysm
- reinterventions
- stent-graft