This Article Full Text (OnlineFirst PDF) All Versions of this Article: 1531003507310833v1 20/1/96    most recent Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by LeCroy, C. J. Articles by Jordan, W. D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by LeCroy, C. J. Articles by Jordan, W. D., Jr. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Outlook Commentary

University of Alabama at Birmingham

^* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: wdjordan{at}uab.edu.

	Abstract

Abstract Objective: To assess the outcome of endovascular repair (EVAR) of small abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA, 5.5 mm in maximum diameter) in Australia. Summary Background Data: Randomized trials have suggested that small AAAs should not be treated by open surgery. Endovascular repair is associated with less perioperative mortality than open surgery for large AAAs. We assessed the outcome of EVAR of small AAAs as part of a national audit. Methods: ASERNIP-S carried out a prospective audit of EVAR performed between November 1999 and May 2001 in Australia. A total of 478 of the 961 patients entered underwent treatment of a small AAA. Data were collected regarding preoperative characteristics, procedural outcome, and intermediate success. Median follow-up was 3.2 years. Data were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard analyses. Results: The 30-day mortality and technical success rates were 1.1% and 98%, respectively. Postoperative complications occurred in 29%. Survival was 84% and 52% at 3 and 5 years, respectively. Primary, assisted primary, and secondary clinical success rates were 72%, 79%, and 82%, respectively, at 3 years. Reintervention rate was 11% at 3 years; however, 15% of patients continued to have significant aortic sac enlargement. Survival was reduced in patients considered unfit for general anesthesia (odds ratio = 2.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-4.8, P = .002) or those who had elevated preoperative serum creatinine (odds ratio = 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-3.0, P = 0.001). Conclusions: Endovascular repair can be carried with good perioperative outcome in patients with small AAA; however, intermediate success is hampered by the need for reintervention and continued aortic sac enlargement. At present, widespread treatment of small AAAs by EVAR would appear inappropriate.

First published on April 2, 2008, doi:10.1177/1531003507310833

Perspectives in Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy 2008;20:96.

A more recent version of this article appeared on March 1, 2008


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?