[Open and endovascular surgery for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Review of the available evidence]. / Manejo del aneurisma de la aorta abdominal: estado actual, evidencias y perspectivas para el desarrollo de un programa nacional.

Open and endovascular surgery are therapeutic alternatives for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm. The development of guidelines for its treatment requires a thorough analysis of available evidence to recommend the best treatment for each country's reality. Prospective randomized trials have shown best initial results with endovascular surgery, with higher hospital costs than open surgery. The requirement of anatomical suitability for the placement of endovascular prostheses limits the universal use of endovascular surgery. Moreover, this type of surgery needs a strict imaging and clinical follow up due to the high rates of late complications, which range from 20% to 40%. Many of these complications require further surgical interventions, elevating costs of treatment. The initial benefit of endovascular surgery is lost during long follow up as survival curves become similar to those of open surgery. Even for patients with a high surgical risk, the benefits of endovascular surgery are doubtful.

Manejo del aneurisma de la aorta abdominal: Estado actual, evidencias y perspectivas para el desarrollo de un programa nacional / Open and endovascular surgery for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurism: Review of the available evidence

Open and endovascular surgery are therapeutic alternatives for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurism. The development of guidelines for its treatment requires a thorough analysis of available evidence to recommend the best treatment for each country's reality. Prospective randomized trials have shown best initial results with endovascular surgery, with higher hospital costs than open surgery. The requirement of anatomical suitability for the placement of endovascular prostheses limits the universal use of endovascular surgery. Moreover, this type of surgery needs a strict imaging and clinical follow up due to the high rates of late complications, which range from 20 percent to 40 percent. Many of these complications require further surgical interventions, elevating costs of treatment. The initial benefit of endovascular surgery is lost during long follow up as survival curves become similar to those of open surgery. Even for patients with a high surgical risk, the benefits of endovascular surgery are doubtful.

Tratamiento endovascular de aneurisma aórtico abdominal: resultados en 80 pacientes consecutivos / Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm: Results in 80 consecutive patients

Background: Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) avoids laparotomy, shortens hospital stay and reduces morbidity and mortality related to surgical repair, allowing full patient recovery in less time. Aim: To report short and long term results of endovascular repair of AAA in 80 consecutive patients treated at our institution. Patients and Methods: Between September 1997 and February 2005, three women and 77 men with a mean age 73.6±7.7 years with AAA 5.8±1.0 cm in diameter, were treated. The surgical risk of 38 percent of patients was grade III according to the American Society of Anesthesiologists classification. Each procedure was performed in the operating room, under local or regional anesthesia, with the aid of digital substraction angiography. The endograft was deployed through the femoral artery (83.7 percent bifurcated, 16.3 percent tubular graft). A femoro-femoral bypass was required in 11.3 percent of cases. Follow-up included a spiral CT scan at 1, 6 and 12 months postoperatively, and then annually. Results: Endovascular repair was successfully completed in 79/80 patients (98.7 percent technical success). The procedures lasted 147±71 min. Length of stay in the observation unit was 20.6±13.5 h. Blood transfusion was required in 10 percent. Sixty two percent of the patients were discharged before 72 h. One patient died 8 days after surgery due to a myocardial infarction (1.3 percent). During follow-up (3-90 months), 1 patient developed late AAA enlargement due to a type I endoleak, requiring a new endograft. No AAA rupture was observed. Survival at 4 years was 84.2 percent (SE =9.2). Endovascular re-intervention free survival was 82.7 percent (SE =9.5). Conclusion: Endovascular surgery allows effective exclusion of AAA avoiding progressive enlargement and/or rupture and is a good alternative to open repair. Close and frequent postoperative follow up is mandatory.