Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Vasc Surg ; 58(2): 324-32, 2013 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23683376

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To assess outcomes after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) in an integrated health care system. METHODS: Between 2000 and 2010, 1736 patients underwent EVAR at 17 centers. Demographic data, comorbidities, and outcomes of interest were collected. EVAR in patients presenting with ruptured or symptomatic aneurysms was categorized as urgent; otherwise, it was considered elective. Primary outcomes were mortality and aneurysm-related mortality (ARM). Secondary outcomes were change in aneurysm sac size, endoleak status, major adverse events, and reintervention. RESULTS: Overall, the median age was 76 years (interquartile range, 70-81 years), 86% were male, and 82% were Caucasian. Most cases (93.8%) were elective, but urgent use of EVAR increased from 4% in the first 5 years to 7.3% in the last 5 years of the study period. Mean aneurysm size was 5.8 cm. Patients were followed for an average of 3 years (range, 1-11 years); 8% were lost to follow-up. Intraoperatively, 4.5% of patients required adjunctive maneuvers for endoleak, fixation, or flow-limiting issues. The 30-day mortality rate was 1.2%, and the perioperative morbidity rate was 6.6%. Intraoperative type I and II endoleaks were uncommon (2.3% and 9.3%, respectively). Life-table analysis at 5 years demonstrated excellent overall survival (66%) and freedom from ARM (97%). Postoperative endoleak was seen in 30% of patients and was associated with an increase in sac size over time. Finally, the total reintervention rate was 15%, including 91 instances (5%) of revisional EVAR. The overall major adverse event rate was 7.9% and decreased significantly from 12.3% in the first 5 years to 5.6% in the second 5 years of the study period (P < .001). Overall ARM was worse in patients with postoperative endoleak (4.1% vs 1.8%; P < .01) or in those who underwent reintervention (7.6% vs 1.6%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Results from a contemporary EVAR registry in an integrated health care system demonstrate favorable perioperative outcomes and excellent clinical efficacy. However, postoperative endoleak and the need for reintervention continue to be challenging problems for patients after EVAR.


Assuntos
Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/cirurgia , Ruptura Aórtica/cirurgia , Implante de Prótese Vascular , Procedimentos Endovasculares , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Aneurisma da Aorta Abdominal/mortalidade , Ruptura Aórtica/mortalidade , Implante de Prótese Vascular/efeitos adversos , Implante de Prótese Vascular/mortalidade , California , Distribuição de Qui-Quadrado , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos , Emergências , Endoleak/etiologia , Endoleak/mortalidade , Endoleak/cirurgia , Procedimentos Endovasculares/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Endovasculares/mortalidade , Feminino , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Tábuas de Vida , Masculino , Programas de Assistência Gerenciada , Análise Multivariada , Modelos de Riscos Proporcionais , Sistema de Registros , Reoperação , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA