Journal «Angiology and Vascular Surgery» • 

2018 • VOLUME 24 • №4

Results of a single-centre study of open and endovascular operations of prosthetic repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms

Zvereva E.D., Komakha B.B., Zverev D.A., Chernyavsky M.A., Gordeev M.L.

National Medical Research Centre named after V.A. Almazov under the RF Ministry of Public Health, Saint Petersburg, Russia

Objective. The purpose of the study was to assess surgical outcomes in patients suffering from an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm and treated at the Department of Cardiovascular Surgery №2 of the National Medical Research Centre named after V.A. Almazov.

Patients and methods. We carried out a non-randomized retrospective study including a total of 209 patients presenting with an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm. Of these, 160 (76%) patients were subjected to open surgical interventions (Group One) and 49 (24%) patients underwent endovascular isolation of the abdominal aortic aneurysm (Group Two). The check examination was performed in the early postoperative period and at 30 postoperative days. The mean age of the patients amounted to 65±3.4 and 69±6.2 years in Group One and Two, respectively, with the mean diameter of the infrarenal portion of the aorta amounting to 6.5±0.8 and 6.7±0.9 cm, respectively.

Results. 30-day mortality amounted to 2.5 and 2.05% in Group One and Two, respectively (OR 1.231; 95% CI 0.134-11.277). Repeat interventions were more often performed in Group One patients compared with Group Two patients (13.7 vs 2.05%) (OR 6.085; 95% CI 0.791-46.799). Postoperative complications were observed more often in Group One patients than in Group Two patients (OR 9.916; 95% CI 2.143-39.457). Complications encountered in Group One and not observed in Group Two were as follows: nosocomial pneumonia – in 3.75% of cases, acute impairment of cerebral circulation (AICC) and acute myocardial infarction – in 1.25% of cases each, cardiac arrhythmia and acute renal failure – in 1.88% of cases each. Local postoperative wound-related complications were encountered in 18.11% of cases in Group One versus 4.1% in Group Two (OR 5.202; 95% CI 1.195-22.652).

Conclusions. The retrospective analysis of open and endovascular methods of treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms demonstrated that, given the multifocal nature of an atherosclerotic lesion in the cohort of patients involved, it is appropriate in the preoperative period to perform coronarography in all patients in order to rule out significant damage of the coronary bed. It is also appropriate to regard a cohort over 60 years and patients found to have significant concomitant pathology as candidates for endovascular treatment. A differentiated approach to careful selection will make it possible to improve the results of treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms.

KEY WORDS: infrarenal aneurysm, aortic prosthetic repair, endovascular isolation of abdominal aortic aneurysm.

P. 131

« Back