Article

Endovascular repair compared with surveillance for patients with small abdominal aortic aneurysms

Division of Vascular Surgery, Columbia University and NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA.
Journal of vascular surgery: official publication, the Society for Vascular Surgery [and] International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter (Impact Factor: 2.98). 03/2010; 51(5):1081-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2009.10.113
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Although repair of large abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is well accepted, randomized clinical trials have failed to demonstrate benefit for early surgical repair of small aneurysms compared with surveillance. Endovascular repair has been shown to be safer than open surgical repair in patients with large aneurysms, prompting a randomized trial of early endovascular repair vs surveillance in patients with small aneurysms.
We randomly assigned 728 patients (13.3% women; mean age, 71 +/- 8 years) with 4 to 5 cm AAAs to early endovascular repair (366 patients) or ultrasound surveillance (362 patients). Rupture or aneurysm-related death and overall mortality in the two groups were compared during a mean follow-up of 20 +/- 12 months.
Among patients randomized to treatment, 89% underwent aneurysm repair. Among patients randomized to surveillance, 31% underwent aneurysm repair during the course of the study. After a mean follow-up of 20 +/- 12 months (range, 0-41 months), 15 deaths had occurred in each group (4.1%). The unadjusted hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) for mortality after early endovascular repair was 1.01 (0.49-2.07, P = .98). Aneurysm rupture or aneurysm-related death occurred in two patients in each group (0.6%). The unadjusted hazard ratio was 0.99 (0.14-7.06, P = .99) for early endovascular repair.
Early treatment with endovascular repair and rigorous surveillance with selective aneurysm treatment as indicated both appear to be safe alternatives for patients with small AAAs, protecting the patient from rupture or aneurysm-related death for at least 3 years.

0 Followers
 · 
110 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Previous studies in rodent models and patients suggest that visceral adipose could play a direct role in the development and progression of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). This study aimed to assess the association of visceral adiposity with AAA presence and growth. This study was a case-control investigation of patients that did (n=196) and did not (n=181) have an AAA who presented to The Townsville Hospital vascular clinic between 2003 and 2012. Cases were patients with AAA (infra-renal aortic diameter >30 mm) and controls were patients with intermittent claudication but no AAA (infra-renal aortic diameter <30 mm). All patients underwent computed tomography angiography (CTA). The visceral to total abdominal adipose volume ratio was estimated from CTAs by assessing total and visceral adipose deposits using an imaging software program. Measurements were assessed for reproducibility by repeat assessments on 15 patients. AAA risk factors were recorded at entry. Forty-five cases underwent two CTAs more than 6 months apart to assess AAA expansion. The association of visceral adiposity with AAA presence and growth was examined using logistic regression. Visceral adipose assessment by CTA was highly reproducible (mean coefficient of variation 1.0%). AAA was positively associated with older age and negatively associated with diabetes. The visceral to total abdominal adipose volume ratio was not significantly associated with AAA after adjustment for other risk factors. Patients with a visceral to total abdominal adipose volume ratio in quartile four had a 1.63-fold increased risk of AAA but with wide confidence intervals (95% CI 0.71-3.70; p=0.248). Visceral adiposity was not associated with AAA growth. In conclusion, this study suggests that visceral adiposity is not specifically associated with AAA presence or growth although larger studies are required to confirm these findings.
    Vascular Medicine 06/2014; 19(4). DOI:10.1177/1358863X14537883 · 1.73 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aortic aneurysms are associated with coronary artery ectasia (CAE). However, the relation between the extent of CAE and coronary blood flow in patients with aortic aneurysms is not fully understood. This study was undertaken to assess the angiographic characteristics and effects of the topographical extent of CAE on coronary blood flow in patients with aortic aneurysms. This study consisted of 93 consecutive patients with aortic aneurysms (AA group) and 79 patients without aortic aneurysms who had angiographically normal coronary arteries as the control group (Control group). Coronary flow velocity was determined using the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction frame count (TFC) and the topographical extent of CAE was assessed. In the AA group, 43 patients (46.2 %) had significant coronary artery stenosis and 37 patients (40.2 %) had diffuse CAE. TFC was significantly higher in the AA group than in the control group in all 3 coronary arteries. Furthermore, mean corrected TFC (CTFC) was significantly higher in the AA group than in the control group (40.1 ± 10.7 vs. 25.8 ± 6.5, p < 0.001). In the AA group, mean CTFC in patients with diffuse CAE was significantly higher than that in patients with segmental CAE (50.2 ± 8.7 vs. 33.6 ± 5.2, p < 0.001). The mean CTFC correlated positively with the topographical extent of CAE. Many patients with aortic aneurysms were accompanied with angiographic coronary artery stenosis and CAE. Furthermore, patients with aortic aneurysms had higher CTFC than those without aortic aneurysms and it was primarily driven by more frequent prevalence of diffuse CAE.
    Heart and Vessels 07/2014; DOI:10.1007/s00380-014-0540-5 · 2.11 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Description: Update of the 2005 U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommendation on screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Methods: The USPSTF commissioned a systematic review that assessed the evidence on the benefits and harms of screening for AAA and strategies for managing small (3.0 to 5.4 cm) screen-detected AAAs. Population: These recommendations apply to asymptomatic adults aged 50 years or older. Recommendation: The USPSTF recommends 1-time screening for AAA with ultrasonography in men aged 65 to 75 years who have ever smoked. (B recommendation) The USPSTF recommends that clinicians selectively offer screening for AAA in men aged 65 to 75 years who have never smoked. (C recommendation) The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the balance of benefits and harms of screening for AAA in women aged 65 to 75 years who have ever smoked. (I statement) The USPSTF recommends against routine screening for AAA in women who have never smoked. (D recommendation)
    Annals of internal medicine 06/2014; 161(4). DOI:10.7326/M14-1204 · 16.10 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
0 Downloads
Available from