[New evidence for endovascular versus open treatment of patients with an aneurysm of the abdominal aorta]

D A Legemate
Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Geneeskunde 2006 March 25, 150 (12): 653-6
Recent randomised trials have compared conventional and endovascular repair of asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms (DREAM and EVAR I trials), and endovascular repair with no intervention in high-risk patients (EVAR 2 trial). DREAM and EVAR I showed that endovascular repair is associated with lower perioperative mortality, but overall survival is not improved after mid-term follow-up. EVAR 2 showed that high-risk patients do not benefit from elective endovascular repair. It can be concluded that relatively young and low-risk patients should be treated with open repair and that conservative treatment may be appropriate for high-risk patients. Between these extremes is a large group ofpatients who may benefit from endovascular repair. However, long-term follow-up data are not yet available and costs for endovascular therapy are substantial.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article


You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Trending Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.


Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"