Abstract:Objective:To compare the therapeutic effect of endovascular repair(EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) of abdominal aortic aneurysm, and discuss how to select a proper time and method of operation.
Methods :The clinical data of fifty-one patients with infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm who received surgical treatment in the recent four years were analyzed. The perioperative and short term advantages and disadvantages of OSR group (n=37) were compared with EVAR group (n=14).
Results:Compared to OSR group, the EVAR group had shorter time of operation and intensive care(P<0.05), and shorter hospital stay after operation (P<0.01), but the cost of hospitalization was far higher than that of OSR group［(137 000±47 000) vs. (34 000±7 000)］.There was no statistically significant difference in short term postoperative complications between the two groups.
Conclusions:EVAR is safer and less traumatic method than OSR, and patients can recover more rapidly. But the cost of hospitalization of EVAR remains too exorbitant.Large randomized controlled trial is necessary to validate the long term effects of EVAR.