Percutaneous repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm

Mark D. Morasch*, Melina R. Kibbe, Mary E. Evans, Wendy S. Meadows, Mark K. Eskandari, Jon S. Matsumura, William H. Pearce

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

103 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective Percutaneous treatment of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is feasible, but is associated with a unique set of risks. A comparison of Excluder endograft deployment with femoral artery cutdown (FAC) versus percutaneous femoral access (PFA) for treatment of infrarenal AAA was undertaken. Methods A single-institution, controlled, retrospective review was carried out in patients who underwent either bilateral FAC or bilateral PFA for endovascular repair of infrarenal AAA with the Gore bifurcated Excluder endograft between March 1999 and November 2003. To November 2000, 35 patients underwent bilateral FAC; since then, 47 patients have undergone bilateral PFA. All have been followed up for at least 30 days. Results Mean AAA size was 5.7 cm in the FAC group and 6.0 cm in the PFA group. During hospitalization there were six access-related complications in the FAC group; three required early surgical intervention. In the PFA group nine perioperative access-related complications occurred, all consisting of either hemorrhage or arterial occlusion; seven required additional intervention, and were recognized and ameliorated while the patient was still in the operating room. At 30-day follow-up there were no additional access-related complications in the PFA group. There were eight other access-related complications in eight additional patients who underwent FAC. In patients undergoing bilateral PFA total operative time was shorter (PFA 139 minutes vs FAC 169 minutes; P = .002), total in-room anesthesia time was less (PFA 201 minutes vs FAC 225 minutes; P < .008), and use of general anesthesia was reduced (P < .001). No significant differences were observed between groups with respect to estimated blood loss (PFA 459 mL vs FAC 389 mL; P = .851). Conclusion Complete percutaneous treatment of AAA may have some advantages over open femoral artery access, but it is not free from risk. Percutaneous treatment of AAA can be completed successfully in most patients, but should be performed at an institution where conversion to an open procedure can be completed expeditiously if necessary.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)12-16
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Vascular Surgery
Volume40
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2004

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Percutaneous repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this