In randomized trials endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been shown to have superior perioperative outcomes compared with open aneurysm repair (OAR). However, outcomes in patients at low risk of complications are unclear and many surgeons still prefer OAR in this cohort. The objective was to analyse perioperative and longer-term outcomes of OAR and EVAR in this low-risk group of patients.Methods:
All elective infrarenal EVARs and OARs in the Vascular Study Group of New England database were reviewed from 2003 to 2014. The Medicare scoring system was used to identity patients at low risk of perioperative complications and death. Perioperative and longer-term outcomes were analysed in this cohort. A Kaplan–Meier plot was constructed for evaluation of longer-term survival. Further propensity matching and multivariable analysis were performed to analyse additional differences between the two groups.Results:
Some 1070 patients who underwent EVAR and 476 who had OAR were identified. Mean(s.d.) age was 67·3(5·7) and 65·1(6·3) years respectively (P< 0·001). EVAR was associated with a lower overall perioperative complication rate (4·2versus26·5 per cent;P< 0·001). There was no difference in 30-day mortality (0·4versus0·6 per cent;P= 0·446). Overall survival at 3 years was similar after EVAR and OAR (92·5versus92·1 per cent respectively;P= 0·592). In multivariable analyses there was no difference in freedom from reintervention (odds ratio 1·69, 95 per cent c.i. 0·73 to 3·90;P= 0·220) or survival (hazard ratio 0·85, 0·61 to 1·20;P= 0·353).Conclusion:
In patients predicted to be at low risk of perioperative death following aneurysm repair, EVAR resulted in fewer perioperative complications than OAR. However, perioperative mortality, reinterventions and survival rates in the longer term appeared similar between endovascular and open repair.