Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2015 Jun;61(6):1442-7.
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.01.005. Epub 2015 Mar 7.

Contemporary outcomes of intact and ruptured visceral artery aneurysms

Affiliations
Free article
Comparative Study

Contemporary outcomes of intact and ruptured visceral artery aneurysms

Ankur J Shukla et al. J Vasc Surg. 2015 Jun.
Free article

Abstract

Objective: The treatment outcomes of ruptured visceral artery aneurysms (rVAAs) have been sparsely characterized, with no clear comparison between different treatment modalities. The purpose of this paper was to review the perioperative and long-term outcomes of open and endovascular interventions for intact visceral artery aneurysms (iVAAs) and rVAAs.

Methods: This was a retrospective review of all treated VAAs at one institution from 2003 to 2013. Patient demographics, aneurysm characteristics, management, and subsequent outcomes (technical success, mortality, reintervention) and complications were recorded.

Results: The study identified 261 patients; 181 patients were repaired (77 ruptured, 104 intact). Pseudoaneurysms were more common in rVAAs (81.8% vs 35.3% for iVAAs; P < .001). The rVAAs were smaller than the iVAAs (20.7 mm vs 27.5 mm; P = .018), and their most common presentation was abdominal pain; 29.7% were hemodynamically unstable. Endovascular intervention was the initial treatment modality for 67.4% (75.3% for rVAAs, 61.5% for iVAAs). The perioperative complication rate was higher for rVAAs (13.7% vs 1% for iVAAs; P = .003), as was mortality at 30 days (13% vs 0% for iVAAs; P = .001), 1 year (32.5% for rVAAs vs 4.1% for iVAAs; P < .001), and 3 years (36.4% for rVAAs vs 8.3% for iVAAs; P < .001). Lower 30-day mortality was noted with endovascular repair for rVAAs (7.4% vs 28.6% open; P = .025). Predictors of mortality for rVAAs included age (odds ratio, 1.04; P = .002), whereas endovascular repair was protective (odds ratio, 0.43; P = .037). Mean follow-up was 26.2 months, and Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival were higher for iVAAs at 3 years (88% vs 62% for rVAAs; P = .045). The 30-day reintervention rate was higher for rVAAs (7.7% vs 19.5% for iVAAs; P = .019) but was similar between open and endovascular repair (8.2% vs 15%; P = NS).

Conclusions: rVAAs have significant mortality. Open and endovascular interventions are equally durable for elective repair of VAAs, but endovascular interventions for rVAAs result in lower morbidity and mortality. Aggressive treatment of pseudoaneurysms is electively recommended at diagnosis regardless of size.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

  • Discussion.
    [No authors listed] [No authors listed] J Vasc Surg. 2015 Jun;61(6):1447-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.01.007. Epub 2015 Mar 7. J Vasc Surg. 2015. PMID: 25752695 No abstract available.

Publication types

MeSH terms