Comparison of percutaneous access and open femoral cutdown in elective endovascular aortic repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms
- PMID: 35444858
- PMCID: PMC8990152
- DOI: 10.5606/tgkdc.dergisi.2022.21898
Comparison of percutaneous access and open femoral cutdown in elective endovascular aortic repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study was to compare postoperative outcomes of percutaneous access and femoral cutdown methods for elective bifurcated endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.
Methods: Between November 2013 and September 2020, a total of 152 patient (135 males, 17 females; mean age: 70.6±6, range, 57 to 87 years) who underwent endovascular repair due to infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm were retrospectively analyzed. According to femoral access type, the patients were grouped into two groups as the total percutaneous femoral access and open cutdown femoral access endovascular repair. Intra- and postoperative data were compared, including operative time, amount of contrast media, bleeding requiring transfusion, return to the operating room, access vessel complications, wound complications, and overall length of hospital stay.
Results: Eighty-seven (57.2%) femoral cutdown access repair and 65 (42.8%) percutaneous femoral access repair cases were evaluated in the study. The two groups were comparable in terms of demographic and clinical characteristics (p>0.05), except for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease which was more frequent in the percutaneous access group (p=0.014). After adjustment, age, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and obesity were not predictive of percutaneous access failure. Percutaneous femoral access was observed as the only preventing factor for wound infection (odds ratio=0.166, 95% confidence interval: 0.036-0.756; p=0.021).
Conclusion: Although femoral access preference does not affect mortality and re-intervention rates, percutaneous endovascular repair reduces operation time, hospital stay, and wound site complications compared to femoral artery exposures.
Keywords: Abdominal; aorta; aortic aneurysms; common femoral artery; endovascular procedures.
Copyright © 2022, Turkish Society of Cardiovascular Surgery.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of Interest: The authors declared no conflicts of interest with respect to the authorship and/or publication of this article.
Similar articles
-
Percutaneous versus Cutdown Access for Endovascular Aortic Repair.Heart Surg Forum. 2023 Sep 20;26(5):E455-E462. doi: 10.59958/hsf.6665. Heart Surg Forum. 2023. PMID: 37920077
-
Preoperative risk score for access site failure in ultrasound-guided percutaneous aortic procedures.J Vasc Surg. 2019 Oct;70(4):1254-1262.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.12.025. Epub 2019 Mar 7. J Vasc Surg. 2019. PMID: 30852039 Free PMC article.
-
Comparison of percutaneous versus open femoral cutdown access for endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms.J Vasc Surg. 2017 Nov;66(5):1364-1370. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2017.03.431. J Vasc Surg. 2017. PMID: 29061269
-
Editor's Choice - Percutaneous Access Does Not Confer Superior Clinical Outcomes Over Cutdown Access for Endovascular Aneurysm Repair: Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2021 Mar;61(3):383-394. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2020.11.008. Epub 2020 Dec 10. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2021. PMID: 33309488
-
Endovascular stent grafting and open surgical replacement for chronic thoracic aortic aneurysms: a systematic review and prospective cohort study.Health Technol Assess. 2022 Jan;26(6):1-166. doi: 10.3310/ABUT7744. Health Technol Assess. 2022. PMID: 35094747
Cited by
-
Endovascular Perclose ProGlide complication puncture site, treated successful by cutting balloon dilatation: A case report and literature review.Sci Prog. 2024 Jul-Sep;107(3):368504241278481. doi: 10.1177/00368504241278481. Sci Prog. 2024. PMID: 39279272 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Analysis of Determinants for Suture-mediated Closure Device Failure During EVAR Procedures.Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2024 Feb;58(2):129-135. doi: 10.1177/15385744231189356. Epub 2023 Jul 14. Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2024. PMID: 37450890 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Akbulut M, Aksoy E, Kara İ, Çelik EC, Rabuş MB, Çekmecelioğlu D, et al. Abdominal aort anevrizma tamirinde açık cerrahi ve endovasküler stent greft onarım yöntemlerinin erken ve orta dönem sonuçlarının karşılaştırılması. Damar Cerrahi Dergisi. 2017;26:5–11.
-
- Güneş T, Yılık L, Yetkin U, Yürekli İ, Özcem B, Yazman S, et al. Abdominal aort anevrizması tamirinde açık konvansiyonel veendovasküler cerrahi tedavinin karşılaştırılmas. Turk Gogus Kalp Dama. 2012;20:515–523.
-
- Dosluoglu HH, Cherr GS, Harris LM, Dryjski ML. Total percutaneous endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms using Perclose ProGlide closure devices. J Endovasc Ther. 2007;14:184–188. - PubMed
-
- Nelson PR, Kracjer Z, Kansal N, Rao V, Bianchi C, Hashemi H, et al. A multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of totally percutaneous access versus open femoral exposure for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (the PEVAR trial) J Vasc Surg. 2014;59:1181–1193. - PubMed
-
- Chen SL, Kabutey NK, Whealon MD, Kuo IJ, Fujitani RM. Comparison of percutaneous versus open femoral cutdown access for endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg. 2017;66:1364–1370. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources