論文ID: CJ-21-0574
Background:Not every elderly person is frail, and whether it would be beneficial to perform endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) solely because a patient is older is unclear. This study aimed to compare the results of EVAR and open surgical repair (OSR) in elderly individuals.
Methods and Results:From May 1998 to March 2021, 828 EVAR patients and 886 OSR patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) were reviewed. Patients aged ≥80 years were included among them. After propensity score matching by age, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification, the outcomes were compared between patients who underwent EVAR and OSR. The study cohort was composed of 351 EVAR patients and 90 OSR patients. The groups had similar comorbidities, except that EVAR patients were significantly older and had higher ASA classifications. After propensity score matching, 79 pairs of patients were selected. The 30-day mortality (0 vs. 1.2%) and aneurysm-related death (ARD) rates during follow up (2.3% vs. 2.3%, respectively) were similar between the groups. Kaplan-Meier curves revealed that estimated overall survival and freedom from ARD were also similar.
Conclusions:This study suggests that EVAR cannot improve survival outcomes compared with OSR if applied solely because a patient is aged ≥80 years. Not only age but also other risk factors and quality of life after surgery need to be further studied.
