Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Elective Endovascular Repair versus Conventional Surgery—Evaluation with Evidence-based Medicine Techniques

PURPOSE: To use evidence-based techniques to compare elective open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms with endovascular repair by means of stent placement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A focused clinical question formed the basis of a literature search. Evidence-based criteria were used to appraise and assign a “level of evidence” to retrieved articles. The following data were determined from the best studies: systemic, local, and/or vascular complications; graft failure rates; blood loss; mortality; length of intensive care and/or hospital stay; mid- and long-term outcomes; cost of endovascular repair versus that of surgery; and eligibility for endovascular repair. Absolute risk reductions and/or increases and numbers needed to treat or harm were calculated.

RESULTS: The best current evidence came from 22 studies, which showed that there is slight, if any, difference between mortality rates of endovascular repair and surgery. Hospital and/or intensive care stay is shorter, blood loss less, and systemic complications fewer (numbers needed to treat, two to 12) with endovascular repair. Some authors reported a significant increase in local and/or vascular complications with endovascular repair (numbers needed to harm, two to six). Graft failure is significantly more common with endovascular repair (numbers needed to harm, four), and substantive adjunctive interventions are needed. Endovascular repair is more expensive than surgery.

CONCLUSION: Elective endovascular repair has short-term benefits compared with surgery. There is slight, if any, difference in mortality. Endovascular repair costs more than surgery. At follow-up, surgical grafts performed better.

© RSNA, 2003

References

  • 1 Parodi JC, Palmaz JC, Barone HD. Transfemoral intraluminal graft implantation for abdominal aortic aneurysms. Ann Vasc Surg 1991; 5:491-499. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Kaufman JA, Geller SC, Brewster DC, et al. Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: current status and future directions. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2000; 175:289-302. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Uflacker R, Robison J. Endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms: a review. Eur Radiol 2001; 11:739-753. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, Oxford University. Levels of evidence and grades of recommendations. Available at: www.cebm.net/levels_of_evidence.asp. Accessed June 1 2003. Google Scholar
  • 5 Snowball R. Finding the evidence: an information skills approach. In: Dawes M, Davies P, Gray A, Mant J, Seers K, Snowball R, eds. Evidence-based practice: a primer for health care professionals. Edinburgh, Scotland: Churchill Livingstone, 1999; 20. Google Scholar
  • 6 Black WC. How to evaluate the radiology literature. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1990; 154:17-22. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Wood BP. What’s the evidence? Radiology 1999; 213:635-637. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Malone DE, MacEneaney PM. Applying ’technology assessment’ and ’evidence based medicine’ theory to interventional radiology. I. Suggestions for the phased evaluation of new procedures. Clin Radiol 2000; 55:929-937. Google Scholar
  • 9 Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Cook DJ. Users’ guides to the medical literature. II. How to use an article about therapy or prevention. A. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1993; 270:2598-2601. Google Scholar
  • 10 Guyatt GH, Sackett DL, Cook DJ. Users’ guides to the medical literature. II. How to use an article about therapy or prevention. B. What were the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1994; 271:59-63. Google Scholar
  • 11 Levine M, Walter S, Lee H, Haines T, Holbrook A, Moyer V. Users’ guides to the medical literature. IV. How to use an article about harm. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1994; 271:1615-1619. Google Scholar
  • 12 Sackett DL, Straus SE, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. Therapy In: Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Churchill Livingstone, 2000; 105-110. Google Scholar
  • 13 Oxman AD, Cook DJ, Guyatt GH. Users’ guides to the medical literature. VI. How to use an overview. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1994; 272:1367-1371. Google Scholar
  • 14 Drummond MF, Richardson WS, O’Brien BJ, Levine M, Heyland D. Users’ guides to the medical literature. XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice. A. Are the results of the study valid? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1997; 277:1552-1557. Google Scholar
  • 15 O’Brien BJ, Heyland D, Richardson WS, Levine M, Drummond MF. Users’ guides to the medical literature. XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice. B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients? Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1997; 277:1802-1806. [Erratum: JAMA 1997; 278:1064.]. Google Scholar
  • 16 MacEneaney PM, Malone DE. Applying ’evidence-based medicine’ theory to interventional radiology. II. A spreadsheet for swift assessment of procedural benefit and harm. Clin Radiol 2000; 55:938-945. Google Scholar
  • 17 Laupacis A, Sackett DL, Roberts RS. An assessment of clinically useful measures of the consequences of treatment. N Engl J Med 1988; 318:1728-1733. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Cook RJ, Sackett DL. The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect. BMJ 1995; 310:452-454. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Chatellier G, Zapletal E, Lemaitre D, Menard J, Degoulet P. The number needed to treat: a clinically useful nomogram in its proper context. BMJ 1996; 312:426-429. [Erratum: BMJ 1996; 312:563.]. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Zarins CK, Wolf YG, Lee WA, et al. Will endovascular repair replace open surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair? Ann Surg 2000; 232:501-507. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Zarins CK, White RA, Schwarten D, et al. AneuRx stent graft versus open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: multicenter prospective clinical trial. J Vasc Surg 1999; 29:292-305. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 22 May J, White GH, Yu W, et al. Concurrent comparison of endoluminal versus open repair in the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms: analysis of 303 patients by life table method. J Vasc Surg 1998; 27:213-220. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Brewster DC, Geller SC, Kaufman JA, et al. Initial experience with endovascular aneurysm repair: comparison of early results with outcome of conventional open repair. J Vasc Surg 1998; 27:992-1003. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Cohnert TU, Oelert F, Wahlers T, et al. Matched-pair analysis of conventional versus endoluminal AAA treatment outcomes during the initial phase of an aortic endografting program. J Endovasc Ther 2000; 7:94-100. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Becquemin J, Bourriez A, D’Audiffret A, et al. Mid-term results of endovascular versus open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm in patients anatomically suitable for endovascular repair. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2000; 19:656-661. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 26 White GH, May J, McGahan T, et al. Historic control comparison of outcome for matched groups of patients undergoing endoluminal versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg 1996; 23:201-211. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 27 May J, White GH, Waugh R, et al. Improved survival after endoluminal repair with second-generation prostheses compared with open repair in the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms: a 5-year concurrent comparison using life table method. J Vasc Surg 2001; 33(suppl 2):S21-S26. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Quinones-Baldrich WJ, Garner C, Caswell D, et al. Endovascular, transperitoneal, and retroperitoneal abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: results and costs. J Vasc Surg 1999; 30:59-67. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Moore WS, Kashyap VS, Vescera CL, Quinones-Baldrich WJ. Abdominal aortic aneurysm: a 6-year comparison of endovascular versus transabdominal repair. Ann Surg 1999; 230:298-306. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Beebe HG, Cronenwett JL, Katzen BT, Brewster DC, Green RM. Results of an aortic endograft trial: impact of device failure beyond 12 months. J Vasc Surg 2001; 33(suppl 2):S55-S63. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Adriaensen ME, Bosch JL, Halpern EF, Hunink MG, Gazelle GS. Elective endovascular versus open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: systematic review of short-term results. Radiology 2002; 224:739-747. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 32 McGovern D. Systematic reviews. In: McGovern D, Valori R, Summerskill W, Levi M, eds. Key topics in evidence-based medicine. Oxford, England: BIOS Scientific Publishers, 2001; 17-19. Google Scholar
  • 33 Becquemin JP, Lapie V, Favre JP, Rousseau H. Mid-term results of a second generation bifurcated endovascular graft for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: the French Vanguard trial. J Vasc Surg 1999; 30:209-218. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Bush RL, Lumsden AB, Dodson TF, et al. Mid-term results after endovascular repair of the abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg 2001; 33(suppl 2):S70-S76. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Holzenbein TJ, Kretschmer G, Thurnher S, et al. Midterm durability of abdominal aortic aneurysm endograft repair: a word of caution. J Vasc Surg 2001; 33(suppl 2):S46-S54. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Harris PL, Vallabhaneni SR, Desgranges P, Becquemin JP, van Marrewijk C, Laheij RJ. Incidence and risk factors of late rupture, conversion, and death after endovascular repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms: the EUROSTAR experience. European Collaborators on Stent/graft techniques for aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 2000; 32:739-749. Google Scholar
  • 37 Sarkar R, Moore WS, Quinones-Baldrich WJ, Gomes AS. Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm using the EVT device: limited increased utilization with availability of a bifurcated graft. J Endovasc Surg 1999; 6:131-135. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Treiman GS, Lawrence PF, Edwards WH, Jr, Galt SW, Kraiss LW, Bhirangi K. An assessment of the current applicability of the EVT endovascular graft for treatment of patients with an infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg 1999; 30:68-75. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Wolf YG, Fogarty TJ, Olcott CI, et al. Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: eligibility rate and impact on the rate of open repair. J Vasc Surg 2000; 32:519-523. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Sternbergh WC, III, Money SR. Hospital cost of endovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: a multicenter study. J Vasc Surg 2000; 31:237-244. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Bosch JL, Lester JS, McMahon PM, et al. Hospital costs for elective endovascular and surgical repairs of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms. Radiology 2001; 220:492-497. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Birch SE, Stary DR, Scott AR. Cost of endovascular versus open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Aust N Z J Surg 2000; 70:660-666. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Ceelen W, Sonneville T, Randon C, De Roose J, Vermassen F. Cost-benefit analysis of endovascular versus open abdominal aortic aneurysm treatment. Acta Chir Belg 1999; 99:64-67. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Clair DG, Gray B, O’Hara PJ, Ouriel K. An evaluation of the costs to health care institutions of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg 2000; 32:148-152. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Seiwert AJ, Wolfe J, Whalen RC, Pigott JP, Kritpracha B, Beebe HG. Cost comparison of aortic aneurysm endograft exclusion versus open surgical repair. Am J Surg 1999; 178:117-120. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Holzenbein J, Kretschmer G, Glanzl R, et al. Endovascular AAA treatment: expensive prestige or economic alternative? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 1997; 14:265-272. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Patel ST, Haser PB, Bush HL, Jr, Kent KC. The cost-effectiveness of endovascular repair versus open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: a decision analysis model. J Vasc Surg 1999; 29:958-972. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Bosch JL, Kaufman JA, Beinfeld MT, Adriaensen ME, Brewster DC, Gazelle GS. Abdominal aortic aneurysms: cost-effectiveness of elective endovascular and open surgical repair. Radiology 2002; 225:337-344. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Guyatt G, Jaeschke R, Heddle N, Cook D, Shannon H, Walter S. Basic statistics for clinicians. II. Interpreting study results: confidence intervals. Can Med Assoc J 1995; 152:169-173. Google Scholar
  • 50 McGovern D. Risk reduction and the number needed to treat (NNT). In: McGovern D, Valori R, Summerskill W, Levi M, eds. Key topics in evidence-based medicine. Oxford, England: BIOS Scientific Publishers, 2001; 83-86. Google Scholar
  • 51 Ohki T, Veith F, Shaw P, et al. Increasing incidence of midterm and long-term complications after endovascular graft repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: a note of caution based on a 9-year experience. Ann Surg 2001; 234:323-334. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Brook RH, Lohr KN. Efficacy, effectiveness, variations, and quality: boundary-crossing research. Med Care 1985; 23:710-722. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Treharne GD, Thompson MM, Whiteley MS, Bell PR. Physiological comparison of open and endovascular aneurysm repair. Br J Surg 1999; 86:760-764. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Scharrer-Pamler R, Kapfer X, Orend KH, Sunder-Plassmann L. Endoluminal grafting of infrarenal aortic aneurysms. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999; 47:119-121. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Oxman A, Guyatt G, Cook D, Montori V. I The basics: summarizing the evidence. In: Guyatt G, Hayward R, Rennie D, eds. Users’ guides to the medical literature. Chicago, Ill: American Medical Association, 2002; 155-173. Google Scholar
  • 56 Montori V, Guyatt G, Oxman A, Cook D. II. Beyond the basics: using and teaching the principles of evidence-based medicine—summarizing the evidence, fixed-effects and random-effects models. In: Guyatt G, Hayward R, Rennie D, eds. Users’ guides to the medical literature. Chicago, Ill: American Medical Association, 2002; 539-546. Google Scholar
  • 57 McGovern D. Meta-analyses. In: McGovern D, Valori R, Summerskill W, Levi M, eds. Key topics in evidence-based medicine. Oxford, England: BIOS Scientific Publishers, 2001; 20-25. Google Scholar
  • 58 Vallabhaneni S, Harris P. Lessons learnt from the EUROSTAR registry on endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Eur J Radiol 2001; 39:34-41. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Collin J, Murie JA. Endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm: a failed experiment. Br J Surg 2001; 88:1281-1282. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 60 The Cochrane Library.Available at: www.update-software.com/cochrane/. Accessed June 12003. Google Scholar
  • 61 McMaster University.Users’ guides to the medical literature: a manual for evidence-based practice. Available at: www.usersguides.org. Accessed June 12003. Google Scholar
  • 62 American College of Physicians. ACP journal club. Available at: www.acpjc.org. Accessed June 1 2003. Google Scholar
  • 63 EBM online: evidence-based medicine.Available at: ebm.bmjjournals.com/. Accessed June 12003. Google Scholar
  • 64 eBMJ, McMaster University, Oxford University. Evidence-based medicine. Available at: hiru.mcmaster.ca/ebmj/default.htm. Accessed June 1 2003. Google Scholar
  • 65 Linde K, Willich SN. How objective are systematic reviews? Differences between reviews on complementary medicine. J R Soc Med 2003; 96:17-22. Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Centres for Health Evidence. Users’ guides to evidence-based practice. Available at: www.cche.net/usersguides/main.asp. Accessed June 1 2003. Google Scholar
  • 67 Sackett DL, Strauss SE, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. In: Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Churchill Livingstone, 2000. Google Scholar
  • 68 Guyatt G, Rennie D, eds. Users’ guides to the medical literature: a manual for evidence-based practice The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. Chicago, Ill: American Medical Association, 2002. Google Scholar
  • 69 The Evidence-Based Radiology Working Group. Evidence-based radiology: a new approach to the practice of radiology. Radiology 2001; 220:566-575. LinkGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Sackett DL, Strauss SE, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W, Haynes RB. Therapy In: Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach EBM. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Churchill Livingstone, 2000; 105-153. Google Scholar
  • 71 Oxman AD, Sackett DL, Guyatt GH. Users’ guides to the medical literature. I. How to get started. The Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA 1993; 270:2093-2095. Google Scholar
  • 72 McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Health Information Research Unit (HIRU): evidence-based health informatics. Available at: hiru.mcmaster.ca/. Accessed June 1 2003. Google Scholar
  • 73 Malone DE, Staunton M, Skehan J, MacEneaney PM, Schranz M. Evidence-based radiology on the internet: a website for teaching and practice (abstr). Euro Radiol 2003; 113(suppl 1):435. Google Scholar

Article History

Published in print: Sept 2003