...
首页> 外文期刊>The British Journal of Surgery >Meta‐analysis of long‐term survival after elective endovascular or open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm
【24h】

Meta‐analysis of long‐term survival after elective endovascular or open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm

机译:长期存活后的腹膜血管外或腹主动脉瘤的开放修复后的荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has become the preferred strategy for elective repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) for many patients. However, the superiority of the endovascular procedure has recently been challenged by reports of impaired long‐term survival in patients who underwent EVAR. A systematic review of long‐term survival following AAA repair was therefore undertaken. Methods A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Articles reporting short‐ and/or long‐term mortality of EVAR and open surgical repair (OSR) of AAA were identified. Pooled overall survival estimates (hazard ratios (HRs) with corresponding 95 per cent c.i. for EVAR versus OSR) were calculated using a random‐effects model. Possible confounding owing to age differences between patients receiving EVAR or OSR was addressed by estimating relative survival. Results Some 53 studies were identified. The 30‐day mortality rate was lower for EVAR compared with OSR: 1·16 (95 per cent c.i. 0·92 to 1·39) versus 3·27 (2·71 to 3·83) per cent. Long‐term survival rates were similar for EVAR versus OSR (HRs 1·01, 1·00 and 0·98 for 3, 5 and 10?years respectively; P?= ?0·721, P?= ?0·912 and P?= ?0·777). Correction of age inequality by means of relative survival analysis showed equal long‐term survival: 0·94, 0·91 and 0·76 at 3, 5 and 10?years for EVAR, and 0·96, 0·91 and 0·76 respectively for OSR. Conclusion Long‐term overall survival rates were similar for EVAR and OSR. Available data do not allow extension beyond the 10‐year survival window or analysis of specific subgroups.
机译:背景技术血管内动脉瘤修复(EVAR)已成为许多患者的腹主动脉瘤(AAA)的选择性修复的首选策略。然而,血管内程序的优越性最近受到evar患者的长期存活的报告的挑战。因此进行了对AAA修复后的长期存活的系统审查。方法根据Prisma指南进行系统审查。鉴定了报告eFAR和开放外科修复(OSR)的短期和/或长期死亡率的文章被确定为AAA。使用随机效应模型计算汇集总存活估计(具有相应的95%C.I的危险比率为95%C.i.Sevar与OSR)。由于估计相对存活,通过估算evar或OSR的患者之间的年龄差异可能的混淆。结果确定了大约53项研究。与OSR相比,EVAR的30天死亡率降低:1·16(95%C.I.0·92至1·39),而3·27(2·​​71至3·83)%。 evar与OSR(HRS 1·01,1·00和0·98分别为3,5和10的长期存活率类似于分别为3,5和10岁; P?= 0·721,P?= 0·912和p?=?0·777)。通过相对存活分析校正年龄不平等,显示相同的长期存活:0·94,0·91和0·76,在3,5和10?evar的年份,0·96,0·91和0· 76分别用于OSR。结论eVar和OSR的长期整体生存率类似。可用数据不允许扩展超出10年生存窗口或特定子组的分析。

著录项

  • 来源
    《The British Journal of Surgery》 |2019年第5期|共11页
  • 作者单位

    Department of Vascular SurgeryLeiden University Medical CentreLeiden the Netherlands;

    Department of SurgeryLeiden University Medical CentreLeiden the Netherlands;

    Department of Vascular SurgeryLeiden University Medical CentreLeiden the Netherlands;

    Department of Vascular SurgeryLeiden University Medical CentreLeiden the Netherlands;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 外科学;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号