TY - JOUR
T1 - GRADE-Based Recommendations for Surgical Repair of Nonruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm
AU - Posso, Margarita
AU - Quintana, M. Jesús
AU - Bellmunt, Sergi
AU - Martínez García, Laura
AU - Escudero, José R.
AU - Viteri-García, Andrés
AU - Valli, Claudia
AU - Bonfill, Xavier
PY - 2019/9/1
Y1 - 2019/9/1
N2 - © The Author(s) 2019. The objective of this study was to provide evidence-based recommendations for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) versus open surgical repair (OSR) for patients with a nonruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement and adhered to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Both low- and high surgical risk patients treated with EVAR showed decreased 30-day mortality, but the low-risk group had no differences in 4-year mortality. Compared with friendly anatomy, patients with hostile anatomy had an increased risk of type I endoleak. Young patients may prefer OSR. Endovascular aneurysm repair was not cost-effective in Europe. Four conditional recommendations were formulated: (1) OSR for low-risk patients up to 80 years old, (2) EVAR for low-risk patients older than 80 years, (3) EVAR for high-risk patients as long as is anatomically feasible, and (4) OSR in patients in whom it is not anatomically feasible to perform EVAR. Based on GRADE criteria, either OSR or EVAR can be suggested to patients with nonruptured AAA taking into account their surgical risk, hostile anatomy, and age. Given the weakness of the recommendations, personal preferences are determinant.
AB - © The Author(s) 2019. The objective of this study was to provide evidence-based recommendations for endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) versus open surgical repair (OSR) for patients with a nonruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement and adhered to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) framework. Both low- and high surgical risk patients treated with EVAR showed decreased 30-day mortality, but the low-risk group had no differences in 4-year mortality. Compared with friendly anatomy, patients with hostile anatomy had an increased risk of type I endoleak. Young patients may prefer OSR. Endovascular aneurysm repair was not cost-effective in Europe. Four conditional recommendations were formulated: (1) OSR for low-risk patients up to 80 years old, (2) EVAR for low-risk patients older than 80 years, (3) EVAR for high-risk patients as long as is anatomically feasible, and (4) OSR in patients in whom it is not anatomically feasible to perform EVAR. Based on GRADE criteria, either OSR or EVAR can be suggested to patients with nonruptured AAA taking into account their surgical risk, hostile anatomy, and age. Given the weakness of the recommendations, personal preferences are determinant.
KW - abdominal aortic aneurysm
KW - endovascular procedure
KW - vascular surgical procedure
U2 - 10.1177/0003319719838892
DO - 10.1177/0003319719838892
M3 - Review article
C2 - 30961349
SN - 0003-3197
VL - 70
SP - 701
EP - 710
JO - Angiology
JF - Angiology
IS - 8
ER -