Abstract
Several early studies have shown the benefit of endovascular aneurysm repair in reducing procedure-related mortality and morbidity of open aneurysm repair. Three prospective randomized trials have addressed the advantages and disadvantages of the two procedures. These studies had shown some conflicting findings in survival and complications. We reviewed the largest registry for endovascular abdominal aortic repair and the three randomized trials to evaluate the similarities and differences in their outcomes. Cross-comparison of operative, aneurysm-related and all-cause mortality is presented. Patient characteristics, device specifications, procedure morbidity and reintervention rate of each study are evaluated.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 165-169 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| Journal | Seminars in Vascular Surgery |
| Volume | 23 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Sep 2010 |
| Externally published | Yes |
Fingerprint
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
- Surgery
Cite this
Interpretation of the results of OVER in the context of EVAR Trial, DREAM, and the EUROSTAR registry. / Malas, Mahmoud B.; Freischlag, Julie A.
In: Seminars in Vascular Surgery, Vol. 23, No. 3, 09.2010, p. 165-169.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Interpretation of the results of OVER in the context of EVAR Trial, DREAM, and the EUROSTAR registry
AU - Malas, Mahmoud B.
AU - Freischlag, Julie A.
PY - 2010/9
Y1 - 2010/9
N2 - Several early studies have shown the benefit of endovascular aneurysm repair in reducing procedure-related mortality and morbidity of open aneurysm repair. Three prospective randomized trials have addressed the advantages and disadvantages of the two procedures. These studies had shown some conflicting findings in survival and complications. We reviewed the largest registry for endovascular abdominal aortic repair and the three randomized trials to evaluate the similarities and differences in their outcomes. Cross-comparison of operative, aneurysm-related and all-cause mortality is presented. Patient characteristics, device specifications, procedure morbidity and reintervention rate of each study are evaluated.
AB - Several early studies have shown the benefit of endovascular aneurysm repair in reducing procedure-related mortality and morbidity of open aneurysm repair. Three prospective randomized trials have addressed the advantages and disadvantages of the two procedures. These studies had shown some conflicting findings in survival and complications. We reviewed the largest registry for endovascular abdominal aortic repair and the three randomized trials to evaluate the similarities and differences in their outcomes. Cross-comparison of operative, aneurysm-related and all-cause mortality is presented. Patient characteristics, device specifications, procedure morbidity and reintervention rate of each study are evaluated.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77956320203&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77956320203&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2010.05.009
DO - 10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2010.05.009
M3 - Article
VL - 23
SP - 165
EP - 169
JO - Seminars in Vascular Surgery
JF - Seminars in Vascular Surgery
SN - 0895-7967
IS - 3
ER -