Endovascular Versus Open Mesenteric Revascularization: Immediate Benefits Do Not Equate with Short-Term Functional Outcomes - 09/08/11
⁎, Jeffrey M. Rhodes, MD, FACS , David Lee, MD †, David L. Waldman, MD †, Richard M. Green, MD, FACS , Mark G. Davies, MD, PhD, FACS , † Center for Vascular Disease, Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular Surgery, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY. Correspondence address: Nayan Sivamurthy, MD, UCSF Medical Center, Division of Vascular Surgery, 400 Parnassus Ave, A-581, Box 0222, San Francisco, CA 94143-0222Résumé |
Background |
Percutaneous therapy for symptomatic visceral occlusive disease is rapidly gaining popularity in many centers. This study evaluates the anatomic and functional outcomes of open and endovascular therapy for chronic mesenteric ischemia at an academic medical center.
Study design |
We performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent endovascular or open mesenteric arterial revascularization for chronic mesenteric ischemia between January 1989 and September 2003. Indications for revascularization included postprandial abdominal pain (92%) or weight loss (54%). All had atherosclerotic visceral occlusive disease with a median of 2 vessels with more than 50% stenosis or occlusion on angiography. Sixty patients (44 women, mean age 66 years) underwent 67 interventions (43 vessels bypassed, 23 vessel endarterectomies, 22 vessel angioplasty and stents). The median numbers of vessels revascularized were two in the open group and one in the endovascular group.
Results |
Thirty-day mortality and cumulative survival at 3 years were similar (open, 15% and 62% ± 9%; endovascular, 21% and 63%±14%, respectively; p=NS). Cumulative patencies at 6 months were 83%±7% and 68%±14% in the open and endovascular groups, respectively (p=NS). Major morbidity, median postoperative length of stay, and cumulative freedom from recurrent symptoms at 6 months were significantly greater in the open group (open, 46%, 23 days, and 71%±7%, respectively; endovascular, 19%, 1 day, and 34%±10%, respectively; p < 0.01).
Conclusions |
Endovascular revascularization is attractive because it carries equivalent patency to open revascularization. Symptomatic benefit of endovascular revascularization is not achieved, probably as a result of incomplete revascularization. Despite incomplete revascularization, endovascular therapy has equivalent survival and lower morbidity compared with open revascularization. Complete endovascular revascularization needs further evaluation to determine if it is superior to open revascularization. In the interim, endovascular therapy should be reserved for the patient unable to undergo open revascularization.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Plan
| Competing Interests Declared: None. Dr Sivamurthy is currently at UCSF Medical Center, Division of Vascular Surgery, San Francisco, CA Dr Green is currently at Lenox Hill Hospital, Department of Surgery, New York, NY |
Vol 202 - N° 6
P. 859-867 - juin 2006 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- Subject Index
- Extensive Thyroidectomy in Graves’ Disease
- Sebastien Gaujoux, Laurence Leenhardt, Christophe Trésallet, Agnes Rouxel, Catherine Hoang, Christelle Jublanc, Jean-Paul Chigot, Fabrice Menegaux
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?