Nieuwe argumenten voor endovasculaire versus open behandeling van patiënten met een aneurysma van de abdominale aorta

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleProfessional

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Recent randomised trials have compared conventional and endovascular repair of asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms (DREAM and EVAR I trials), and endovascular repair with no intervention in high-risk patients (EVAR 2 trial). DREAM and EVAR I showed that endovascular repair is associated with lower perioperative mortality, but overall survival is not improved after mid-term follow-up. EVAR 2 showed that high-risk patients do not benefit from elective endovascular repair. It can be concluded that relatively young and low-risk patients should be treated with open repair and that conservative treatment may be appropriate for high-risk patients. Between these extremes is a large group ofpatients who may benefit from endovascular repair. However, long-term follow-up data are not yet available and costs for endovascular therapy are substantial
Original languageDutch
Pages (from-to)653-656
JournalNederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde
Volume150
Issue number12
Publication statusPublished - 2006

Cite this