Comparison of open and endovascular repair of inflammatory aortic aneurysms

Inflammatory abdominal aortic aneurysms (IAAAs) have been traditionally managed with open repair. Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) was approved September of 1999. Some authors have suggested that EVAR is not an acceptable option for management of an IAAA. However, several recent reports have suggested EVAR is a reasonable management option in these patients. The purpose of our study was to review our experience with the contemporary management of IAAA involving both open and endovascular approaches.

A retrospective review of all patients undergoing repair of IAAAs from 1999 to 2011 was conducted at three geographically separate institutions. Basic demographics, diagnostic workup, treatment, and outcomes were reviewed.

Between 1999 and 2011, 69 patients underwent surgical repair of IAAAs, 59 by open repair and 10 by EVAR. Eighty-three percent of patients were men with a mean age of 67. Aneurysm size was similar in both groups (6.3 cm open repair vs 5.9 cm EVAR). Follow-up for the open group was a mean of 42.6 months and 33.6 months for the EVAR group. Periaortic fibrosis decreased from a mean of 5.4 mm to 2.7 mm after EVAR. Hydronephrosis was present preoperatively in one patient and did not change after EVAR. Aneurysm size decreased in seven patients (70%) who underwent EVAR. Two patients had no change with one lost to follow-up. Mean aneurysm size decrease after EVAR was 1.12 cm (17.8%). There were no aneurysm-related deaths or major morbidities in the EVAR group. Twenty-two patients (37%) in the open surgical group suffered major complications, including myocardial infarction, renal failure, lower extremity amputation, sepsis, and prolonged ventilation.

Endovascular repair for IAAA results in successful management with improvement of periaortic inflammation. EVAR should be considered as first-line therapy in which anatomic parameters are favorable.