This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Abularrage, C. J. Articles by Mukherjee, D. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Abularrage, C. J. Articles by Mukherjee, D. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Endovascular versus "Fast-Track" Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Department of Surgery, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC

Michael J. Sheridan, ScD

Department of Medicine, Inova Fairfax Hospital, Falls Church, VA

Dipankar Mukherjee, MD

Department of Surgery, Inova Fairfax Hospital, Falls Church, VA; 3022 Williams Drive, #100, Fairfax, VA 20031 muk1953{at}aol.com

Recent studies have shown that endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) has decreased costs, as well as decreased intensive care unit and total hospital length of stays when compared to abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair using a retroperitoneal exposure. The authors hypothesized that the fast-track AAA repair, which combines a retroperitoneal exposure with a patient care pathway that includes a gastric promotility agent and patient-controlled analgesia, would have no differences when compared to EVAR. Records of 58 patients who underwent AAA repair between April 14, 2000, and July 12, 2002, were reviewed retrospectively. Demographic information, length of stay, intraoperative and postoperative complications, mortality, and costs were evaluated. Fifty-eight AAA repairs were performed with the EVAR (n=28) and fast-track (n=30) techniques. The EVAR group was slightly older (72 vs 68 years, p=0.04), had slightly smaller average aneurysm size (5.5 ±0.13 vs 6.1 ±0.17 cm, p=0.008), and had more patients designated American Society of Anesthesia class 4 (p<0.0001). Both groups were predominantly male. Otherwise there were no statistically significant differences in risk factors. Patients who underwent fast-track repair tended to have a longer operation (216 ±7.4 vs 158 ±6.8 minutes, p<0.0001), with a greater volume of blood (1.8 ±0.29 vs 0.32 ±0.24 units, p=0.0005), colloid (565 ±89 vs 32 ±22 cc, p<0.0001), and crystalloid transfusions (4,625 ±252 vs 2,627 ±170 cc, p<0.0001). There were no statistically significant differences in the number of intraoperative or postoperative complications between the 2 groups. EVAR patients resumed a regular diet earlier (0.21 ±0.08 vs 1.8 ±0.11 days, p<0.0001). Intensive care unit stay was shorter for EVAR (0.50 ±0.10 vs 0.87 ±0.10 days, p=0.01), but floor (2.1 ±0.23 vs 2.6 ±0.21 days, p=0.17), and total hospital lengths of stay (2.8 ±0.32 vs 3.4 ±0.18 days, p=0.07) were similar between the 2 groups. Total hospital cost was lower in the fast-track ($10,205 ±$736 vs $20,640 ±$1,206, p<0.0001) leading to greater overall hospital earnings ($6,141 ±$1,280 vs $107 ±$1,940, p=0.01). Fast-track AAA repair is a viable alternative for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms. Compared to endovascular repair, the fast-track method had increased transfusions of blood and intravenous fluids and increased operating room times, but equivalent lengths of floor and total hospital stay and increased total hospital earnings.

Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Vol. 39, No. 3, 229-236 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/153857440503900303


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. Brustia, A. Renghi, A. Fassiola, L. Gramaglia, F. Della Corte, R. Cassatella, and A. Cumino Fast-track approach in abdominal aortic surgery: left subcostal incision with blended anesthesia Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery, February 1, 2007; 6(1): 60 - 64. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]