• J. Vasc. Surg. · Sep 1999

    Comparative Study

    Comparison between the transabdominal and retroperitoneal approaches for aortic reconstruction in patients at high risk.

    • L B Kirby, D Rosenthal, C P Atkins, G A Brown, J H Matsuura, M D Clark, and L Pallos.
    • Georgia Baptist Medical Center, Division of Health Studies Center for Disease Control, Atlanta, 30312, USA.
    • J. Vasc. Surg. 1999 Sep 1;30(3):400-5.

    PurposeThe purpose of this study was to compare the transabdominal approach with the retroperitoneal approach for elective aortic reconstruction in the patient who is at high risk.MethodsFrom January 1992 through January 1997, 148 patients underwent aortic operations: 92 of the patients were classified as American Society of Anesthesia (ASA) class IV. Forty-four operations on the patients of ASA class IV were performed with the transabdominal approach (25 for abdominal aortic aneurysms and 19 for aortoiliac occlusive disease), and 48 operations were performed with the retroperitoneal approach (27 for abdominal aortic aneurysms and 21 for aortoiliac occlusive disease). There were no significant differences between the groups for comorbid risk factors or perioperative care.ResultsAmong the patients of ASA class IV, eight (8.7%) died after operation (retroperitoneal, 3 [6.26%]; transabdominal, 5 [11.3%]; P =.5). There was no difference between groups in the number of pulmonary complications (retroperitoneal, 23 [47.9%]; transabdominal, 19 [43.2%]; P =.7) or in the development of incisional hernias (retroperitoneal, 6 [12.5%]; transabdominal, 5 [11.3%]; P =.5). The retroperitoneal approach was associated with a significant reduction in cardiac complications (retroperitoneal, 6 [12.5%]; transabdominal, 10 [22.7%]; P =.004) and in gastrointestinal complications (retroperitoneal, 5 [8.3%]; transabdominal, 15 [34.1%]). Operative time was significantly longer in the retroperitoneal group (retroperitoneal, 3.35 hours; transabdominal, 2.98 hours; P =.006), as was blood loss (retroperitoneal, 803 mL; transabdominal, 647 mL; P =.012). The patients in the retroperitoneal group required less intravenous narcotics (retroperitoneal, 36.6 +/- 21 mg; transabdominal, 49.5 +/- 28.5 mg; P =.004) and less epidural analgesics (retroperitoneal, 39.5 +/- 6.4 mg; transabdominal, 56.6 +/- 9.5 mg; P =.004). Hospital length of stay (retroperitoneal, 7.2 +/- 1.6 days; transabdominal, 12.8 +/- 2.3 days; P =.024) and hospital charges (retroperitoneal, $35,587 +/- $980; transabdominal, $54,832 +/- $1105; P =.04) were significantly lower in the retroperitoneal group. The survival rates at the 40-month follow-up period were similar between the groups (retroperitoneal, 81.3%; transabdominal, 78.7%; P =.53).ConclusionIn this subset of patients who were at high risk for aortic reconstruction, the postoperative complications were common. However, the number of complications was significantly lower in the retroperitoneal group. Aortic reconstruction in patients of ASA class IV appears to be more safely and economically performed with the retroperitoneal approach.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…