Purpose: To examine the results of elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in young patients (<70 years old) and compare the outcome of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) techniques. Methods: The MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and OpenGray databases were searched from January 2000 to March 2015. Periprocedural (30-day mortality and morbidity, length of hospitalization) and long-term outcomes (long-term mortality, rate of secondary procedures) were compared between young patients undergoing EVAR and OSR. For the meta-analysis of comparative studies, the random effects model was used to calculate combined overall effect sizes of pooled data. One randomized control trial and 8 observational studies were included in the analysis. Data are presented as the odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: EVAR was associated with a decreased risk of 30-day mortality (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.42, p<0.001) and 30-day morbidity (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.58, p<0.001) and shorter length of hospitalization (MD −4.28 days, 95% CI −4.86 to −3.70, p<0.001). Moreover, a potential long-term survival benefit did not reach statistical significance (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.34, p=0.16), whereas the need for reintervention was similar between EVAR and OSR groups (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.54, p=0.89). Conclusion: There are insufficient data for definite conclusions to be drawn regarding the relative effectiveness of EVAR and OSR in young subjects. Contemporary evidence suggests that EVAR should not be discouraged in this cohort of patients based solely on the age criterion.
CriadoFJ.EVAR at 20: the unfolding of a revolutionary new technique that changed everything. J Endovasc Ther. 2010;17:789–796.
2.
SachsTSchermerhornMPomposelliF. Resident and fellow experiences after the introduction of endovascular aneurysm repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg. 2011;54:881–888.
3.
United Kingdom EVAR Trial Investigators, GreenhalghRMBrownLC. Endovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1863–1871.
4.
De BruinJLBaasAFButhJ; DREAM Study Group. Long-term outcome of open or endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. N Engl J Med. 2010;362:1881–1889.
5.
LederleFAFreischlagJAKyriakidesTC.; OVER Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group. Long-term comparison of endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. N Engl J Med. 2012;367:1988–1997.
6.
BecqueminJPPilletJCLescalieF; ACE Trialists. A randomized controlled trial of endovascular aneurysm repair versus open surgery for abdominal aortic aneurysms in low- to moderate-risk patients. J Vasc Surg. 2011;53:1167–1173.
7.
BiancariFCataniaAD’AndreaV.Elective endovascular vs. open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm in patients aged 80 years and older: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011;42:571–576.
8.
SchneiderFRiccoJB.Part two: against the motion. Young patients with good risk factors should not be treated with EVAR. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2013;46:618–621.
9.
VallabhaneniRFarberMA.Part one: for the motion. Young patients with good risk factors should be treated with EVAR. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2013;46:614–617.
10.
RiccoJBForbesTL.Trans-Atlantic debate: should young patients with good risk factors be treated with EVAR?Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2013;46:622–623.
11.
SchwarzeMLShenYHemmerichJ. Age-related trends in utilization and outcome of open and endovascular repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm in the United States, 2001-2006. J Vasc Surg. 2009;50:722–729.
12.
GuptaPKRamananBLynchTG. Endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm does not improve early survival versus open repair in patients younger than 60 years. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2012;43:506–512.
13.
LiberatiAAltmanDGTetzlaffJ. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62:1–34.
14.
HozoSPDjulbegovicBHozoI.Estimating the mean and variance from the median, range, and the size of a sample. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2005;5:13.
15.
AltafNAbisiSYongY. Mid-term results of endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in the young. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2013;46:315–319.
16.
SandfordRMChokeEBownMJ. What is the best option for elective repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm in a young fit patient?Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2014;47:13–18.
17.
DiehmNTsoukasAIKatzenBT. Matched-pair analysis of endovascular versus open surgical repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in young patients at low risk. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008;19:645–651.
18.
SchermerhornMO’MalleyJJhaveriA. Endovascular vs. open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in the Medicare population. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:464–474.
19.
GilesKALandonBECotterillP. Thirty-day mortality and late survival with reinterventions and readmissions after open and endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in Medicare beneficiaries. J Vasc Surg. 2011;53:6–13.e1.
20.
LeeKTangEDuboisL. Durability and survival are similar after elective endovascular and open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms in younger patients. J Vasc Surg. 2015;61:636–641.
