| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Sunday June 18 |
University of Western Ontario, London, ONTARIO, Canada
INTRODUCTION: We undertook an audit of all patients whom electively underwent either endovascular aortic repair (EAR) or open aortic repair (OAR) of their infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms(AAA) at our institution in 2004. This audit was intended to provide an overview of the anaesthetic management of AAA repair at our institution, as we believe the management was different from that previously reported (1).
METHODS: All data for this study was collected retrospectively. Ethics approval was obtained from the local IRB. Informed consent was not required due to the data collection nature of the study. Data from 89 patients undergoing EAR was compared to 99 patients undergoing OAR. Statistical methods included Student t-test and chi-square analysis, and a p-value less than 0.05 was considered significant.
RESULTS: In comparison to the open repair group the endovascular repair group showed statistically significant increases in age, ASA status, previous myocardial infarction, ischemic heart disease, and CVA/TIA history (data to be presented). Other demographic data was not different. Table 1
demonstrates comparisons of intraoperative results. The OAR group also had a larger number of significant postoperative complications including CHF/pulmonary edema (24 vs. 0), hypotension (25 vs. 4), GI problems (11 vs. 1), and pneumonia (10 vs. 2).
|
REFERENCES:
1 Anesthesia Intensive Care 2002, 30(1) 6670
2 Anesthesia Intensive Care 2002, 30(1) 6670
3 Heart Surg Forum. 2004;7(5):E45961[Medline]
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |