[Comparative study of perioperative outcome between endovascular repair and open surgical repair for XXXX ].

@entity1 @entity1755
OBJECTIVE: To compare the perioperative outcome between the endovascular repair (EVAR) and open surgical repair (OSR) for @entity1755 . METHODS: From January 2006 to January 2013, totally 66 @entity1 with @entity1755 ( @entity1755 ) treated by surgery were retrospectively analyzed in Department of vascular surgery, @entity1 's Liberation Army General Hospital. According to the repair method, all the subjects were divided into EVAR group and OSR group. EVAR group included 40 @entity1 , 30 @entity1 were male, 10 @entity1 were female, aged from 47 to 78 with a mean of (71    7) years. OSR group included 26 @entity1 , 21 @entity1 were male, aged from 45 to 87 with a mean of (72    9) years. The difference of the operation time, the amount of suspended red blood cells, ICU stay time, case fatality rate, adverse event rate and the difference of the two intervention rate were compared between the 2 groups by   (2) test and t test. RESULTS: There were significant differences between the 2 groups in operation time, the amount of suspended red blood cells, ICU stay time, case fatality rate, adverse event rate ((183    44) minutes vs. (384    108) minutes, t = -10.59, P = 0.00; (0.4    0.8) units vs. (1.1    1.8) units, t = -2.19, P = 0.03; (3.0    1.8) d vs. (8.5    5.1) d, t = -6.34, P = 0.00; 20.0% (8/40) vs. 46.2% (12/26),   (2) = 5.10, P = 0.02; 25.0% (10/40) vs. 53.8% (14/26),   (2) = 5.67, P = 0.02). There were no significant differences in frozen plasma quantities and the two intervention rate between the 2 groups (t = -1.98, P = 0.05;   (2) = 0.49, P = 0.48). CONCLUSIONS: EVAR decreases the perioperative mortality and adverse event of @entity1755 compared with OSR. More studies are necessary to compare the middle and long-outcome between EVAR and OSR of @entity1755 .
