We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Meta-Analysis
Systematic Review
Open versus endovascular treatment of subclavian artery atherosclerotic disease.
Journal of Vascular Surgery 2019 January
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare open and endovascular treatment of patients with subclavian artery atherosclerotic disease (SAAD) as far as early and late outcomes are concerned.
METHODS: A systematic literature review conforming to established criteria was conducted to identify eligible articles published before January 2018. The following online search engines were used: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library (search conducted between December 2017 and January 2018). Eligible studies compared early and late major outcomes between open and endovascular therapy for patients suffering from SAAD.
RESULTS: Overall, seven clinical studies included 731 patients undergoing 760 procedures in total (297 endovascular and 463 open procedures). The majority of procedures (99.7%) referred to symptomatic patients, and more patients undergoing open surgery had an occlusion compared with patients undergoing endovascular repair, the majority of whom had a stenosis. Regarding early outcomes (30-day death, cardiac events, technical success, and central nervous system events), there was no difference between the two methods. Only peripheral nervous system complications were more prevalent in patients undergoing open repair (odds ratio [OR], 7.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.142-22.921; P = .001). Regarding late outcomes, open repair was associated with significantly higher 1-year (OR, 4.33; 95% CI, 1.954-9.619; P = .0003), 3-year (OR, 5.67; 95% CI, 2.881-11.167; P < .0001), and 5-year (OR, 4.27; 95% CI, 1.906-9.567; P = .0004) primary patency rates compared with endovascular therapy. However, 5-year freedom from recurrent symptoms as well as 5-year overall survival showed no difference.
CONCLUSIONS: Open repair and endovascular repair in patients with SAAD do not show any difference concerning the majority of early major outcomes, although more patients undergoing open repair had an occlusion. However, open surgery seems to prevail regarding long-term primary patency, although long-term survival and freedom from recurrent symptoms show no difference.
METHODS: A systematic literature review conforming to established criteria was conducted to identify eligible articles published before January 2018. The following online search engines were used: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library (search conducted between December 2017 and January 2018). Eligible studies compared early and late major outcomes between open and endovascular therapy for patients suffering from SAAD.
RESULTS: Overall, seven clinical studies included 731 patients undergoing 760 procedures in total (297 endovascular and 463 open procedures). The majority of procedures (99.7%) referred to symptomatic patients, and more patients undergoing open surgery had an occlusion compared with patients undergoing endovascular repair, the majority of whom had a stenosis. Regarding early outcomes (30-day death, cardiac events, technical success, and central nervous system events), there was no difference between the two methods. Only peripheral nervous system complications were more prevalent in patients undergoing open repair (odds ratio [OR], 7.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.142-22.921; P = .001). Regarding late outcomes, open repair was associated with significantly higher 1-year (OR, 4.33; 95% CI, 1.954-9.619; P = .0003), 3-year (OR, 5.67; 95% CI, 2.881-11.167; P < .0001), and 5-year (OR, 4.27; 95% CI, 1.906-9.567; P = .0004) primary patency rates compared with endovascular therapy. However, 5-year freedom from recurrent symptoms as well as 5-year overall survival showed no difference.
CONCLUSIONS: Open repair and endovascular repair in patients with SAAD do not show any difference concerning the majority of early major outcomes, although more patients undergoing open repair had an occlusion. However, open surgery seems to prevail regarding long-term primary patency, although long-term survival and freedom from recurrent symptoms show no difference.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Prevention and treatment of ischaemic and haemorrhagic stroke in people with diabetes mellitus: a focus on glucose control and comorbidities.Diabetologia 2024 April 17
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Eosinophilic Esophagitis: Clinical Pearls for Primary Care Providers and Gastroenterologists.Mayo Clinic Proceedings 2024 April
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app