4.1 Article

Statins Promote Residual Aneurysm Sac Regression Following Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair

Journal

VASCULAR AND ENDOVASCULAR SURGERY
Volume 48, Issue 2, Pages 111-115

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/1538574413513846

Keywords

EVAR; aorta; statin

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Regression of the residual sac is indicative of successful endovascular aortic aneurysm (EVAR) repair. Using color duplex ultrasound (CDU), we monitored the residual aneurysm sac following EVAR and correlated sac behavior with perioperative risk factors. Methods: Of 145 patients with EVAR, 106 (73.1%) patients between January 01, 2003, and July 01, 2010, had at least 2 consecutive postoperative scans and thus were eligible for inclusion. Mean ( standard deviation [SD]) CDU scans per person was 4.6 (1.4). All were conducted by the same technologist using a standard protocol on the same machine. Aneurysm sac change in centimeters and percentage terms was calculated. The presence or absence of an endoleak was also recorded. Change in aneurysm sac size was correlated with preoperative risk factors. Findings: Mean sac size change at 1 month was a decrease of 0.24 cm, equating to a percentage change of 4.3%. At 7 months, the decrease was 0.59 cm (9.8%), at 12 months, 0.73 cm (12.4%), at 18 months 0.92 cm (15.8%), and at 36 months 1.0 cm (16.6%). Both univariate and multivariate analyses demonstrated that statin therapy (P = .002) was the only risk factor variable positively associated with aneurysm regression while the presence of an endoleak was inversely related to sac reduction (P = .01). Interpretation: Maximum aneurysmal sac reduction seems to occur in the first year following endograft implantation. Statin therapy appears to be associated with an increased likelihood of sac regression following EVAR. Further investigation of the role of statins in the biology of abdominal aortic aneurysmal disease is warranted.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available