Endovascular Treatment of Popliteal Artery Aneurysms

Gerasimidis, Thomas; Sfyroeras, George S.; Papazoglou, Konstantinos; Trellopoulos, George; Ntinas, A.; Karamanos, Dimitrios

doi:10.1016/s1078-5884(03)00343-5

Cited by 65 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…3,5,[7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15]20,24,[26][27][28][31][32][33][34][35][36][37] In the majority of patients, the endovascular repair was done in the presence of a good tibial run-off; at least two patent tibial arteries were present in 71% (95% CI 65%-76%) of patients. 1,7,10,[12][13][14][15]24,27,32,33,35,38 Several types of stents have been used to treat PAA. At the beginning of the era of this new modality of treatment, in North America home-made devices made of balloon expandable stents covered with vein or PTFE were used, while in Europe the Cragg Endo Pro stents were used, which included the System 1 (a self expandable nitinol stent covered by polyester fabric, Cragg EndoPro System; Mintec, La Ciotat, France); the Passager stent graft (a self expandable, polyester-covered metal stent-grafts; Boston Scientific, Watertown, Mass), and the Corvita stentgraft (a metallic self-expandable, braided wire stent to which is bonded an inner liner of polycarbonate urethane microfibers; Boston Scientific, Bülach, Switzerland).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endovascular repair of popliteal aneurysms

Cinà

2010

Journal of Vascular Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Endovascular repair is an established modality of treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysms. It is therefore reasonable to expect its application to other less common aneurysmal conditions, including isolated iliac and popliteal artery aneurysms (PAA). There are, however, essential differences between aortic aneurysms and peripheral aneurysms: smaller arterial caliber, mobility of the arterial segment, associated occlusive disease, and devices that have not been specifically designed for peripheral applications. Due to these differences, results obtained in abdominal aortic aneurysms cannot be extrapolated to peripheral aneurysms. The attraction of the endovascular repair for PAA is its minimally invasive nature. The literature, however, provides only case reports, case series and small cohorts, and one small randomized, controlled trial. A cumulative summary of these studies provides the clinician with information upon which to base the choice of treatment on a specific patient. Endovascular repair for PAA with suitable anatomy and good run-off can be considered safe, and medium term results appear comparable with those of open repair.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endovascular repair of popliteal aneurysms

Cinà

2010

Journal of Vascular Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…25 In this early series, 11 patients had a total of 12 PAAs treated with covered stents. At 1 and 12 months, these investigators observed 47% primary patency and 75% secondary patency rates.…”

Section: Open Repair Remains the Gold Standard (Dr Randy Moore)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Open versus endovascular repair of popliteal artery aneurysms

Moore

Hill

2010

Journal of Vascular Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A 72-year-old male presents with a large asymptomatic aneurysm of his left popliteal artery. He has a history of noninsulin dependent diabetes, hypertension, and a prior history of a percutaneous intervention for a coronary artery stenosis. He is anatomically and physiologically a candidate for surgical or endovascular repair of his aneurysm. The following debate attempts to resolve whether open repair remains the gold standard for the treatment of popliteal artery aneurysms.

show abstract

“…Both grafts have been used to treat PAA, and various groups of investigators have published their results. [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9] A recent meta-analysis compared endovascular repair of PAA with open surgery and included 3 studies and 141 patients (37 endovascular, 104 open). 10 The authors concluded that the main advantage of endovascular repair was a shorter hospital length of stay, with a weighted mean difference of Ϫ3.9 days in favor of endovascular repair.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%