Health-related quality-of-life outcomes after open versus endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

ObjectiveEndovascular repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms is a safe alternative to open aneurysm repair (OAR) in selected patients. The aim of this study was to compare the health-related quality-of-life (HR-QoL) outcomes of patients following EVAR and OAR.MethodsA literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library identified five randomized trials that reported on HR-QoL in EVAR and OAR for elective management of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms. No consistent HR-QOL instrument was used among the studies. A meta-analysis was performed on the 36-Item Short Form (SF-36) and the EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D) HR-QoL results.ResultsSF-36 general health scores were higher for EVAR at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. SF-36 physical functioning scores were higher for EVAR at 6 months but this advantage was lost at 12 months. In addition, SF-36 social functioning scores were higher for EVAR at 12 months. SF-36 component summary scores were not significantly different. EVAR was associated with a better EQ-5D score at 3, 6, and 12 months, but not at 24 months of follow-up.ConclusionsEVAR was associated with better HR-QoL in some domains up to 12 months postoperatively. There is insufficient data to demonstrate a HR-QoL advantage beyond 12 months. More studies are required to examine any long-term HR-QoL advantages for either intervention.