Home > Riviste > The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery > Fascicoli precedenti > The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2020 February;61(1) > The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2020 February;61(1):53-9



Opzioni di pubblicazione
Per abbonarsi
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca


Publication history
Per citare questo articolo



The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2020 February;61(1):53-9

DOI: 10.23736/S0021-9509.18.10144-3


lingua: Inglese

Surgical versus endovascular revascularization of subclavian artery arteriosclerotic disease

Marco V. USAI 1, 2 , Michel J. BOSIERS 1, 2, Theodosios BISDAS 1, 2, Giovanni TORSELLO 1, 2, Efthymis BEROPOULIS 1, 2, Bernd KASPRZAK 1, 2, Arne STACHMANN 1, 2, Konstantinos STAVROULAKIS 1, 2

1 Department of Vascular Surgery, St. Franziskus Hospital GmbH, Münster, Germany; 2 Department of Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Surgery, University Clinic of Münster, Münster, Germany

BACKGROUND: Endovascular treatment offers an alternative, less invasive approach to open repair for subclavian artery atherosclerotic disease (SAAD). However, only few studies compared the outcomes of both strategies in the long run. This study reports on the performance of endovascular and surgical revascularization for SAAD.
METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on patients treated for SAAD at two institutions between January 1998 and December 2015. Primary outcome of this study was the composite endpoint of reintervention-free survival (RFS) defined as time to reintervention and/or death from any cause. Secondary endpoints included primary patency (PPR) and secondary patency (SPR) rates as well as overall survival and time to reintervention.
RESULTS: Surgical treatment was the preferred treatment option in 27 (25%) patients, while 83 (75%) patients underwent primary stent therapy. The median follow-up was 87 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 38 to 151) in the surgical group and 27 (IQR: 12 to 59) in the endovascular (P=0.0001). Severe arterial wall calcification was more commonly observed in the surgical arm (P<0.0001), while mild and moderate calcification in the endovascular (P=0.0004 and P=0.014). Vessel occlusion was more frequent among patients treated surgically (100% vs. 34%, P<0.0001). At 98 months RFS was significantly higher after surgical treatment (95% vs. 54%, HR: 8.4, 95% CI: 3.9 to 18.1, P=0.0002). Although overall survival did not differ significantly between the two groups (HR: 4.28, 95% CI: 0.86 to 21.22, P=0.093), open repair was associated with reduced reintervention rate (HR: 12.04, 95% CI: 4.98 to 29.12, P=0.001). The PPR at 98 months following surgical and endovascular therapy amounted to 96% and 65% (HR: 12.87, 95% CI: 5.44 to 30.44, P=0.0008) respectively. No significant difference was observed regarding the SPR between the two groups (100% vs. 95%, P=0.090).
CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment was associated in this cohort with increased patency and a significant reduction of reinterventions compared to the endovascular approach.

KEY WORDS: Endovascular procedures; Subclavian artery; Atherosclerosis

inizio pagina