BACKGROUND Aortic aneurysm (AA) is a pathology with high morbidity and mortality. The management can be expectant, surgical, or through endovascular repair (EVAR). In Latin America the incidence of AA… Click to show full abstract
BACKGROUND Aortic aneurysm (AA) is a pathology with high morbidity and mortality. The management can be expectant, surgical, or through endovascular repair (EVAR). In Latin America the incidence of AA has increased and the analysis of therapeutic options, especially if they are expensive, is fundamental. OBJECTIVE To analyze available evidence on the effectiveness, safety and coverage policies of the EVAR. METHODOLOGY Panoramic review in the main bibliographical bases (MEDLINE, LILACS, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, DARE) and generic internet searchers, main health technology assessment (HTA) agencies and health insurance companies. Systematic reviews (SR), clinical practice guidelines (CPG), HTA and coverage policies, followed by the identification of primary studies published after the SR search date were included. A search of studies published until November 2015 in English and Spanish was carried out. RESULTS 311 references were recovered, from which seven SRs were selected, one clinical study and 15 CPGs, consensus or coverage policies and ETS. CONCLUSIONS For abdominal AA, high quality evidence showed no differences inlong-term survival with the use of EVAR compared to conventional surgery, but lower early mortality was observed (OR = 0.33, 95% CI 0.20 -0.55). EVAR was associated with a greater need for re-intervention. In the case of other types of AA, further evidence is still required to establish the benefit of EVAR. The CPGs, consensus, HTAs and coverage policies identified, mostly consider open surgery as the treatment of choice, reserving the EVAR for patients with high surgical risk for conventional surgery in the presence of favorable anatomy.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.