Comparison Open and Endovascular Popliteal AneurysmRepairs in a Single Center Experience

Background: The treatment of the popliteal artery aneurysm is feasible with conventional and endovascular methods. However, there is no unanimous agreement on the best choice both in asymptomatic and symptomatic cases. The purpose of this retrospectively study was to compare perioperative and mid-term results of open and endovascular repair on both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients, in our clinical experience. Method: Altogether 49 surgical interventions were retrospectly reviewed, OPEN treatment was used in 20 cases and in 29 cases endovascular treatment. The procedures were made from August 2011 to May 2018. Result: Primary patency at the medium follow up 28 months was 80% in the OPEN group and 83% in the ENDO group (P=0.8, log-rank: 0.7, 95% CI: 0.2-0.3). The secondary patency was 90% (18/20 pts) in the OPEN group and 93% (27/29 pts) in the ENDO group (P=0.7, log-rank: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.1-0.2). Freedom from amputation was 100% in the OPEN group and 93% in the ENDO group (P=0.2, log-rank: 0.2, 95% CI: 0.2-0.3). Survival was 80% in the OPEN group and 86% in the ENDO group (P=0.6, log-rank: 0.6, 95% CI: 0.2-0.3). Conclusion: Endovascular treatment represents a safe alternative to OPEN surgery, for treating the aneurysms of the popliteal artery. In addition, the advancement of technology, that has improved the available stent characteristics, and the correct selection of patients, have allowed to improve outcomes, making it comparable to OPEN surgery; in our series symptomatic patients too.