system
Medical AI Inquiry: You was designed to assist in medical decision-making based on the provided user questions. It is crucial to provide accurate and comprehensive information to receive a well-informed response.  Labels: OBJECTIVE, METHODS, RESULTS. Meshes: Aged, Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal, Aortography, Blood Vessel Prosthesis, Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation, Chi-Square Distribution, Endoleak, Endovascular Procedures, Female, Foreign-Body Migration, Humans, Life Tables, Male, Pennsylvania, Prosthesis Design, Retrospective Studies, Stents, Time Factors, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Treatment Outcome.
user
Do endografts with suprarenal fixation perform better than those with infrarenal fixation in the treatment of patients with short straight proximal aortic necks? Context: To determine if there are any differences in outcomes between infrarenal fixation (IF) and suprarenal fixation (SF) endograft systems for the endovascular treatment (endovascular aneurysm repair [EVAR]) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) with short, straight proximal aortic necks (<1.5 cm). A retrospective review of 1379 EVAR procedures was performed between the years of 2002 and 2009 at a single institution. The charts and radiographic images of all patients were reviewed. Patients who underwent EVAR with AAA morphology with short proximal necks were stratified into two groups: IF, Gore Excluder (W. L. Gore, Flagstaff, Ariz) group and SF, Cook Zenith (Cook, Bloomington, Ind) group. The primary end point for the study was the presence of proximal type 1 endoleaks. Secondary end points were graft migration at 1- and 2-year follow-up and aneurysm sac regression. The groups' demographics and comorbidities were also compared. A total of 1379 EVARS were performed during the study period and 84 were identified as having a short proximal aortic neck. Sixty patients were in the IF group and 24 in the SF group. The average follow-up period was 18.6 months (IF) and 18.5 months (SF). There was no difference in the average proximal neck length (1.19 cm IF vs 1.14 cm SF; P = not significant [NS]) or the preoperative AAA size (5.8 cm IF vs 5.9 cm SF; P = NS). There were no significant differences in age (76.6 years IF vs 74.8 years SF; P = .32), gender (IF 66.7% vs SF 21.88% men; P = .053), or length of stay (2.2 days IF vs 1.9 days SF; P = .39). The comorbidities (diabetes, hypertension, and warfarin use) were also similar. There were five type 1a endoleaks in group IF and one in group SF (P = .44) identified at the 1-month follow-up; however, only one patient in the IF group underwent intervention for enlargement of the AAA sac. At 1 year, there was persistence of one type 1a endoleak in both groups, but these were deemed dead-end leaks as they did not fill the sac nor lead to aneurysm growth. There were no migrations (>0.5 cm) noted in either group. Sac regression was observed at an average rate of 0.24 cm/year in the IF group and 0.26 cm/year in the SF group (P = NS). There were no aneurysm ruptures during the study period.
assistant
There are no significant differences in endograft migration or in the incidence of early and late type 1a endoleaks between endografts that use IF (Gore Excluder) and SF (Cook Zenith) fixation for patients with short aortic necks undergoing EVAR. Final Decision: no