|
PThe numerous options currently available for treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease have led to considerable controversy in regard to the optional method of revascularization in such patients. Differences of options exist not only with respect to certain technical aspects of direct anatomic aortic reconstruction, which has traditionally been regarded as the "gold standard" treatment, but even more importantly as to whether alternative methods including a variety of catheter-based endoluminal therapies and extraanatomic bypasses may offer nearly equivalent results with less risk. From March 1992 to Dec 2002, 99 aortoiliac occlusive cases were surgically treated at Kyunghee university hospital. Surgical indications, combined diseases, cardiac risk assessment, type of occlusions, surgical methods and cumulative patency rate were reviewed retrospectively. Extensive disease pattern was more common in our experiences. No single option for inflow revascularization is optimal in all instances. Durability must be balanced against the possible advantages of safety and expediency. The availability and results of alternative techniques have improved, but aortofemoral bypass remains the most durable and functionally effective.
|