Expert Round Table

Controversies in EVAR


The two main methods of correction when it comes to abdominal aortic aneurysm are open surgical repair and endovascular repair. Over recent years, many trials have been undertaken to compare EVAR with the standard therapy of open surgery, and these have shown that, despite an early survival benefit, a faster recovery time and a lower operative mortality with EVAR, open surgery maintains greater durability. Although there have been major developments in stent graft technology for the treatment of aortic disease, many patients are initially determined to be ineligible for endovascular repair due to anatomic restrictions, and once beyond that, which method to pursue is still a highly discussed topic, since past studies have shown that patients undergoing EVAR also tend to require more reinterventions and steady observation in the long-term. But as technology continues to advance and techniques improve to adapt EVAR for more patients, secondary procedures may be reduced and EVAR may demonstrate long-term survival benefits to add to the already prevalent short-term benefits. This year, one of the Expert Round Tables at IDEAS will focus on several of the controversial questions that arise when attempting to determine what the best choice is for the patient based on several of the above-mentioned considerations. Questions such as, when is percutaneous EVAR (PEVAR) better than EVAR, is EVAR suitable for all patients and when is the best time to intervene, will be addressed.


Monday, September 18, 2017


Expert Round Table

ERT 1805 Controversies in EVAR


When is it appropriate to treat small aneurysms?

K. Deloose (Dendermonde/BE)


Indications for open surgery for AAA in 2017

R.G.J. Gibbs (London/UK)

EVAR for all patients?

N.V. Dias (Lund/SE)


Is percutaneous EVAR better for patients?

A. Chavan (Oldenburg/DE)