Background: Long term results of systemic lysis therapy with ultrahigh-dose urokinase (UHUK) in reopening aorto-iliac occlusive disease have not yet been evaluated. This prospective trial investigates the long-term primary patency rate, the rate of complications and assesses the role of different expected influence parameters on the primary patency rate. Patients and methods: 72 patients with aorto-iliac occlusive disease received daily intravenous infusions of UHUK either until reperfusion or – after at least 3 cycles – no progress in recanalization could be stated on two consecutive days by duplex scanning. Results: Systemic lysis therapy was morphological at least partially successful in 44 patients (61.1%). Concomitant percutaneous transluminal angioplasty was performed in 41 patients (56.9%), surgery in 7 patients (9.7%) and both in further 5 patients (6.9%). In patients without surgery hemodynamical success could be achieved in 39 patients (54.2%) and even more important clinical success in 51 patients (70.8%). Compared to baseline results patients improved significantly in ankle/brachial pressure index and in Fontaine stages (p < 0,001), the same results could be seen after a mean follow-up period of 62 months. Thrombolysis was complicated in 4 patients (5.6%) by macroembolizations but no major bleedings or deaths occurred. Primary patency was 76%, 64%, and 43% after 1, 5 and 10 years. Male sex and distal localization were significantly correlated with lower primary clinical patency. Conclusion: Systemic lysis therapy is an alternative to surgical intervention in acute and subacute aorto-iliac occlusive disease, because it offers acceptable long-term results with a low rate of complications.

BACKGROUND:Long term results of systemic lysis therapy with ultrahigh-dose urokinase (UHUK) in reopening aorto-iliac occlusive disease have not yet been evaluated. This prospective trial investigates the long-term primary patency rate, the rate of complications and assesses the role of different expected influence parameters on the primary patency rate.PATIENTS AND METHODS:72 patients with aorto-iliac occlusive disease received daily intravenous infusions of UHUK either until reperfusion or--after at least 3 cycles--no progress in recanalization could be stated on two consecutive days by duplex scanning.RESULTS:Systemic lysis therapy was morphological at least partially successful in 44 patients (61.1%). Concomitant percutaneous transluminal angioplasty was performed in 41 patients (56.9%), surgery in 7 patients (9.7%) and both in further 5 patients (6.9%). In patients without surgery hemodynamical success could be achieved in 39 patients (54.2%) and even more important clinical success in 51 patients (70.8%). Compared to baseline results patients improved significantly in ankle/brachial pressure index and in Fontaine stages (p < 0.001), the same results could be seen after a mean follow-up period of 62 months. Thrombolysis was complicated in 4 patients (5.6%) by macroembolizations but no major bleedings or deaths occurred. Primary patency was 76%, 64%, and 43% after 1, 5 and 10 years. Male sex and distal localization were significantly correlated with lower primary clinical patency.CONCLUSION:Systemic lysis therapy is an alternative to surgical intervention in acute and subacute aorto-iliac occlusive disease, because it offers acceptable long-term results with a low rate of complications.

OBJECTIVES:To compare the costs of endovascular aneurysm treatment versus open surgery during the perioperative period.METHODS:Retrospective analysis of a consecutive series of 44 patients undergoing infrarenal abdominal aneurysm repair from February 1995 to March 1996 at a university teaching hospital.RESULTS:No endovascular procedure was converted to open repair. Operative time was shorter for endovascular treatment (207.6 min vs. 229.1 min, n.s.), as well as postoperative intensive care unit stay (ICU, 22.7 h vs. 55.0 h, p = 0.017) and the postoperative recovery period (5.6 days vs. 13.3 days, p < 0.001). Open surgery generated significantly more costs (25,374.07 ECU vs. 22,268.78 ECU, p < 0.001), despite evaluation and a more expensive endovascular procedure (10,699.48 ECU vs. 4032.01 ECU, p < 0.001). During the study, costs for open surgery exceeded the cost for endovascular treatment by 13.95%.CONCLUSIONS:Endovascular aneurysm treatment is cost effective and less expensive than open surgery. The main reason for cost saving is faster patient recovery after surgery, associated with a shorter LOS in the patients treated with endovascular procedure.