评价八九十岁和九十岁老人腹主动脉瘤监测的结果和效用。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 SURGERY
I T Nasir, S S Shoab, M G Bani-Hani
{"title":"评价八九十岁和九十岁老人腹主动脉瘤监测的结果和效用。","authors":"I T Nasir, S S Shoab, M G Bani-Hani","doi":"10.1308/rcsann.2023.0089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of our regional abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening programme in octogenarians and nonagenarians. This was to help decide whether discontinuation might be appropriate in certain instances. Primary outcomes were the number of patients who reached threshold (5.5cm) and the number where intervention was offered. Secondary outcome was cost effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of a regional AAA surveillance database was carried out to evaluate outcomes. Data collected included patient age, sex, date of first and last scan, initial and latest size of aneurysm, outcome, time under surveillance and total number of scans. Patients were divided into three groups (80-84 years, 85-89 years and 90+ years).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The number of patients in this age group was 354. Only 2.0% (<i>n</i>=7) of patients underwent intervention. Threshold size was achieved in 8.3% (<i>n</i>=18), 14.8% (<i>n</i>=18) and 26.7% (<i>n</i>=4), in the age groups 80-84 years, 85-89 years and 90+ years, respectively. Of these patients, operative intervention was possible in 2.8% (<i>n</i>=6), 0.8% (<i>n</i>=1) and 0% (<i>n</i>=0), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A relatively small number of octogenarians and nonagenarians reach the threshold size during surveillance. An even smaller proportion require repair of their aneurysm. While there may be a role for AAA surveillance in octogenarians in highly selected groups, these data should inform the discussions made with individual patients. It should also inform future evaluation of such surveillance.</p>","PeriodicalId":8088,"journal":{"name":"Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England","volume":" ","pages":"642-646"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11365734/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of outcomes and utility of abdominal aortic aneurysm surveillance in octogenarians and nonagenarians.\",\"authors\":\"I T Nasir, S S Shoab, M G Bani-Hani\",\"doi\":\"10.1308/rcsann.2023.0089\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of our regional abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening programme in octogenarians and nonagenarians. This was to help decide whether discontinuation might be appropriate in certain instances. Primary outcomes were the number of patients who reached threshold (5.5cm) and the number where intervention was offered. Secondary outcome was cost effectiveness.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective review of a regional AAA surveillance database was carried out to evaluate outcomes. Data collected included patient age, sex, date of first and last scan, initial and latest size of aneurysm, outcome, time under surveillance and total number of scans. Patients were divided into three groups (80-84 years, 85-89 years and 90+ years).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The number of patients in this age group was 354. Only 2.0% (<i>n</i>=7) of patients underwent intervention. Threshold size was achieved in 8.3% (<i>n</i>=18), 14.8% (<i>n</i>=18) and 26.7% (<i>n</i>=4), in the age groups 80-84 years, 85-89 years and 90+ years, respectively. Of these patients, operative intervention was possible in 2.8% (<i>n</i>=6), 0.8% (<i>n</i>=1) and 0% (<i>n</i>=0), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A relatively small number of octogenarians and nonagenarians reach the threshold size during surveillance. An even smaller proportion require repair of their aneurysm. While there may be a role for AAA surveillance in octogenarians in highly selected groups, these data should inform the discussions made with individual patients. It should also inform future evaluation of such surveillance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8088,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"642-646\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11365734/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsann.2023.0089\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1308/rcsann.2023.0089","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:本研究的目的是评估我们的区域腹主动脉瘤(AAA)筛查方案在80岁和90岁老人中的应用。这是为了帮助决定在某些情况下停止是否适当。主要结局是达到阈值(5.5cm)的患者数量和提供干预的患者数量。次要结果是成本效益。方法:对一个地区AAA监测数据库进行回顾性审查,以评估结果。收集的数据包括患者的年龄、性别、首次和最后一次扫描的日期、动脉瘤的初始和最新大小、结果、监测时间和总扫描次数。患者分为80-84岁、85-89岁和90+岁三组。结果:本组患者354例。只有2.0% (n=7)的患者接受了干预。80-84岁、85-89岁和90岁以上年龄组的阈值分别为8.3% (n=18)、14.8% (n=18)和26.7% (n=4)。在这些患者中,可以进行手术干预的分别为2.8% (n=6)、0.8% (n=1)和0% (n=0)。结论:在监测过程中,达到阈值的80岁和90岁老人数量较少。更少的人需要修复他们的动脉瘤。虽然AAA监测可能在高度选定的80多岁人群中发挥作用,但这些数据应该为与个体患者的讨论提供信息。它还应为今后对这种监测的评估提供信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of outcomes and utility of abdominal aortic aneurysm surveillance in octogenarians and nonagenarians.

Introduction: The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of our regional abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) screening programme in octogenarians and nonagenarians. This was to help decide whether discontinuation might be appropriate in certain instances. Primary outcomes were the number of patients who reached threshold (5.5cm) and the number where intervention was offered. Secondary outcome was cost effectiveness.

Methods: A retrospective review of a regional AAA surveillance database was carried out to evaluate outcomes. Data collected included patient age, sex, date of first and last scan, initial and latest size of aneurysm, outcome, time under surveillance and total number of scans. Patients were divided into three groups (80-84 years, 85-89 years and 90+ years).

Results: The number of patients in this age group was 354. Only 2.0% (n=7) of patients underwent intervention. Threshold size was achieved in 8.3% (n=18), 14.8% (n=18) and 26.7% (n=4), in the age groups 80-84 years, 85-89 years and 90+ years, respectively. Of these patients, operative intervention was possible in 2.8% (n=6), 0.8% (n=1) and 0% (n=0), respectively.

Conclusion: A relatively small number of octogenarians and nonagenarians reach the threshold size during surveillance. An even smaller proportion require repair of their aneurysm. While there may be a role for AAA surveillance in octogenarians in highly selected groups, these data should inform the discussions made with individual patients. It should also inform future evaluation of such surveillance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
316
期刊介绍: The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England is the official scholarly research journal of the Royal College of Surgeons and is published eight times a year in January, February, March, April, May, July, September and November. The main aim of the journal is to publish high-quality, peer-reviewed papers that relate to all branches of surgery. The Annals also includes letters and comments, a regular technical section, controversial topics, CORESS feedback and book reviews. The editorial board is composed of experts from all the surgical specialties.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信