Browsing by Author "Ezite, Natalija"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Quality of life after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair : Nellix sac-anchoring endoprosthesis versus open surgery
    (2012) Ķisis, Kaspars; Krieviņš, Dainis; Naškoviča, Karina; Gediņš, Marcis; Šavlovskis, Janis; Ezite, Natalija; Lietuvietis, Edvins; Zariņš, Kristaps
    An increasing number of patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms are treated using endovascular rather than open surgical techniques. The Vascular Surgery Center, P. Stradins Clinical University Hospital, has the largest worldwide experience using a new type of endoprosthesis, which fills and anchors the device in the aneurysm sac. Within the framework of a clinical trial, the quality-of-life evaluation of patients treated using this type of device was carried out. Materials and Method: A cohort study was conducted from 2008 to 2011 comparing the quality of life (QOL) of patients after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair with either the new endovascular treatment method (EVAR) or open surgery (OS). Each group comprised 20 patients, and the quality-of life-evaluation was performed using the SF-36 questionnaire before operation, 1 month after operation, and 1 year after operation. Results: One month after operation, an improved QOL was documented in the EVAR group (47 [SD, 3] in the EVAR group vs. 38 [SD, 3] in the OS group, P<0.001). One year after operation, a significant improvement in QOL persisted although the difference between the groups diminished (48 [SD, 4] in the EVAR group vs. 42 [SD, 3] in the OS group, P<0.001). Conclusions: The patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms who underwent EVAR using the new sac-anchoring endoprosthesis have improved health-related quality of life compared to the patients undergoing open surgical repair. The improvement in quality of life remained slightly better in the EVAR group 1 year after operation.
  • No Thumbnail Available
    Item
    Three-Year Patency Results following Endovascular Transvenous Femoropopliteal Bypass
    (2023-02-25) Rumba, Roberts; Krievins, Dainis; Savlovskis, Janis; Ezite, Natalija; Lacis, Aigars; Petrosina, Eva; Mouttet, Ludovic; Gardovskis, Janis; Zarins, Christopher K.; Rīga Stradiņš University; Statistics Unit
    Background and Objectives: Peripheral artery disease is one of the most common vascular pathologies. There is an ongoing debate among specialists on whether open or endovascular revascularization is preferred in cases of complex superficial femoral artery (SFA) lesions. The purpose of this study was to assess patency results of a relatively new transvenous endovascular bypass device. This could add to existing evidence and aid in comparison between open and endovascular bypass. Materials and Methods: Patients with complex TASC-C and D SFA lesions who had indications for revascularization were identified. Prospective analysis of stent graft patency from 54 transvenous femoropopliteal bypass procedures was performed. Patency was assessed by Duplex ultrasound every six months. Kaplan–Meier analysis was performed to assess primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency of transvenous bypass. Results: Following endovascular transvenous femoropopliteal bypass, 3-year graft primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency was 43.8%, 66.3%, and 73.9%, respectively. Conclusions: Transvenous endovascular femoropopliteal bypass is a viable option for selected patients who lack adequate saphenous vein or have comorbidities that increase the risk of open femoropopliteal bypass. Strict post-operative follow-up is necessary to improve patency rates.