In current practice, the place of open surgery in managing abdominal aortic aneurysm is a contentious issue. The principal reason being greater applications of endovascular techniques treating increasingly complicated aortic disease. Development of branched and fenestrated devices enabled this, with numbers increasing annually. This meant a good risk patient with a long infrarenal aortic neck and normal diameter non-tortuous iliac arteries may be suitable for both endovascular and open techniques. However, indications for open surgery are becoming increasingly unclear nowadays due to short-term gains in morbidity and mortality. Exact aortic anatomical morphologies optimum for open or endovascular techniques remains unclear. As graft technology evolves, possibilities for endovascular options are expanding. Currently, establishing optimum treatment plans for complicated abdominal aortic aneurysm (little or no infrarenal neck) is difficult without considering general fitness of the patient. Hence, two sets of possible postoperative complications and follow-up protocols must be explained to patients before either approach. Complicating matters is the optimum surgical approach used for any open repair. The standard approach for open abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery has been transperitoneal as this provides excellent access to the infrarenal aorta and iliac arteries. However, although less commonly used, the retroperitoneal approach has advantages particularly when location of proximal aortic disease indicates suprarenal clamp might be optimum. This paper scrutinises benefits of the retroperitoneal approach performed purely for anatomical reasons where stent graft may be considered complicated. Also, long-term outcomes are examined in terms of endo-leak and subsequent development of true and false aneurysm following both endovascular and open repair.
Regarding “Aneurysmal iliac arteries do not portend future iliac aneurysmal enlargement after endovascular aneurysm repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm”