Thoracic endovascular vs open surgical repair in descending thoracic aortic aneurysms: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Table 1 Detailed characteristics of each included study (e.g., sample size, follow-up duration, mean age, comorbidities)

Ref.	Study design	Country	Primary endpoints	No. of patients		Follow up duration		Age		Male (%)		Hypertension		CAD		DM
				EVAR	Open	EVAR	Open	EVAR	Open	EVAR	Open	EVAR	Open	EVAR	Open	EVAR	Open
von Allmen et al[16], 2014	Observational study	United Kingdom	30 days operative mortality, long-term survival (5 years), aortic related intervention	354	264	5 years (maximum)	5 years	72.2 ± 3.5	70.3 ± 3.8	65.5	51.9	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
Andrassy et al[17], 2011	Observational study	Germany	Peri-operative morbidity and mortality, 1 year mortality and cumulative long term survival	53	24	34 ± 35 (mean)	53 ± 55	70 ± 10	67 ± 12	60	54	85%	83%	40%	33%	12%	7%
Arnaoutakis et al[18], 2015	Observational study	United States	1 year all-cause mortality	62	56	23.7 months (median)	36.4 months	67.6 ± 12.9	56.4 ± 14.3	53	68	89	77	34	9	16	11
Bavaria et al[19], 2007	Observational study	United States	Peri operative mortality and complications, middle term survival and reoperation rates	140	94	25.8 ± 14.6 (mean)	24.9 ± 12.8	70.5 ± 10.4	68.2 ± 10.2	57	51	-	-	49	36	-	-
Brandt et al[20], 2004	Observational study	Germany	30 day mortality, peri operative morbidity	22	22	30 days	30 days	68 ± 13	69 ± 11	68	59	64	77	36	32	14	18
Chiu et al[28], 2019	Observational study	United States	All-cause mortality	2470	1235	4.53 ± 2.89	5.43 ± 6.90	72.97 ± 8.36	72.88 ± 7.52	57.6	57.5	78.9	79.5	-	-	21.5	19.4
Desai et al[44], 2012	Observational study	United States	Operative mortality, late survival	106	45	59 ± 35.32	81 ± 71.99	74.3 ± 9.1	69.5 ± 11.1	57	40	88	89			21	6.7
Dick et al[21], 2008	Observational study	Switzerland	Peri operative mortality and morbidity within 30 days of treatment, cumulative long term survival, quality of life	52	70	29 ± 16	37 ± 17	68.8 ± 10.1	61.6 ± 15.2	83	84	79	76	35	49	15	4
Glade et al[22], 2005	Observational study	Netherlands	In-hospital mortality, middle term survival	42	53	15	26	67	67	62.1	62.1	86	75	-	-	12	6
Goodney et al[45], 2011	Observational study	United States	-	2433	11565	-	-	75.9 ± 6.29	73.8 ± 5.49	58.7 (95% CI: 567-60.7)	55.4	-	-	-	-	NA	NA
Gopaldas et al[23], 2010	Observational study	United States	In-hospital mortality	2563	9106	NA	NA	69.5 ± 12.7	60.2 ± 14.2	59.4	68	-	-	-	-	13.7	9.4
Hughes et al[30], 2014	Observational study	United States	Mortality	712	8255	Short term	-	71 ± 11.14	62.33 ± 14.83	61.3	65.6	-	-	-	-	13.2	8.3
Karimi et al[24], 2012	Observational study	United States	In-hospital and late mortality, endo-leak and re-intervention rates	28	29	26.9 ± 14	42.6 ± 19.8	73.2 ± 9.7	62.3 ± 12.2	57.1	65.5	78.6	89.7	32.1	27.6	10.7	34.5
Kieffer et al[31], 2009	Observational study	France	-	52	121	Short term	-	69.3 ± 12.5	59.4 ± 13.7	78.8	82.6	71.2	77.7	34.6	24.8	5.8	4.1
Lee et al[25], 2015	Observational study	Korea	30-day and late mortality	114	53	36 ± 26	36 ± 26	65.5 ± 12.9	60.1 ± 15.9	76.3	69.8	73.7	75.5	11.4	13.2	8.8	13.2
Matsumura et al[32], 2014	Observational study	Denmark	-	158	70	5 years (maximum)	5 years	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA	NA
Ogawa et al[35], 2021	Observational study	United States	30-day and long term all cause mortalities	79	39	828 ± 1258 (days)	1048 ± 1591 (days)	70.4 ± 12.7	64 ± 13.6	60.8	74.4	86.1	69.2	15.2	12.8	8.9	7.7
Orandi et al[26], 2009	Observational study	United States	In-hospital mortality	267	763	NA	NA	69.9 ± 20.9	66.1 ± 21.3	69.2	66.1	76.2	64.3	NA	NA	7.6	11
Orelaru et al[34], 2023	Observational study	United States	-	120	120	8.80 ± 7.13 years	4.0 7 ± 3.68	64 ± 14.07	65 ± 10.37	64	66	91	88	18	25	13	13
Patel et al[33], 2008	Observational study	United States	-	52	41	33.1 ± 36.9 (maximum follow up 12 years)	33.1 ± 36.9	80.6 ± 4.0	76.8 ± 1.8	50	70.7	78.9	80.5	55.8	43.9	13.5	4.9
Stone et al[27], 2006	Observational study	United States	Peri-operative mortality, actuarial middle-term survival, freedom from re-intervention	105	93	22 ± 16.83 months	-	70 ± 14.3	70.8 ± 9.8	62.9	54.8	NA	84.9	NA	NA	NA	NA

EVAR: Endovascular aortic repair; NA: Not available; CI: Confidence interval.

Table 2 Quality assessment scores of the included studies, indicating methodological quality and risk of bias

Ref.	Selection				Comparability	Outcome			Total
	1	2	3	4	1	1	2	3
von Allmen et al[16], 2014	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	8
Andrassy et al[17], 2011	One star	One star	One star	One star	Two stars	One star	One star	One star	9
Arnaoutakis et al[18], 2015	One star	One star	One star	One star	Two stars	One star	One star	One star	9
Bavaria et al[19], 2007	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	-	7
Brandt et al[20], 2004	One star	One star	One star	One star	Two stars	One star	One star	One star	9
Chiu et al[28], 2019	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	8
Desai et al[44], 2012	One star	One star	One star	One star	Two stars	One star	One star	One star	9
Dick et al[21], 2008	One star	One star	One star	One star	Two stars	One star	One star	-	8
Glade et al[22], 2005	One star	One star	One star	One star	Two stars	One star	One star	One star	9
Goodney et al[45], 2011	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	8
Gopaldas et al[23], 2010	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	8
Hughes et al[30], 2014	One star	One star	One star	One star	-	One star	One star	One star	7
Karimi et al[24], 2012	One star	One star	One star	One star	Two stars	One star	One star	One star	9
Kieffer et al[31], 2009	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	One star	9
Lee et al[25], 2015	One star	One star	One star	One star	Two stars	One star	One star	One star	9
Matsumura et al[32], 2014	One star	One star	One star	One star	Two stars	One star	One star	-	8
Ogawa et al[35], 2021	One star	One star	One star	One star	Two stars	One star	One star	One star	9
Orandi et al[26], 2009	One star	One star	One star	One star	Two stars	One star	One star	One star	9
Orelaru et al[34],2023	One star	One star	One star	One star	Two stars	One star	One star	One star	9
Patel et al[33], 2008	One star	One star	One star	One star	Two stars	One star	One star	One star	9
Stone et al[27], 2006	One star	One star	One star	One star	Two stars	One star	One star	One star	9

The stars included in the table represent the scores assigned using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, a tool designed to assess the quality of non-randomized studies in systematic reviews. Each star corresponds to a point awarded based on three key domains: The selection of study groups, the comparability of the groups, and the ascertainment of exposure or outcome. The maximum score is nine stars, with higher numbers indicating higher study quality. The stars in the table reflect the evaluation of each study against these criteria.