Abstract
Although the standard surgical approach for repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic
aneurysm (AAA) has been the transperitoneal approach, several reports have suggested
the usefulness of retroperitoneal aortic reconstruction. However, the superiority
of the retroperitoneal compared with transperitoneal approach is still controversial.
To compare the efficacy of the retroperitoneal with that of the transperitoneal approach
in elective AAA resection, 19 consecutive cases with previous laparotomies were randomly
reviewed. From January 1990 through December 1992, 94 consecutive patients underwent
elective reconstructions of an infrarenal AAA. Among them, 75 patients had had no
previous surgery of any kind. In all of them, the transperitoneal approach was used
(Group I). Nineteen other patients who had various laparotomies were randomly divided
into two groups. The transperitoneal approach was used in 10 patients (Group II),
and the retroperitoneal approach was used in 9 patients (Group III). Thus, the patients
were separated into three groups and the intra- and postoperative parameters were
compared. Surgical data including operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and aortic
cross-clamping time did not differ significantly between the transperitoneal approach
in the patients without laparotomy (Group I) and the retroperitoneal approach (Group
II). In addition, the postoperative recovery including the initiation of alimentation
and postoperative hospitalization also did not differ significantly between the two
groups. However, there was a significant difference in the operative time and the
blood loss between the retroperitoneal approach (Group II) and transperitoneal approach
(Group III) in the patients with previous laparotomy. In addition, the postoperative
parameters including the initiation of oral intake was sooner and hospitalization
was significantly shorter in the retroperitoneal group (Group II) than in the transperitoneal
group (Group III) with previous laparotomy. There was no incidence of postoperative
adhesive ileus in the patients with the retroperitoneal approach (Group II). The results
demonstrated no important advantage for the retroperitoneal approach compared with
routine transperitoneal approach in the patients without previous laparotomy. However,
in the patients with previous laparotomies, the retroperitoneal approach is a preferable
alternative to the transperitoneal route.