Current controversies in the management of aortoiliac occlusive disease.

Abstract

The numerous options currently available for treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease have led to considerable controversy in regard to the optimal method of revascularization in such patients. Differences of opinion exist not only with respect to certain technical aspects of direct anatomic aortic reconstruction, which has traditionally been regarded as the "gold standard" treatment, but even more importantly as to whether alternative methods including a variety of catheter-based endoluminal therapies and extraanatomic grafts may offer nearly equivalent results with less risk and possible cost advantages. Although little truly definitive data is available, a review of published information can help clarify many of these management dilemmas. In the final analysis, the various methods may not be as competitive with one another as first seems apparent. Each has its own specific advantages and disadvantages and when used, in appropriate circumstances can provide excellent results. Indeed, it is this broad spectrum of options that can be matched to each patient's own unique anatomic and risk characteristics that make treatment of aortoiliac disease one of the most successful areas of contemporary vascular surgery practice.