An outcome analysis of endovascular versus open repair of blunt traumatic aortic injuries Ali Azizzadeh, MD, Kristofer M. Charlton-Ouw, MD, Zhongxue Chen, PhD, Mohammad H. Rahbar, PhD, Anthony L. Estrera, MD, Hammad Amer, MD, Sheila M. Coogan, MD, Hazim J. Safi, MD Journal of Vascular Surgery Volume 57, Issue 1, Pages 108-115 (January 2013) DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2012.05.110 Copyright © 2013 Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions
Fig 1 Classification of traumatic aortic injury. Journal of Vascular Surgery 2013 57, 108-115DOI: (10.1016/j.jvs.2012.05.110) Copyright © 2013 Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions
Fig 2 Mechanisms of injury. Journal of Vascular Surgery 2013 57, 108-115DOI: (10.1016/j.jvs.2012.05.110) Copyright © 2013 Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions
Fig 3 Treatment of traumatic aortic injury: the proportion of patients undergoing thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) increased from 0% to 100% from April 2, 2002 to June 2, 2010. OR, Open repair. Journal of Vascular Surgery 2013 57, 108-115DOI: (10.1016/j.jvs.2012.05.110) Copyright © 2013 Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions
Fig 4 A Kaplan-Meier curve demonstrates the distribution of survival in the cohort over time. OR, Open repair; TEVAR, thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Journal of Vascular Surgery 2013 57, 108-115DOI: (10.1016/j.jvs.2012.05.110) Copyright © 2013 Society for Vascular Surgery Terms and Conditions