Comparative Analysis of Surgical and Endovascular Approaches for Isolated Aortic Coarctation Repair across Age Groups: Outcomes and Long-Term Efficacy

<b>Background:</b> Aortic coarctation, a condition characterized by localized narrowing of the aorta, can be managed with either surgical or endovascular techniques. This study aims to compare these approaches concerning long-term outcomes, particularly re-coarctation rates and late arterial hypertension. <b>Methods:</b> We retrospectively analyzed data from patients with native, isolated aortic coarctation treated by surgical or endovascular methods between 2015 and 2024. Clinical and demographic data were collected from electronic health records. Blood pressure was measured using oscillometric devices, and transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) was performed by an experienced sonographer. The primary endpoint was to identify which treatment predicted re-coarctation during follow-up, while the secondary endpoint assessed the incidence of late arterial hypertension. <b>Results:</b> Sixty-nine patients were included, with a mean age of 18.14 ± 8.18 years (median 16 years; range 8 to 37 years) and a median follow-up of 3 years (range 6 months to 8 years). Of these, 67 (97.1%) underwent elective repairs. Repair techniques included endovascular treatment (24.6%), surgical end-to-end anastomosis (47.8%), and surgical patchplasty (27.5%). The endovascular group was significantly older (29.82 ± 5.9 years vs. 14.33 ± 4.25 years, <i>p</i> = 0.056) and had shorter procedure durations and hospital stays. One-year freedom from reintervention was significantly higher in the surgical group (98.7%) compared to the endovascular group (88.23%) (<i>p</i> < 0.001). <b>Conclusions:</b> Both techniques effectively treat aortic coarctation, but surgical repair offers better long-term outcomes, while endovascular repair provides shorter recovery times. These findings should inform the choice of treatment modality based on patient-specific factors and clinical priorities.