Chuter T A, Faruqi R M, Sawhney R, Reilly L M, Kerlan R B, Canto C J, Lukaszewicz G C, Laberge J M, Wilson M W, Gordon R L, Wall S D, Rapp J, Messina L M
Division of Vascular Surgery and Interventional Radiology, University of California-San Francisco, USA.
J Vasc Surg. 2001 Jul;34(1):98-105. doi: 10.1067/mva.2001.111487.
We sought to assess the role of endovascular techniques in the management of perigraft flow (endoleak) after endovascular repair of an abdominal aortic aneurysm.
We performed endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm in 114 patients, using a variety of Gianturco Z-stent-based prostheses. Results were evaluated with contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) at 3 days, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, and every year after the operation. An endoleak that occurred 3 days after operation led to repeat CT scanning at 2 weeks, followed by angiography and attempted endovascular treatment.
Endoleak was seen on the first postoperative CT scan in 21 (18%) patients and was still present at 2 weeks in 14 (12%). On the basis of angiographic localization of the inflow, the endoleak was pure type I in 3 cases, pure type II in 9, and mixed-pattern in 2. Of the 5 type I endoleaks, 3 were proximal and 2 were distal. All five resolved after endovascular implantation of additional stent-grafts, stents, and embolization coils. Although inferior mesenteric artery embolization was successful in 6 of 7 cases and lumbar embolization was successful in 4 of 7, only 1 of 11 primary type II endoleaks was shown to be resolved on CT scanning. There were no type III or type IV endoleaks (through the stent-graft). Endoleak was associated with aneurysm dilation two cases. In both cases, the aneurysm diameter stabilized after coil embolization of the inferior mesenteric artery. There were two secondary (delayed) endoleaks; one type I and one type II. The secondary type I endoleak and the associated aneurysm rupture were treated by use of an additional stent-graft. The secondary type II endoleak was not treated.
Type I endoleaks represent a persistent risk of aneurysm rupture and should be treated promptly by endovascular means. Type II leaks are less dangerous and more difficult to treat, but coil embolization of feeding arteries may be warranted when leakage is associated with aneurysm enlargement.
我们旨在评估血管内技术在腹主动脉瘤血管腔内修复术后移植物周围血流(内漏)管理中的作用。
我们使用多种基于Gianturco Z支架的假体对114例患者进行了腹主动脉瘤的血管腔内修复。术后3天、3个月、6个月、12个月及每年均采用增强计算机断层扫描(CT)评估结果。术后3天发生的内漏导致在2周时重复进行CT扫描,随后进行血管造影并尝试血管内治疗。
21例(18%)患者在术后首次CT扫描时发现内漏,14例(12%)在2周时仍存在内漏。根据血流流入的血管造影定位,内漏为单纯I型3例,单纯II型9例,混合型2例。在5例I型内漏中,3例为近端,2例为远端。所有5例在血管腔内植入额外的覆膜支架、支架和栓塞线圈后均得到解决。虽然7例中有6例肠系膜下动脉栓塞成功,7例中有4例腰动脉栓塞成功,但11例原发性II型内漏中只有1例在CT扫描中显示得到解决。没有III型或IV型内漏(通过覆膜支架)。内漏与2例动脉瘤扩张相关。在这两例中,肠系膜下动脉线圈栓塞后动脉瘤直径稳定。有2例继发性(延迟性)内漏;1例I型和1例II型。继发性I型内漏及相关动脉瘤破裂通过使用额外的覆膜支架进行治疗。继发性II型内漏未进行治疗。
I型内漏是动脉瘤破裂的持续风险,应通过血管内手段及时治疗。II型内漏危险性较小且更难治疗,但当漏血与动脉瘤扩大相关时,对供血动脉进行线圈栓塞可能是必要的。