Suppr超能文献

5 年大、小主动脉瘤颈腔内修复治疗的对比。

A 5-year comparison of EVAR for large and small aortic necks.

机构信息

Section of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri 63110, USA.

出版信息

J Endovasc Ther. 2010 Oct;17(5):575-84. doi: 10.1583/10-3140.1.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To compare the long-term outcomes of endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) using the Talent endograft for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) with large and small aortic necks.

METHODS

Data on 156 patients (142 men; mean age 74.1 years, range 41-89) with adequate preoperative imaging were obtained from the prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter Talent eLPS trial, which enrolled patients from February 2002 to April 2003. Subgroup analyses were performed for AAAs with a large aortic neck diameter (≥28 mm; n=53, group 1) and those with smaller necks (<28 mm; n=103, group 2). Safety and effectiveness endpoints were evaluated at 30 days, 1 year, and 5 years post procedure.

RESULTS

Patients in both groups had similar gender and risk factor profiles. However, group 1 was significantly older (mean age 76.5 versus 72.9 years; p<0.01). Aside from neck diameter, the 2 groups had similar mean neck length and angulation. Group 1 also had a larger maximum aneurysm diameter (mean 58.2 versus 53.4 mm; p<0.01). At 1 year, the 2 groups had similar effectiveness endpoint results. There was a significantly lower freedom from major adverse events (MAEs) for group 1 at 30 days (79.2% versus 95.1%; p<0.01). While this trend continued to 1 year, the difference lost statistical significance (72.0% versus 85.1%; p=0.08). Freedom from all-cause mortality at 30 days (94.4% versus 100%; p<0.04) and aneurysm-related death at 1 year (93.3 versus 100%; p<0.04) also was significantly lower for group 1. At 5 years, there were no significant differences in the rates of endoleaks or aneurysm changes. The 5-year rates for freedom from aneurysm-related mortality for groups 1 and 2 were 91.2% and 98.7% (p=NS), respectively. There were 5 instances of migration in this study, all occurring in group 1 patients.

CONCLUSION

AAAs with aortic necks ≥28 mm can be treated with endovascular devices with acceptable results at 5 years. However, these patients have a higher rate of MAEs within the first year and higher migration rates at 5 years. In addition, they have a lower freedom from all-cause mortality at 30 days and aneurysm-related death at 1 year. Careful patient selection, accurate device deployment, and continued follow-up are necessary to optimize long-term results in this patient population.

摘要

目的

比较使用 Talent 覆膜支架治疗主动脉瘤(AAA)大、小主动脉颈的长期结果。

方法

从 2002 年 2 月至 2003 年 4 月,前瞻性、非随机、多中心 Talent eLPS 试验纳入了足够术前影像学资料的 156 例患者(142 例男性;平均年龄 74.1 岁,范围 41-89 岁)的数据。对大主动脉颈直径(≥28mm;n=53,第 1 组)和小颈直径(<28mm;n=103,第 2 组)的 AAA 进行了亚组分析。在术后 30 天、1 年和 5 年时评估安全性和有效性终点。

结果

两组患者的性别和危险因素谱相似。然而,第 1 组患者年龄明显较大(平均年龄 76.5 岁 vs 72.9 岁;p<0.01)。除颈直径外,两组的颈长度和角度平均值相似。第 1 组的最大动脉瘤直径也较大(平均 58.2 毫米 vs 53.4 毫米;p<0.01)。1 年时,两组的有效性终点结果相似。第 1 组在 30 天时主要不良事件(MAE)的无事件率显著较低(79.2% vs 95.1%;p<0.01)。虽然这一趋势持续到 1 年,但差异失去了统计学意义(72.0% vs 85.1%;p=0.08)。第 1 组在 30 天时全因死亡率(94.4% vs 100%;p<0.04)和 1 年时动脉瘤相关死亡率(93.3% vs 100%;p<0.04)也显著较低。5 年时,两组的内漏率或动脉瘤变化率无显著差异。第 1 组和第 2 组的 5 年动脉瘤相关死亡率无事件率分别为 91.2%和 98.7%(p=NS)。本研究中有 5 例迁移,均发生在第 1 组患者中。

结论

主动脉瘤颈直径≥28mm 的 AAA 可采用血管内装置治疗,5 年时效果可接受。然而,这些患者在术后 1 年内 MAE 发生率较高,5 年内迁移率较高。此外,他们在术后 30 天的全因死亡率和 1 年的动脉瘤相关死亡率较低。为了优化该患者人群的长期结果,需要对患者进行仔细选择、准确的装置放置和持续随访。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验