Department of Vascular Surgery, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH 44195, USA.
J Vasc Surg. 2011 Mar;53(3):698-704; discussion 704-5. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2010.09.049. Epub 2011 Jan 14.
Few centers have adopted endovascular therapy for the treatment of acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI). We sought to evaluate the effect of endovascular therapy on outcomes for the treatment of AMI.
A single-center, retrospective cohort review was performed on all consecutive patients with thrombotic or embolic AMI presenting between 1999 and 2008. Patients with mesenteric venous thrombosis, nonocclusive mesenteric ischemia, and ischemia associated with aortic dissection were excluded. Demographic factors, preoperative metabolic status, and etiology were compared. Primary clinical outcomes included endovascular technical success, operative complications, and in-hospital mortality.
Seventy consecutive patients were identified with AMI (mean age, 64 ± 13 years). Etiology of mesenteric ischemia was 65% thrombotic and 35% embolic occlusions. Endovascular revascularization was the preferred treatment (81%) vs operative therapy (19%). Successful endovascular treatment was achieved in 87%. Endovascular therapy required laparotomy in 69% vs traditional therapy in 100% (P < .05), with a median 52-cm necrotic bowel resected (interquartile range [IQR], 11-140 cm) vs 160 cm (IQR, 90-250 cm; P < .05), respectively. Acute renal failure and pulmonary failure occurred less frequently with endovascular therapy (27% vs 50%; P < .05 and 27% vs 64%; P < .05). Successful endovascular treatment resulted in a mortality rate of 36% compared with 50% (P < .05) with traditional therapy, whereas the mortality rate for endovascular failures was 50%. Endovascular therapy was associated with improved mortality in thrombotic AMI (odds ratio, 0.10; 95% confidence interval, 0.10-0.76; P < .05).
Endovascular therapy has altered the management of AMI, and there are measurable advantages to this approach. Using endovascular therapy as the primary modality for AMI reduces complications and improves outcomes.
很少有中心采用血管内治疗治疗急性肠系膜缺血(AMI)。我们旨在评估血管内治疗对 AMI 治疗结果的影响。
对 1999 年至 2008 年间连续就诊的所有血栓性或栓塞性 AMI 患者进行了单中心回顾性队列研究。排除肠系膜静脉血栓形成、非闭塞性肠系膜缺血和与主动脉夹层相关的缺血患者。比较了人口统计学因素、术前代谢状态和病因。主要临床结局包括血管内技术成功、手术并发症和住院死亡率。
确定了 70 例连续的 AMI 患者(平均年龄 64±13 岁)。肠系膜缺血的病因 65%为血栓形成,35%为栓塞性闭塞。血管内血管重建是首选治疗方法(81%),而非手术治疗(19%)。87%的患者成功进行了血管内治疗。血管内治疗需要剖腹手术的比例为 69%,而传统治疗的比例为 100%(P<.05),需要切除的坏死肠管中位数为 52cm(四分位距[IQR],11-140cm),而传统治疗的比例为 160cm(IQR,90-250cm;P<.05)。血管内治疗急性肾衰竭和呼吸衰竭的发生率较低(分别为 27%和 50%;P<.05 和 27%和 64%;P<.05)。成功的血管内治疗的死亡率为 36%,而传统治疗的死亡率为 50%(P<.05),血管内治疗失败的死亡率为 50%。血管内治疗与血栓性 AMI 死亡率降低相关(比值比,0.10;95%置信区间,0.10-0.76;P<.05)。
血管内治疗改变了 AMI 的治疗方法,这种方法具有明显的优势。将血管内治疗作为 AMI 的主要治疗方式可减少并发症并改善结局。