Suppr超能文献

采用“跨越”技术的髂分支内假体治疗分叉移植物失败的血管内修复的结果。

Outcomes of an iliac branch endoprosthesis using an "up-and-over" technique for endovascular repair of failed bifurcated grafts.

机构信息

Advanced Endovascular Aortic Research Program, Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

Advanced Endovascular Aortic Research Program, Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg. 2019 Aug;70(2):497-508.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.10.098. Epub 2018 Dec 21.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Type IB endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair may be treated by an iliac branch endoprosthesis (IBE) through brachial access for internal iliac artery (IIA) stenting. The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of the IBE using an "up-and-over" transfemoral technique in patients with prior aortic repair compared with the standard technique in patients with de novo iliac aneurysms.

METHODS

We reviewed the clinical data of patients treated for aortoiliac aneurysms using Gore IBE (W. L. Gore & Associates, Flagstaff, Ariz) between 2014 and 2017. The up-and-over technique was indicated in patients with type IB endoleak or common iliac aneurysms after prior aortic repair with bifurcated endografts or surgical grafts. End points were technical success, mortality, major adverse events, IIA patency, freedom from IIA branch instability (composite end point of any IIA branch-related complication leading to aneurysm rupture, death, occlusion, component separation, or reintervention to maintain branch patency or to treat a branch-related separation or endoleak), and freedom from secondary interventions or new-onset buttock claudication.

RESULTS

There were 53 patients (51 male; 74 ± 8 years old) treated by 62 IBEs (9 bilateral). Standard technique was used in 36 patients (43 IBEs) and up-and-over technique in 17 (19 IBEs). Three patients had contralateral IIA embolization. Total procedure time, contrast material volume, and radiation dose averaged 168 ± 98 minutes, 140 ± 50 mL, and 1096 ± 1009 mGy, with no difference between techniques. Technical success was achieved in 98% of patients. Eleven patients had extension of IIA bridging stent into the posterior branch (eight standard, three up-and-over). Four patients (8%) had major adverse events due to estimated blood loss >1000 mL in all patients. There was no 30-day mortality after a median follow-up of 7 months (interquartile range, 3-12 months). There were two IIA stent occlusions (all standard), three iliac-related type I endoleaks (one standard, two up-and-over), and four secondary interventions (three standard, one up-and-over). At 1 year, patients treated by standard or up-and-over technique had similar primary patency (94% ± 4% vs 100%; P = .38) and secondary patency (97% ± 3% vs 100%; P = .54) and freedom from IIA branch instability (90% ± 6% vs 93% ± 7%; P = .48), secondary intervention (84% ± 8% vs 90% ± 9%; P = .63), and new-onset buttock claudication (90% ± 6% vs 100%; P = .35).

CONCLUSIONS

Endovascular repair using IBE was associated with high technical success, no mortality, and low rate of complications using either the standard technique for de novo aneurysms or an up-and-over technique for patients with failed bifurcated endografts or grafts. The up-and-over technique should be considered a suitable alternative to brachial access in patients who require distal extension using IBEs.

摘要

目的

血管内动脉瘤修复术后出现 1B 型内漏,可通过肱动脉入路对髂内动脉(IIA)进行支架置入,使用髂分支覆膜支架(IBE)进行治疗。本研究旨在评估与新型髂动脉瘤患者标准技术相比,在既往主动脉修复患者中使用“翻山而过”经股技术治疗 IBE 的结果。

方法

我们回顾了 2014 年至 2017 年期间使用 Gore IBE(戈尔公司,亚利桑那州弗拉格斯塔夫)治疗腹主动脉瘤患者的临床数据。在存在 1B 型内漏或 IIA 动脉瘤的情况下,翻山而过技术适用于既往接受分叉型腔内移植物或外科移植物治疗的主动脉修复患者。终点为技术成功率、死亡率、主要不良事件、IIA 通畅性、IIA 分支稳定性(任何与 IIA 分支相关的并发症的复合终点,导致动脉瘤破裂、死亡、闭塞、组件分离或再次介入以维持分支通畅性或治疗分支相关分离或内漏)、免于二次介入或新发臀部跛行。

结果

53 例患者(51 例男性;74±8 岁)接受 62 个 IBE 治疗(9 例双侧)。标准技术用于 36 例患者(43 个 IBE),翻山而过技术用于 17 例患者(19 个 IBE)。3 例患者对侧 IIA 栓塞。总手术时间、造影剂用量和辐射剂量平均为 168±98 分钟、140±50ml 和 1096±1009mGy,两种技术之间无差异。98%的患者达到了技术成功。11 例患者将 IIA 桥接支架延伸至后支(8 例标准,3 例翻山而过)。4 例(8%)患者因所有患者估计出血量>1000ml 而发生主要不良事件。中位随访 7 个月(四分位距 3-12 个月)后无 30 天死亡率。有 2 例 IIA 支架闭塞(均为标准)、3 例髂内相关 1 型内漏(1 例标准,2 例翻山而过)和 4 例二次介入(3 例标准,1 例翻山而过)。在 1 年时,接受标准或翻山而过技术治疗的患者具有相似的主要通畅率(94%±4%比 100%;P=0.38)和次要通畅率(97%±4%比 100%;P=0.54)以及免于 IIA 分支不稳定(90%±6%比 93%±7%;P=0.48)、二次介入(84%±8%比 90%±9%;P=0.63)和新发臀部跛行(90%±6%比 100%;P=0.35)。

结论

使用 IBE 的血管内修复术与高技术成功率、无死亡率和低并发症发生率相关,无论是用于新型动脉瘤的标准技术还是用于分叉型腔内移植物或外科移植物失败的患者的翻山而过技术。在需要使用 IBE 进行远端延伸的患者中,翻山而过技术应被视为肱动脉入路的一种合适替代方法。

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