Andraska Elizabeth, Haga Lindsey, Li Xiaoyi, Avgerinos Efthymios, Singh Michael, Chaer Rabih, Madigan Michael, Eslami Mohammad H
Heart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pa.
Heart and Vascular Institute, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pa.
J Vasc Surg. 2020 Oct;72(4):1260-1268. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.02.044. Epub 2020 Apr 8.
Retrograde open mesenteric stenting (ROMS) is an alternative to traditional bypass in patients who present with acute mesenteric ischemia (AMI). However, there is a paucity of data comparing outcomes of ROMS with other open surgical approaches. This study represents the largest single-institution experience with ROMS and aims to compare outcomes of ROMS with those of conventional mesenteric bypass.
All patients who presented with AMI from 2008 to 2019 and who were treated with either ROMS or mesenteric bypass were included in the study. Patient, procedure, and outcome variables were compared. Bypass and ROMS patients were compared using univariate statistics.
A total of 34 patients who presented with AMI needing bypass were included in the study; 16 underwent mesenteric bypass, and 18 underwent ROMS. ROMS patients tended to be older than bypass patients and had higher rates of comorbidities. Bypass patients were more likely to have a history of chronic mesenteric symptoms (68.8% vs 27.8%; P = .019). Bypass procedures also took longer than ROMS procedures (302 vs 189 minutes; P < .01). The majority of ROMS procedures were not performed in a hybrid room (77.8%). Within 1 year, one stent thrombosed in a ROMS patient, requiring later mesenteric bypass. In the bypass group, one conduit thrombosed, ultimately resulting in perioperative death, and one bypass anastomosis stenosed, requiring angioplasty. Complication, unanticipated reintervention, and mortality rates were otherwise similar between groups.
Complication, reintervention, and mortality rates after ROMS are similar to those of mesenteric bypass in the setting of AMI. Given similar postoperative outcomes and ability to perform these procedures in a conventional operating room but with significantly shorter operative times, ROMS should be considered a first-line option in acute situations when the operator is comfortable performing the procedure.
对于急性肠系膜缺血(AMI)患者,逆行开放肠系膜支架置入术(ROMS)是传统旁路手术的一种替代方案。然而,比较ROMS与其他开放手术方法疗效的数据较少。本研究代表了最大规模的单机构ROMS经验,旨在比较ROMS与传统肠系膜旁路手术的疗效。
纳入2008年至2019年期间所有出现AMI并接受ROMS或肠系膜旁路手术治疗的患者。比较患者、手术及结局变量。采用单变量统计方法对旁路手术和ROMS患者进行比较。
本研究共纳入34例需要旁路手术的AMI患者;16例行肠系膜旁路手术,18例行ROMS。ROMS患者往往比旁路手术患者年龄更大,合并症发生率更高。旁路手术患者更可能有慢性肠系膜症状病史(68.8%对27.8%;P = 0.019)。旁路手术时间也比ROMS手术长(302分钟对189分钟;P < 0.01)。大多数ROMS手术并非在杂交手术室进行(77.8%)。在1年内,1例ROMS患者的支架发生血栓形成,随后需要进行肠系膜旁路手术。在旁路手术组,1条管道发生血栓形成,最终导致围手术期死亡,1例旁路吻合口狭窄,需要进行血管成形术。两组的并发症、意外再次干预和死亡率在其他方面相似。
在AMI情况下,ROMS后的并发症、再次干预和死亡率与肠系膜旁路手术相似。鉴于术后结局相似,且能够在传统手术室进行这些手术,同时手术时间显著缩短,当术者对该手术操作熟练时,ROMS应被视为急性情况下的一线选择。