University of California, Davis, CA.
St, Michael Medical Center, Silverdale, WA.
Ann Vasc Surg. 2021 May;73:37-42. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2020.10.028. Epub 2020 Nov 26.
The safety and efficacy of right axillary cannulation during complex aortic aneurysm repair for the deployment of chimney grafts is controversial; however, there are few studies that compare right and left upper extremity access. We favor the right axillary approach because of the relative ease of access to the visceral branches and the ability of surgeons and nursing staff to work on the same side of the patient, while avoiding the left sided image intensifier. We aim to demonstrate that right-sided access is equivalent or safer than left-sided access in terms of technical success and complication rates, with a focus on neurologic outcomes.
This is a single-institution retrospective study with a review of patients who underwent aortic intervention from January 2012 through December 2018. A total of 398 aortic interventions were performed, and 97 of these required brachial, axillary, or subclavian arterial access for attempted ChEVAR or thoracic endovascular aortic repair with parallel chimney grafts. Primary end points that were analyzed were site or sites of upper extremity access, technical success, 30-day mortality, cerebrovascular events, and subclavian/axillary artery injury. The number of parallel grafts, age, mean hospital length of stay, prior aortic intervention, emergent or elective status were also analyzed.
Ninety-seven endovascular aortic operations required upper extremity access, with 67 using access from the right upper extremity, 26 using access from the left upper extremity, and 4 using bilateral upper extremity access. A total of 68.0% of patients had undergone prior aortic surgery. Technical success was achieved in 85 cases (87.6%). Five total patients suffered cerebrovascular accidents, with 2 occurring in left-sided access (7.7%), 2 in right-sided access (3.0%), and 1 in bilateral access (25%).
Right upper extremity access for patients undergoing parallel graft placement during endovascular aortic aneurysm repair is a safe and feasible approach that is not associated with an increased risk of stroke or neurological events as compared with left upper extremity access.
在复杂主动脉瘤修复中,经右腋动脉行烟囱支架置入术的安全性和有效性存在争议;然而,很少有研究比较左右上肢入路。我们倾向于右腋动脉入路,因为这样更容易接近内脏分支,并且术者和护理人员可以在患者的同一侧工作,同时避免使用左侧的影像增强器。我们的目的是证明右侧入路在技术成功率和并发症发生率方面与左侧入路相当或更安全,重点关注神经学结果。
这是一项单中心回顾性研究,对 2012 年 1 月至 2018 年 12 月期间接受主动脉介入治疗的患者进行了回顾。共进行了 398 例主动脉介入治疗,其中 97 例需要肱动脉、腋动脉或锁骨下动脉入路,以便尝试行 ChEVAR 或胸主动脉腔内修复术并行烟囱支架。分析的主要终点是上肢入路的部位或部位、技术成功率、30 天死亡率、脑血管事件和锁骨下/腋动脉损伤。还分析了并行移植的数量、年龄、平均住院时间、既往主动脉介入治疗、紧急或择期情况。
97 例血管内主动脉手术需要上肢入路,其中 67 例采用右侧上肢入路,26 例采用左侧上肢入路,4 例采用双侧上肢入路。共有 68.0%的患者接受过主动脉手术。85 例(87.6%)达到了技术成功。共有 5 例患者发生脑血管意外,其中 2 例发生在左侧入路(7.7%),2 例发生在右侧入路(3.0%),1 例发生在双侧入路(25%)。
在血管内主动脉瘤修复中,对于行并行移植的患者,经右腋动脉入路是一种安全可行的方法,与左侧上肢入路相比,其不会增加中风或神经事件的风险。