Suppr超能文献

开窗与去分支胸主动脉腔内修复术在治疗主动脉弓远端和降主动脉病变中的应用。

Fenestrated versus debranching thoracic endovascular aortic repair for endovascular treatment of distal aortic arch and descending aortic lesions.

机构信息

Department of Vascular Medicine, German Aortic Center Hamburg, University Heart Center, Hamburg, Germany; Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital, LMU Munich, Munich, Germany.

Department of Vascular Medicine, German Aortic Center Hamburg, University Heart Center, Hamburg, Germany.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg. 2021 Jun;73(6):1915-1924. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.10.078. Epub 2020 Nov 27.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Cervical debranching, followed by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), is well-established for treating aortic arch lesions. However, total endovascular repair with fenestrated endografts has not been adequately studied. Thus, we performed a comparison of the two techniques.

METHODS

The present study was a single-center, retrospective study comparing the treatment of thoracic aortic lesions with custom-made fenestrated stent-grafts (fenestrated TEVAR [fTEVAR]) with a single fenestration for the left subclavian artery (LSA), a scallop for the left carotid artery, and hybrid repair with a thoracic stent-graft and cervical debranching of the LSA. Emergency cases were excluded.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2018, 19 patients (58% male) underwent elective fTEVAR (group A) and 17 patients (82% male) underwent debranching TEVAR (dTEVAR; group B). The mean age ± standard deviation in group A was 65.8 ± 2 years and 68 ± 3 years in group B. Left carotid-subclavian bypass was performed in 15 of 17 patients (88%) and transposition of the LSA in 2 of 17 patients (12%) in group B. The two groups were comparable regarding comorbidities, except for peripheral arterial disease: 5 of 19 patients in group A (26%) and none in group B had had peripheral arterial disease (P = .049). Dissection or post-dissection aneurysm was the indication for treatment in 6 of 19 patients in the fTEVAR group (group A) and in 12 of 17 patients in the dTEVAR group (group B; 31.6% vs 70.6%; P = .04). The indication for the remaining patients was a degenerative aortic aneurysm. Technical success was achieved in all cases, except for one case of dTEVAR owing to a type Ia endoleak. The mean endovascular operative time was 191 ± 120 minutes for fTEVAR and 130 ± 75 minutes for dTEVAR (P = NS). The mean operative time for the debranching procedure was 181 ± 97 minutes. No deaths or major strokes had occurred in the early postoperative period (30 days). Of the 17 patients in group B, 5 (29.4%) had experienced a local complication related to the debranching procedure. The mean follow-up was 14.6 ± 2 months for group A and 17 ± 2 months for group B. Of the 19 patients in group A and 17 patients in group B, 2 (10.5%) and 6 (35.3%) had required an unplanned reintervention related to the thoracic stent-graft during the follow-up period, respectively (P = NS). The estimated freedom from unplanned reintervention at 12 months was 86% for group A and 81% for group B. Primary patency of the LSA stent-graft or the carotid-subclavian bypass/transposition was 100% in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Both techniques showed excellent midterm patency rates for the target vessel and high technical success rate. The operation times were shorter for the fTEVAR group and complications related to the debranching procedure were avoided.

摘要

背景

对于治疗主动脉弓病变,颈动脉去分支联合胸主动脉腔内修复术(TEVAR)已得到广泛应用。然而,对于使用开窗支架治疗的全腔内修复术尚未进行充分研究。因此,我们对这两种技术进行了比较。

方法

本研究为单中心回顾性研究,比较了定制开窗支架(fTEVAR)治疗胸主动脉病变的效果,该技术在左锁骨下动脉(LSA)处有一个单一的开窗,左颈总动脉有一个扇贝形开窗,以及采用胸主动脉支架和 LSA 颈动脉去分支的杂交修复。排除急症病例。

结果

2012 年至 2018 年,19 名患者(58%为男性)接受了选择性 fTEVAR(A 组),17 名患者(82%为男性)接受了去分支 TEVAR(dTEVAR;B 组)。A 组患者的平均年龄为 65.8±2 岁,B 组为 68±3 岁。B 组中有 15 例(88%)患者接受了左颈动脉-锁骨下旁路术,2 例(12%)患者接受了 LSA 转位术。两组患者的合并症相似,除了外周动脉疾病:A 组中有 5 例(26%)患者,B 组无患者(P=0.049)。夹层或夹层后动脉瘤是 19 例 fTEVAR 患者(A 组)中 6 例患者(31.6%)和 17 例 dTEVAR 患者(B 组)中 12 例患者(70.6%)的治疗指征(P=0.04)。其余患者的指征为退行性主动脉瘤。所有病例均达到技术成功,除了 1 例 dTEVAR 因 I 型内漏而失败。fTEVAR 的平均腔内手术时间为 191±120 分钟,dTEVAR 为 130±75 分钟(P=NS)。去分支手术的平均手术时间为 181±97 分钟。两组患者在术后早期(30 天)均无死亡或重大卒中发生。B 组 17 例患者中有 5 例(29.4%)发生与去分支手术相关的局部并发症。A 组的平均随访时间为 14.6±2 个月,B 组为 17±2 个月。A 组 19 例患者和 B 组 17 例患者中,分别有 2 例(10.5%)和 6 例(35.3%)在随访期间需要进行与胸主动脉支架相关的计划性再干预(P=NS)。A 组和 B 组在 12 个月时的无计划性再干预率分别为 86%和 81%。LSA 支架或颈动脉-锁骨下旁路/转位的初始通畅率均为 100%。

结论

两种技术均显示出良好的中期靶血管通畅率和较高的技术成功率。fTEVAR 组的手术时间较短,且避免了与去分支手术相关的并发症。

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