Department of Vascular Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Hospital , Munich, Germany.
Department of Trauma Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilians-University Hospital, Munich, Germany.
Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2021 Jul 26;33(2):293-300. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivab067.
The aim of this study was to analyse and report the changes in the management of blunt traumatic aortic injuries (BTAIs) in a single centre during the last 2 decades.
A retrospective analysis of all patients diagnosed with BTAI from January 1999 to January 2020 was performed. Data were collected from electronic/digitalized medical history records.
Forty-six patients were included [median age 42.4 years (16-84 years), 71.7% males]. The predominant cause of BTAI was car accidents (54.5%, n = 24) and all patients presented with concomitant injuries (93% bone fractures, 77.8% abdominal and 62.2% pelvic injuries). Over 70% presented grade III or IV BTAI. Urgent repair was performed in 73.8% of patients (n = 31), with a median of 2.75 h between admission and repair. Thoracic endovascular repair (TEVAR) was performed in 87% (n = 49), open surgery (OS) in 10.9% (n = 5) and conservative management in 2.1% (n = 1). Technical success was 82.6% (92.1% TEVAR, 79% OS). In-hospital mortality was 19.5% (17.5% TEVAR, 40% OS). Of these, 3 died from aortic-related causes. Seven (15.2%) required an early vascular reintervention. The median follow-up was 34 months (1-220 months), with 19% of early survivors having a follow-up of >10 years. Only 1 vascular reintervention was necessary during follow-up: secondary TEVAR due to acute graft thrombosis. Of the patients who survived the initial event, 6.7% died during follow-up, none from aortic-related causes.
Even with all the described shortcomings, in our experience TEVAR for BTAI proved to be feasible and effective, with few complications and stable aortic reconstruction at mid-term follow-up. With the current technical expertise and wide availability of a variety of devices, it should be pursued as a first-line therapy in these challenging scenarios.
本研究旨在分析和报告 20 年来单一中心钝性主动脉损伤(BTAI)治疗方法的变化。
对 1999 年 1 月至 2020 年 1 月期间所有诊断为 BTAI 的患者进行回顾性分析。数据从电子/数字化病历中收集。
共纳入 46 例患者[中位年龄 42.4 岁(16-84 岁),71.7%为男性]。BTAI 的主要原因是车祸(54.5%,n=24),所有患者均伴有合并伤(93%骨折,77.8%腹部和 62.2%骨盆损伤)。超过 70%的患者为 3 级或 4 级 BTAI。73.8%的患者(n=31)接受了紧急修复,从入院到修复的中位时间为 2.75 小时。87%(n=49)的患者接受了胸主动脉腔内修复术(TEVAR),10.9%(n=5)接受了开放手术(OS),2.1%(n=1)接受了保守治疗。技术成功率为 82.6%(TEVAR 为 92.1%,OS 为 79%)。院内死亡率为 19.5%(TEVAR 为 17.5%,OS 为 40%)。其中 3 人死于主动脉相关原因。7 人(15.2%)需要早期血管再介入治疗。中位随访时间为 34 个月(1-220 个月),15.2%的早期幸存者随访时间超过 10 年。在随访期间仅需要进行 1 次血管再介入治疗:急性移植物血栓形成导致的二次 TEVAR。在初始事件中存活的患者中,6.7%在随访期间死亡,均非主动脉相关原因。
尽管存在所有这些描述的缺点,但在我们的经验中,TEVAR 治疗 BTAI 是可行和有效的,并发症少,中期随访时主动脉重建稳定。考虑到当前的技术专业知识和各种设备的广泛可用性,它应该作为这些具有挑战性的情况下的一线治疗方法。