Suppr超能文献

单机透视与双翼透视在接受开窗/分支腔内主动脉修复的患者中的应用比较。

Monoplane versus biplane fluoroscopy in patients undergoing fenestrated/branched endovascular aortic repair.

机构信息

Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of General Surgery, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

Division of Cardiovascular and Interventional Radiology, Department of Bioimaging and Image-Guided Therapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg. 2023 May;77(5):1359-1366.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2022.12.037. Epub 2022 Dec 29.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) with fenestrated (F-EVAR) or branched (B-EVAR) endografts represents an indispensable tool of modern patient care in vascular surgery. The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the center's initial experience of F/B-EVAR procedures performed under biplane angiography guidance compared with a historical control group.

METHODS

From January 2020 to March 2022, 80 consecutive patients underwent F/B-EVAR under general anesthesia at a single institution. As from January 2021, the deployment of complex stent grafts was performed using an alternative intraoperative imaging modality-a biplane fluoroscopy and angiography. The cohort was divided into monoplane (MPA) and biplane (BPA) groups according to the imaging modality applied. The end points were operation time, fluoroscopy time, radiation exposure, dose of contrast agent, and technical success.

RESULTS

The MPA group included 59 patients (78% male; median age; 74 years; interquartile range [IQR], 66-78 years) and the BPA group 21 patients (85.7% males; median age, 75 years; IQR, 69-79 years). Operation time (median, 320 minutes; IQR, 266-376 minutes) versus (median, 275 minutes; IQR, 216-333 minutes) was significantly lower in the BPA group (P = .006). The median fluoroscopy time (median, 82 minutes; IQR, 57-110 minutes vs median, 68 minutes; IQR, 54-92 minutes), contrast agent volume applied (median, 220 mL; IQR, 179-250 mL vs median, 200 mL; IQR, 170-250 mL), and radiation dose (dose-area product, median, 413 Gy × cm; IQR, 249-736 Gy × cm; vs median, 542 Gy × cm; IQR, 196-789 Gy × cm) were similar in both groups. Technical success of 96.6% (57/59 cases) versus 100% (21/21 cases) could be achieved in MPA and BPA group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

F/B-EVAR procedures performed under BPA guidance were associated with a significant decrease in operation time.

摘要

目的

血管外科中,带分支(B-EVAR)或开窗(F-EVAR)的腔内主动脉修复术(EVAR)是现代患者治疗不可或缺的工具。本回顾性研究旨在评估在双平面血管造影引导下进行 F/B-EVAR 手术的中心初步经验,并与历史对照组进行比较。

方法

自 2020 年 1 月至 2022 年 3 月,在一家医疗机构中,80 例连续患者在全身麻醉下接受 F/B-EVAR 手术。自 2021 年 1 月起,采用替代术中成像模式——双平面透视和血管造影术来展开复杂的支架移植物。根据所应用的成像方式,将该队列分为单平面(MPA)和双平面(BPA)组。终点是手术时间、透视时间、辐射暴露、造影剂剂量和技术成功率。

结果

MPA 组包括 59 例患者(78%为男性;中位年龄为 74 岁;四分位间距[IQR],66-78 岁),BPA 组包括 21 例患者(85.7%为男性;中位年龄为 75 岁;IQR,69-79 岁)。BPA 组的手术时间(中位数,320 分钟;IQR,266-376 分钟)明显低于 MPA 组(中位数,275 分钟;IQR,216-333 分钟)(P=0.006)。BPA 组的透视时间中位数(中位数,82 分钟;IQR,57-110 分钟)与 MPA 组的透视时间中位数(中位数,68 分钟;IQR,54-92 分钟)、造影剂体积中位数(中位数,220mL;IQR,179-250mL)与 MPA 组的造影剂体积中位数(中位数,200mL;IQR,170-250mL)、辐射剂量(剂量面积乘积,中位数,413Gy×cm;IQR,249-736Gy×cm;中位数,542Gy×cm;IQR,196-789Gy×cm)相似。MPA 组和 BPA 组的技术成功率分别为 96.6%(57/59 例)和 100%(21/21 例)。

结论

在 BPA 引导下进行的 F/B-EVAR 手术与手术时间的显著缩短相关。

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