Suppr超能文献

复杂主动脉瘤血管内治疗中主动脉封堵范围的增加

Increased Aortic Exclusion in Endovascular Treatment of Complex Aortic Aneurysms.

作者信息

Verhagen Merel, Eefting Daniel, van Rijswijk Carla, van der Meer Rutger, Hamming Jaap, van der Vorst Joost, van Schaik Jan

机构信息

Department of Vascular Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands.

Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, 2333 ZA Leiden, The Netherlands.

出版信息

J Clin Med. 2023 Jul 26;12(15):4921. doi: 10.3390/jcm12154921.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Perioperative risk assessments for complex aneurysms are based on the anatomical extent of the aneurysm and do not take the length of the aortic exclusion into account, as it was developed for open repair. Nevertheless, in the endovascular repair (ER) of complex aortic aneurysms, additional segments of healthy aorta are excluded compared with open repair (OR). The aim of this study was to assess differences in aortic exclusion between the ER and OR of complex aortic aneurysms, to subsequently assess the current classification for complex aneurysm repair.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study included patients that underwent complex endovascular aortic aneurysm repair by means of fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair (FEVAR), fenestrated and branched EVAR (FBEVAR), or branched EVAR (BEVAR). The length of aortic exclusion and the number of patent segmental arteries were determined and compared per case in ER and hypothetical OR, using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

RESULTS

A total of 71 patients were included, who were treated with FEVAR (n = 44), FBEVAR (n = 8), or BEVAR (n = 19) for Crawford types I (n = 5), II (n = 7), III (n = 6), IV (n = 7), and V (n = 2) thoracoabdominal or juxtarenal (n = 44) aneurysms. There was a significant increase in the median exclusion of types I, II, III, IV, and juxtarenal aneurysms ( < 0.05) in ER, compared with hypothetical OR. The number of patent segmental arteries in the ER of type I-IV and juxtarenal aneurysms was significantly lower than in hypothetical OR ( < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

There are significant differences in the length of aortic exclusion between ER and hypothetical OR, with the increased exclusion in ER resulting in a lower number of patent segmental arteries. The ER and OR of complex aortic aneurysms should be regarded as distinct modalities, and as each approach deserves a particular risk assessment, future efforts should focus on reporting on the extent of exclusion per treatment modality, to allow for appropriate comparison.

摘要

目的

复杂动脉瘤的围手术期风险评估基于动脉瘤的解剖范围,且未考虑主动脉阻断长度,因为该评估方法是为开放修复而制定的。然而,在复杂主动脉瘤的血管内修复(ER)中,与开放修复(OR)相比,健康主动脉的额外节段被阻断。本研究的目的是评估复杂主动脉瘤的ER与OR之间主动脉阻断的差异,随后评估复杂动脉瘤修复的当前分类。

方法

这项回顾性观察性研究纳入了通过开窗血管内动脉瘤修复(FEVAR)、开窗分支血管内动脉瘤修复(FBEVAR)或分支血管内动脉瘤修复(BEVAR)进行复杂血管内主动脉瘤修复的患者。使用Wilcoxon符号秩检验,确定并比较每个病例在ER和假设的OR中的主动脉阻断长度和通畅的节段动脉数量。

结果

共纳入71例患者,他们接受了FEVAR(n = 44)、FBEVAR(n = 8)或BEVAR(n = 19)治疗,用于治疗Crawford I型(n = 5)、II型(n = 7)、III型(n = 6)、IV型(n = 7)和V型(n = 2)胸腹或肾旁(n = 44)动脉瘤。与假设的OR相比,ER中I型、II型、III型、IV型和肾旁动脉瘤的中位阻断长度显著增加(< 0.05)。I-IV型和肾旁动脉瘤的ER中通畅的节段动脉数量显著低于假设的OR(< 0.05)。

结论

ER与假设的OR之间在主动脉阻断长度上存在显著差异,ER中阻断长度增加导致通畅的节段动脉数量减少。复杂主动脉瘤的ER和OR应被视为不同的治疗方式,由于每种方法都应进行特定的风险评估,未来的工作应集中于报告每种治疗方式的阻断范围,以便进行适当的比较。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/4dd7/10420108/2981a7e8f1f8/jcm-12-04921-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验