Suppr超能文献

线圈栓塞术治疗静脉闭塞功能障碍患者并不合理:病例系列及文献综述

Coil Embolization Is Not Justified for Treating Patients with Veno-Occlusive Dysfunction: Case Series and Narrative Literature Review.

作者信息

Chang Ko-Shih, Chung Cho-Hsing, Chang Yi-Kai, Hsu Geng-Long, Tsai Mang-Hung, Chueh Jeff Sc

机构信息

Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Microsurgery Potency Reconstruction and Research Center, Yuan Rung Hospital, Yuanlin, Changhua 51052, Taiwan.

School of Nursing, National Taipei University of Nursing and Health Science, Taipei 112303, Taiwan.

出版信息

Life (Basel). 2024 Jul 22;14(7):911. doi: 10.3390/life14070911.

Abstract

Herein, we explore whether coil embolization (CE) is effective in treating veno-occlusive dysfunction (VOD). We present five cases with seven CE episodes and a narrative literature review. From 2013 to 2018, refractory impotence prompted five men to seek penile vascular stripping (PVS), although seven CE episodes were included. All received dual cavernosography in which erection-related veins and VOD were documented. PVS entailed the venous stripping of one deep dorsal vein and two cavernosal veins. The abridged five-item version of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5) score system and the erection hardness scale (EHS) were used, and yearly postoperative follow-ups were conducted via the Internet. Using Pub Med, a narrative literature review was performed on CE treatment for VOD or varicocele. Inserted coils were scattered along the erection-related veins, including the deep dorsal veins (n = 4), periprostatic plexus (n = 5), iliac vein (n = 5), right pulmonary artery (n = 2), left pulmonary artery (n = 2), and right ventricle (n = 1). PVS resulted in some improvements in the IIEF-5 score and EHS scale. Six articles highly recommend CE treatment for VOD. All claimed it is a minimally invasive effective treatment for varicocele. CE is not justified as a VOD treatment, regardless of its viability in the treatment of varicocele.

摘要

在此,我们探讨线圈栓塞术(CE)治疗静脉闭塞功能障碍(VOD)是否有效。我们呈现了5例患者的7次CE治疗情况,并进行了文献综述。2013年至2018年,难治性阳痿促使5名男性寻求阴茎血管剥脱术(PVS),尽管其中包含7次CE治疗。所有患者均接受了双海绵体造影,记录了与勃起相关的静脉和VOD情况。PVS包括剥脱一条阴茎深背静脉和两条海绵体静脉。采用国际勃起功能指数(IIEF-5)评分系统的简化五项版本和勃起硬度评分(EHS),并通过互联网进行每年的术后随访。利用PubMed对CE治疗VOD或精索静脉曲张进行了文献综述。插入的线圈分布在与勃起相关的静脉中,包括阴茎深背静脉(n = 4)、前列腺周围丛(n = 5)、髂静脉(n = 5)、右肺动脉(n = 2)、左肺动脉(n = 2)和右心室(n = 1)。PVS使IIEF-5评分和EHS量表有了一些改善。六篇文章强烈推荐CE治疗VOD。所有文章都称其为治疗精索静脉曲张的微创有效方法。无论CE在治疗精索静脉曲张方面是否可行,将其作为VOD的治疗方法都不合理。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/75c0/11278194/d08d9731f791/life-14-00911-g001.jpg

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