用栅栏式或分支式血管内主动脉修复术治疗切除后胸腹主动脉瘤

IF 5.7 1区 医学 Q1 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
{"title":"用栅栏式或分支式血管内主动脉修复术治疗切除后胸腹主动脉瘤","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.ejvs.2024.04.041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic repair (F/B-EVAR) is a valuable treatment in patients with chronic post-dissection thoraco-abdominal aneurysm (PD-TAAA). This study aimed to analyse early and follow up outcomes of F/B-EVAR in these patients.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Thirty day and follow up outcomes of consecutive patients with PD-TAAA treated with F/B-EVAR in a tertiary centre over eight years were analysed retrospectively. All patients presenting with PD-TAAA and managed with F/B-EVAR were eligible. A modified Crawford’s classification system was used. Thirty day mortality and major adverse event (MAE) rates were analysed. Time to event data were estimated with Kaplan–Meier survival analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Fifty five patients (80% men, mean age 63.7 ± 7.7 years) were included: 12 (22%) were managed urgently; 25 (46%) for chronic type B aortic dissection; and the remainder for residual type A aortic dissection. Of these patients, 88% had undergone previous thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Prophylactic cerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD) was used in 91%. Fifteen (27%) patients were treated with F-EVAR, nine (16%) with fenestrations and branches, and 31 (56%) with B-EVAR. False lumen adjunctive procedures were used in 56%. Technical success was achieved in 96% of patients. The thirty day mortality rate was 7% and MAE rate was 20%. Spinal cord injury (SCI) grades 1 – 3 and grade 3 rates were 13% and 2%, respectively. Mean follow up was 33.0 ± 18.4 months. Survival and freedom from unscheduled re-intervention were 86% (standard error [SE] 5%) and 55% (SE 8%) at 24 months, respectively. Freedom from target vessel stenosis and occlusion was higher in F-EVAR at the 12 month follow up (<em>p</em> = .006) compared with B-EVAR.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Fenestrated or branched endovascular repairs in patients with PD-TAAA showed high technical success, with acceptable early mortality and MAE rates. The SCI rate was &gt; 10%, despite CSFD use and staged procedures. Almost a half of patients needed an unscheduled re-intervention within 24 months after F/B-EVAR.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":55160,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078588424003770/pdfft?md5=db0ecb9b989dc6da3d53df44d0fcfd01&pid=1-s2.0-S1078588424003770-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Post-dissection Thoraco-abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Managed by Fenestrated or Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ejvs.2024.04.041\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>Fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic repair (F/B-EVAR) is a valuable treatment in patients with chronic post-dissection thoraco-abdominal aneurysm (PD-TAAA). This study aimed to analyse early and follow up outcomes of F/B-EVAR in these patients.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Thirty day and follow up outcomes of consecutive patients with PD-TAAA treated with F/B-EVAR in a tertiary centre over eight years were analysed retrospectively. All patients presenting with PD-TAAA and managed with F/B-EVAR were eligible. A modified Crawford’s classification system was used. Thirty day mortality and major adverse event (MAE) rates were analysed. Time to event data were estimated with Kaplan–Meier survival analysis.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Fifty five patients (80% men, mean age 63.7 ± 7.7 years) were included: 12 (22%) were managed urgently; 25 (46%) for chronic type B aortic dissection; and the remainder for residual type A aortic dissection. Of these patients, 88% had undergone previous thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Prophylactic cerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD) was used in 91%. Fifteen (27%) patients were treated with F-EVAR, nine (16%) with fenestrations and branches, and 31 (56%) with B-EVAR. False lumen adjunctive procedures were used in 56%. Technical success was achieved in 96% of patients. The thirty day mortality rate was 7% and MAE rate was 20%. Spinal cord injury (SCI) grades 1 – 3 and grade 3 rates were 13% and 2%, respectively. Mean follow up was 33.0 ± 18.4 months. Survival and freedom from unscheduled re-intervention were 86% (standard error [SE] 5%) and 55% (SE 8%) at 24 months, respectively. Freedom from target vessel stenosis and occlusion was higher in F-EVAR at the 12 month follow up (<em>p</em> = .006) compared with B-EVAR.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Fenestrated or branched endovascular repairs in patients with PD-TAAA showed high technical success, with acceptable early mortality and MAE rates. The SCI rate was &gt; 10%, despite CSFD use and staged procedures. Almost a half of patients needed an unscheduled re-intervention within 24 months after F/B-EVAR.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55160,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078588424003770/pdfft?md5=db0ecb9b989dc6da3d53df44d0fcfd01&pid=1-s2.0-S1078588424003770-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078588424003770\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1078588424003770","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:开孔或分支血管内修复术(f/bEVAR)是治疗慢性胸腹动脉瘤(PD-TAAA)切除术后患者的重要方法。本研究旨在分析f/bEVAR的早期和随访结果:设计:回顾性分析一家三级医疗中心 8 年来连续接受 f/bEVAR 治疗的 PD-TAAA 患者的 30 天疗效和随访疗效:所有PD-TAAA患者均符合条件,并接受了f/bEVAR治疗。采用修正的克劳福德分类系统。分析了30天死亡率和主要不良事件(MAE)。通过 Kaplan-Meier 生存分析估算了事件发生的时间:共纳入 55 名患者(80% 为男性,平均年龄为 63.7 ± 7.7 岁):12名患者(22%)接受了紧急治疗;25名患者(46%)因慢性B型主动脉夹层接受治疗;其余患者因残余A型主动脉夹层接受治疗。在这些患者中,88%曾接受过胸腔内血管主动脉修复术。91%的患者使用了预防性脑脊液引流术(CSFD)。15名患者(27%)接受了fEVAR治疗,9名患者(16%)接受了瘘管和分支治疗,31名患者(56%)接受了bEVAR治疗。56%的患者使用了假腔辅助手术。96%的患者获得了技术成功。30天死亡率为7%,MAE率为20%。脊髓损伤(SCI)1-3级和3级发生率分别为13%和2%。平均随访时间为(33.0 ± 18.4)个月。24个月时的存活率和无计划再介入率分别为86%(SE 5%)和55%(SE 8%)。在12个月的随访中,fEVAR的靶血管狭窄和闭塞发生率高于bEVAR(p = .006):结论:在PD-TAAA患者中进行穿孔或分支血管内修复术显示出很高的技术成功率,早期死亡率和MAE率均可接受。尽管使用了CSFD并进行了分期手术,但SCI率仍大于10%。近二分之一的患者在F/BEVAR术后24个月内需要进行计划外的再次介入治疗。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Post-dissection Thoraco-abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Managed by Fenestrated or Branched Endovascular Aortic Repair

Objective

Fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic repair (F/B-EVAR) is a valuable treatment in patients with chronic post-dissection thoraco-abdominal aneurysm (PD-TAAA). This study aimed to analyse early and follow up outcomes of F/B-EVAR in these patients.

Methods

Thirty day and follow up outcomes of consecutive patients with PD-TAAA treated with F/B-EVAR in a tertiary centre over eight years were analysed retrospectively. All patients presenting with PD-TAAA and managed with F/B-EVAR were eligible. A modified Crawford’s classification system was used. Thirty day mortality and major adverse event (MAE) rates were analysed. Time to event data were estimated with Kaplan–Meier survival analysis.

Results

Fifty five patients (80% men, mean age 63.7 ± 7.7 years) were included: 12 (22%) were managed urgently; 25 (46%) for chronic type B aortic dissection; and the remainder for residual type A aortic dissection. Of these patients, 88% had undergone previous thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Prophylactic cerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD) was used in 91%. Fifteen (27%) patients were treated with F-EVAR, nine (16%) with fenestrations and branches, and 31 (56%) with B-EVAR. False lumen adjunctive procedures were used in 56%. Technical success was achieved in 96% of patients. The thirty day mortality rate was 7% and MAE rate was 20%. Spinal cord injury (SCI) grades 1 – 3 and grade 3 rates were 13% and 2%, respectively. Mean follow up was 33.0 ± 18.4 months. Survival and freedom from unscheduled re-intervention were 86% (standard error [SE] 5%) and 55% (SE 8%) at 24 months, respectively. Freedom from target vessel stenosis and occlusion was higher in F-EVAR at the 12 month follow up (p = .006) compared with B-EVAR.

Conclusion

Fenestrated or branched endovascular repairs in patients with PD-TAAA showed high technical success, with acceptable early mortality and MAE rates. The SCI rate was > 10%, despite CSFD use and staged procedures. Almost a half of patients needed an unscheduled re-intervention within 24 months after F/B-EVAR.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
15.80%
发文量
471
审稿时长
66 days
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery is aimed primarily at vascular surgeons dealing with patients with arterial, venous and lymphatic diseases. Contributions are included on the diagnosis, investigation and management of these vascular disorders. Papers that consider the technical aspects of vascular surgery are encouraged, and the journal includes invited state-of-the-art articles. Reflecting the increasing importance of endovascular techniques in the management of vascular diseases and the value of closer collaboration between the vascular surgeon and the vascular radiologist, the journal has now extended its scope to encompass the growing number of contributions from this exciting field. Articles describing endovascular method and their critical evaluation are included, as well as reports on the emerging technology associated with this field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信