经导管主动脉瓣置换术、血管内主动脉修补术和胸腔内主动脉修补术的大口径入路。解剖学挑战和手术注意事项回顾。

Cara G Pozolo, Angela S Giese, Trissa A Babrowski
{"title":"经导管主动脉瓣置换术、血管内主动脉修补术和胸腔内主动脉修补术的大口径入路。解剖学挑战和手术注意事项回顾。","authors":"Cara G Pozolo, Angela S Giese, Trissa A Babrowski","doi":"10.23736/S0021-9509.24.13150-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) are standard and prolific procedures in the modern cardiovascular world, and appropriate delivery of these endoprostheses requires adequate understanding of the requisite large bore access. Percutaneous large bore access is the preferred route but may be accompanied by complications like thrombosis, hemorrhage, or inability to deliver the device. Anatomic limitations such as vessel tortuosity, small size, and heavy calcification may require alternative approaches for successful large bore access. This study aimed to better define large bore access, as well as to elucidate optimal adjuncts and alternatives to enable successful delivery of large bore endoprostheses.</p><p><strong>Evidence acquisition: </strong>A systematic review for \"large bore access\" in the cardiovascular literature was conducted on PubMed and the Cochrane Library Central according to PRISMA guidelines. Identified articles were filtered and sub-selected for TAVR, EVAR, and TEVAR; studies related to other large bore interventions were excluded.</p><p><strong>Evidence synthesis: </strong>A representative selection of 39 full-text studies included both cardiac and vascular studies and was critically interpreted to identify a consensus definition for large bore access, challenging anatomy, and adjuncts or alternative approaches to the standard transfemoral approach.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Transfemoral access remains the first-line approach but in the setting of unfavorable anatomy, adjunct maneuvers (e.g. intravascular lithotripsy, endoconduits) or alternative approaches (supra-aortic, transcaval) help decrease morbidity, mortality, length of procedure, and overall health care cost in large bore access.</p>","PeriodicalId":101333,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of cardiovascular surgery","volume":" ","pages":"460-467"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Large bore access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement, endovascular aortic repair, and thoracic endovascular aortic repair. A review of anatomic challenges and operative considerations.\",\"authors\":\"Cara G Pozolo, Angela S Giese, Trissa A Babrowski\",\"doi\":\"10.23736/S0021-9509.24.13150-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) are standard and prolific procedures in the modern cardiovascular world, and appropriate delivery of these endoprostheses requires adequate understanding of the requisite large bore access. Percutaneous large bore access is the preferred route but may be accompanied by complications like thrombosis, hemorrhage, or inability to deliver the device. Anatomic limitations such as vessel tortuosity, small size, and heavy calcification may require alternative approaches for successful large bore access. This study aimed to better define large bore access, as well as to elucidate optimal adjuncts and alternatives to enable successful delivery of large bore endoprostheses.</p><p><strong>Evidence acquisition: </strong>A systematic review for \\\"large bore access\\\" in the cardiovascular literature was conducted on PubMed and the Cochrane Library Central according to PRISMA guidelines. Identified articles were filtered and sub-selected for TAVR, EVAR, and TEVAR; studies related to other large bore interventions were excluded.</p><p><strong>Evidence synthesis: </strong>A representative selection of 39 full-text studies included both cardiac and vascular studies and was critically interpreted to identify a consensus definition for large bore access, challenging anatomy, and adjuncts or alternative approaches to the standard transfemoral approach.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Transfemoral access remains the first-line approach but in the setting of unfavorable anatomy, adjunct maneuvers (e.g. intravascular lithotripsy, endoconduits) or alternative approaches (supra-aortic, transcaval) help decrease morbidity, mortality, length of procedure, and overall health care cost in large bore access.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":101333,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of cardiovascular surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"460-467\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of cardiovascular surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0021-9509.24.13150-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/10/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of cardiovascular surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S0021-9509.24.13150-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/10/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:经导管主动脉瓣置换术(TAVR)、血管内主动脉修补术(EVAR)和胸腔内主动脉修补术(TEVAR)是现代心血管领域的标准和多发手术。经皮大口径入路是首选途径,但可能伴随血栓形成、出血或无法输送装置等并发症。血管迂曲、体积小、钙化严重等解剖学限制可能需要采用其他方法才能成功进行大孔径入路。本研究旨在更好地定义大孔径入路,并阐明最佳辅助工具和替代方法,以成功输送大孔径内植物:根据 PRISMA 指南,在 PubMed 和 Cochrane 图书馆中心对心血管文献中的 "大孔径入路 "进行了系统性回顾。对识别出的文章进行了筛选,并针对TAVR、EVAR和TEVAR进行了细选;排除了与其他大孔径介入相关的研究:对39篇有代表性的全文研究(包括心脏和血管研究)进行了批判性解读,以确定大口径入路的共识定义、具有挑战性的解剖结构、辅助方法或标准经口入路的替代方法:结论:经口入路仍是一线方法,但在解剖结构不佳的情况下,辅助操作(如血管内碎石、内导管)或替代方法(主动脉上、经腔)有助于降低大口径入路的发病率、死亡率、手术时间和总体医疗成本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Large bore access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement, endovascular aortic repair, and thoracic endovascular aortic repair. A review of anatomic challenges and operative considerations.

Introduction: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), endovascular aortic repair (EVAR), and thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) are standard and prolific procedures in the modern cardiovascular world, and appropriate delivery of these endoprostheses requires adequate understanding of the requisite large bore access. Percutaneous large bore access is the preferred route but may be accompanied by complications like thrombosis, hemorrhage, or inability to deliver the device. Anatomic limitations such as vessel tortuosity, small size, and heavy calcification may require alternative approaches for successful large bore access. This study aimed to better define large bore access, as well as to elucidate optimal adjuncts and alternatives to enable successful delivery of large bore endoprostheses.

Evidence acquisition: A systematic review for "large bore access" in the cardiovascular literature was conducted on PubMed and the Cochrane Library Central according to PRISMA guidelines. Identified articles were filtered and sub-selected for TAVR, EVAR, and TEVAR; studies related to other large bore interventions were excluded.

Evidence synthesis: A representative selection of 39 full-text studies included both cardiac and vascular studies and was critically interpreted to identify a consensus definition for large bore access, challenging anatomy, and adjuncts or alternative approaches to the standard transfemoral approach.

Conclusions: Transfemoral access remains the first-line approach but in the setting of unfavorable anatomy, adjunct maneuvers (e.g. intravascular lithotripsy, endoconduits) or alternative approaches (supra-aortic, transcaval) help decrease morbidity, mortality, length of procedure, and overall health care cost in large bore access.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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