慢性危重肢体缺血:放射干预的益处是什么?适应症和结果。

Journal belge de radiologie Pub Date : 1998-04-01
R F Dondelinger
{"title":"慢性危重肢体缺血:放射干预的益处是什么?适应症和结果。","authors":"R F Dondelinger","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Indications of interventional radiological procedures in patients with chronic critical limb ischemia are not clearly defined. PTA of limb arteries is used only in 3 of 4% of patients, although 20 to 40% might be candidates for a proximal intervention in the iliac arteries. Following PTA of intrapopliteal arteries, limb salvage varies from 56 to 82% and arterial patency rate from 34 to 100% after 1 to 2 years follow-up in non controlled case series studies. Arterial local thrombolysis shows better results than surgery in subgroups of patients in a few studies. Pulse spray technique does not show better clinical results than conventional infusion of the plasminogen activator. Overall, radiological interventions give similar results compared with surgery, concerning limb salvage rate, length of hospital stay, morbidity and mortality, but significantly more patients are discharged home versus a nursing institution after radiological treatment than after surgery. Radiological techniques seem to be cost effective compared to surgery. Amputation should be carried out only after all revascularization possibilities have been ruled out at a multidisciplinary vascular center.</p>","PeriodicalId":75981,"journal":{"name":"Journal belge de radiologie","volume":"81 2","pages":"96-100"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Chronic critical limb ischemia: what is the benefit of radiological intervention? Indications and results.\",\"authors\":\"R F Dondelinger\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Indications of interventional radiological procedures in patients with chronic critical limb ischemia are not clearly defined. PTA of limb arteries is used only in 3 of 4% of patients, although 20 to 40% might be candidates for a proximal intervention in the iliac arteries. Following PTA of intrapopliteal arteries, limb salvage varies from 56 to 82% and arterial patency rate from 34 to 100% after 1 to 2 years follow-up in non controlled case series studies. Arterial local thrombolysis shows better results than surgery in subgroups of patients in a few studies. Pulse spray technique does not show better clinical results than conventional infusion of the plasminogen activator. Overall, radiological interventions give similar results compared with surgery, concerning limb salvage rate, length of hospital stay, morbidity and mortality, but significantly more patients are discharged home versus a nursing institution after radiological treatment than after surgery. Radiological techniques seem to be cost effective compared to surgery. Amputation should be carried out only after all revascularization possibilities have been ruled out at a multidisciplinary vascular center.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75981,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal belge de radiologie\",\"volume\":\"81 2\",\"pages\":\"96-100\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1998-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal belge de radiologie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal belge de radiologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

慢性危急肢体缺血患者介入放射治疗的指征尚未明确。肢体动脉PTA仅在4%的患者中使用,尽管20%至40%的患者可能是髂动脉近端干预的候选人。在非对照病例系列研究中,经1 ~ 2年随访,经膝内动脉PTA治疗后,肢体保留率为56% ~ 82%,动脉通畅率为34% ~ 100%。在一些研究中,动脉局部溶栓在亚组患者中显示出比手术更好的结果。脉冲喷雾技术并不比常规输注纤溶酶原激活剂表现出更好的临床效果。总体而言,与手术相比,放射干预在肢体保留率、住院时间、发病率和死亡率方面的结果相似,但放射治疗后出院回家的患者明显多于手术后出院回家的患者。与外科手术相比,放射技术似乎更具成本效益。只有在多学科血管中心排除了所有血运重建的可能性后,才能进行截肢手术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Chronic critical limb ischemia: what is the benefit of radiological intervention? Indications and results.

Indications of interventional radiological procedures in patients with chronic critical limb ischemia are not clearly defined. PTA of limb arteries is used only in 3 of 4% of patients, although 20 to 40% might be candidates for a proximal intervention in the iliac arteries. Following PTA of intrapopliteal arteries, limb salvage varies from 56 to 82% and arterial patency rate from 34 to 100% after 1 to 2 years follow-up in non controlled case series studies. Arterial local thrombolysis shows better results than surgery in subgroups of patients in a few studies. Pulse spray technique does not show better clinical results than conventional infusion of the plasminogen activator. Overall, radiological interventions give similar results compared with surgery, concerning limb salvage rate, length of hospital stay, morbidity and mortality, but significantly more patients are discharged home versus a nursing institution after radiological treatment than after surgery. Radiological techniques seem to be cost effective compared to surgery. Amputation should be carried out only after all revascularization possibilities have been ruled out at a multidisciplinary vascular center.

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