局部麻醉穿刺下完全无对比剂腔内修复腹主动脉瘤1例

目的 探讨对比剂过敏高危腹主动脉瘤患者接受局部麻醉穿刺下完全无对比剂主动脉腔内修复术(EVAR)的可行性.方法 对1例对比剂过敏腹主动脉瘤患者,在不使用对比剂、局部麻醉穿刺条件下实施EVAR术.结果 手术获成功.术后MRI随访结果显示,患者腹主动脉瘤完全隔绝,无内漏,覆膜支架内血流通畅,双侧肾动脉显影良好.结论 局部麻醉穿刺下完全无对比剂EVAR术治疗对比剂过敏伴全身麻醉禁忌高危腹主动脉瘤患者安全有效,但严格掌握适应证、术前充分评估是手术成功的关键.     

腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后内漏的研究进展

腹主动脉瘤（abdominal aortic aneurysms，AAAs）是血管外科的常见疾病，其经典治疗方法是AAAs切除、人工血管移植术，但手术创伤大，不适于存在心、肺、肾等严重合并症的高危患者。1990年Parodi等首创了AAAs腔内修复术（endovascular aneurysm repair，EVAR），因其独特的微创优势被迅速推广，截至2003年美国已施行该手术超过5万例次，     

血管塞治疗腹主动脉瘤主动脉腔内修复术后高流量Ⅰ型内漏4例

目的 探讨血管塞治疗腹主动脉瘤主动脉腔内修复术后高流量Ⅰ型内漏的可行性和安全性.方法 回顾性分析2019年5月至9月收治的腹主动脉瘤主动脉腔内修复术患者临床资料,其中3例腹主动脉瘤术后即刻造影发现Ⅰa型内漏,1例腹主动脉瘤术后3个月复查CT发现Ⅰb型内漏.4例腹主动脉瘤主动脉腔内修复术后高流量Ⅰ型内漏患者均接受血管塞栓...     

采用NBCA经导管动脉栓塞治疗腹主动脉瘤修复术后的Ⅱ型血管内漏

目的：评价α-氰基丙烯酸正丁酯（n-butyl cyanoacrylate，NBCA）经导管动脉栓塞（TAE）治疗腹主动脉瘤血管内修复术后Ⅱ型血管内漏的疗效。方法：对2002～2006年采用NBCA经导管动脉栓塞治疗腹主动脉瘤血管内修复术后Ⅱ型血管内漏的患，进行回顾性分析。到达流入血管栓塞内漏即为技术成功。临床成功则是实现技术成功的同时，要完全栓塞内漏（complete endoleak embolization，CE）而不是部分栓塞内漏（partial endoleakt hrombosis，PE），并且无需球囊扩张达12个月。远期形态学分析应评价流入血管（吻合状／网状）和流出血管（复杂型／简单型）。采用Fisher精确概率法比较成功情况、内漏特点及球囊状况。结果：30例患采用NBCA行TAE。     

腹主动脉瘤血管内修复术前后血流动力学变化的MSCT分析

目的 :模拟、评价和分析肾动脉以下腹主动脉瘤行血管内修复术前后血流压力的变化。方法 :自 1996年 3月～ 2 0 0 1年 5月 ,13例腹主动脉瘤患者行血管内介入治疗。所有病例均行多排螺旋CT检查 ,采用计算机辅助流体动力学分析软件 (CFD) ,对主动脉病变介入治疗前后血流动力学进行     

无创性血管弹性成像对犬腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后的随访观察

正摘要目的评估无创性血管弹性成像在评价犬腹主动脉瘤腔内支架修复术后内漏及血栓形成的能力,并以CT及病理做参照。材料与方法所有模型均经动物管理协会及加拿大动物管理委员会同意。18例狗腹主动脉瘤模型均置入支架。伴Ⅰ型内漏的动脉瘤有4例,Ⅱ型内漏13例,无内漏者1例。在手术当天及术后1周、1个月、3个月、6个月均用     

腹主动脉瘤腔内隔绝术后内漏的治疗

为探讨腹主动脉瘤（AAA）腔内隔绝术（EVGE）后内漏产生的原因和治疗方法,作者总结分析了38例腔内隔绝术并发内漏的诊治体会。38例腔内隔绝术中共4例并发内漏,其中I型内漏2例,Ⅱ型内漏1例,Ⅲ型内漏1例;1例中转传统手术,其余3例在观察中。DSA是术中发现内漏的有效手段,球囊扩张法、支架法、移植物法和栓堵法是治疗内漏的有效方法。     

腹主动脉瘤腔内隔绝术后内漏的治疗①

为探讨腹主动脉瘤(AAA)腔内隔绝术(EVGE)后内漏产生的原因和治疗方法,作者总结分析了38例腔内隔绝术并发内漏的诊治体会.38例腔内隔绝术中共4例并发内漏,其中Ⅰ型内漏2例,Ⅱ型内漏1例,Ⅲ型内漏1例;1例中转传统手术,其余3例在观察中.DSA是术中发现内漏的有效手段,球囊扩张法、支架法、移植物法和栓堵法是治疗内漏的有效方法.     

腹主动脉瘤血管腔内修补术的临床应用价值

腹主动脉瘤血管腔内修补术是一种微创手术，对于老年或高危病人有明显优越性，但在中、长期随访时也发现很多缺陷和问题。对血管腔内修补术治疗腹主动脉瘤的优、缺点及发展前景进行综述。     

主动脉瘤腔内修复术一期治愈Stanford A型主动脉夹层并腹主动脉瘤一例

Stanford A型主动脉夹层是一种灾难性疾病,病死率极高[1]。治疗主要以手术为主,即升主动脉或主动脉弓置换术,但手术创伤大,手术病死率达14%～21.6%[2]。自1991年     

Device migration after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: experience with a talent stent-graft

PURPOSE: Device migration (DM) may cause late failure after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Computed tomography (CT) scans following EVAR were reviewed to establish the frequency of DM and whether it can be predicted. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-five patients underwent EVAR with a Talent stent-graft with suprarenal fixation. CT with a fixed protocol was performed at regular intervals. Patient demographics, risk factors, procedure details, and follow-up events were reviewed. Two observers, blinded to each other, reviewed axial images and mutliplanar reformats of the CT scans. DM was defined as a change of > or = 10 mm in the distance between a reference vessel (celiac axis/superior mesenteric artery) and the proximal device. Follow-up was performed for a minimum of 2 years (mean, 3 years; range, 2-5 years). RESULTS: DM was detected in six of 38 patients (15.8%) by 2 years. There were no new cases of migration in the 19 patients at 3 years but one new case in the six patients at 4 years (16.6%). Mean migration over 2 years was 4.8 mm +/- 4.2 mm. One patient with DM developed a type I endoleak that required reintervention. This patient developed a further endoleak and died following surgery for rupture. Top neck enlargement was the only predictive factor identified, present in 71% of patients with DM (P = .056). CONCLUSION: DM occurred in a small proportion of patients; closer follow-up intervals may be necessary in patients with short/enlarging proximal necks.     

Low-dose multidetector-row CT-angiography of abdominal aortic aneurysm after endovascular repair

Purpose

To investigate the possibility of reducing radiation dose exposure while maintaining image quality using multidetector computed tomography angiography (MDCTA) with high-concentration contrast media in patients undergoing follow-up after endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) to treat abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Materials and methods

In this prospective, single center, intra-individual study, patients underwent two consecutive MDCTA scans 6 months apart, one with a standard acquisition protocol (130 mAs/120 kV) and 120 mL of iomeprol 300, and one using a low dose protocol (100 mAs/80 kV) and 90 mL of iomeprol 400. Images acquired during the arterial phase of contrast enhancement were evaluated both qualitatively and quantitatively for image noise and intraluminal contrast enhancement.

Results

Thirty adult patients were prospectively enrolled. Statistically significantly higher attenuation values were measured in the low-dose acquisition protocol compared to the standard protocol, from the suprarenal abdominal aorta to the common femoral artery (p < 0.0001; all vascular segments). Qualitatively, image quality was judged significantly (p = 0.0002) better with the standard protocol than with the low-dose protocol. However, no significant differences were found between the two protocols in terms of contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) (13.63 ± 6.97 vs. 11.48 ± 8.13; p = 0.1058). An overall dose reduction of up to 74% was observed for the low-dose protocol compared with the standard protocol.

Conclusion

In repeat follow-up examinations of patients undergoing EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm, a low-dose radiation exposure acquisition protocol provides substantially reduced radiation exposure while maintaining a constant CNR and good image quality.     

Complications following endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

There is a growing population of patients who have undergone endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) and thus there is an increasing likelihood that radiologists who are unfamiliar with this technique and its complications will have to report radiological investigations on one of these patients. The purpose of this review is to describe and illustrate the normal and abnormal radiological appearances after EVAR on plain radiography, ultrasound and CT.     

Abdominal aortic aneurysm: contrast-enhanced US for missed endoleaks after endoluminal repair

PURPOSE: To evaluate contrast material-enhanced ultrasonography (US) for depiction of endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (or endovascular aneurysm repair [EVAR]) in patients with aneurysm enlargement and no evidence of endoleak. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From November 1998 to February 2003, 112 patients underwent EVAR. At follow-up, duplex US and biphasic multi-detector row computed tomographic (CT) angiography were performed. In 10 patients (group A), evident aneurysm enlargement was observed, with no evidence of complications, at both CT angiography and duplex US. Group A patients, 10 men (mean age, 69.6 years +/- 10 [standard deviation]), underwent US after intravenous bolus injection of a second-generation contrast agent, with continuous low-mechanical index (0.01-0.04) real-time tissue harmonic imaging. Group B patients, 10 men (mean age, 71.3 years +/- 8.2) with aneurysm shrinkage and no evidence of complications, and group C patients, 10 men (mean age, 73.2 years +/- 6) with CT angiographic evidence of endoleak, underwent contrast-enhanced US. Digital subtraction angiography (DSA) was performed in groups A and C. Endoleak detection and characterization were assessed with imaging modalities used in groups A-C; at contrast-enhanced US, time of detection of endoleak, persistence of sac enhancement, and morphology of enhancement were evaluated. RESULTS: In group A, contrast-enhanced US depicted one type I, six type II, one type III, and two undefined endoleaks that were not detected at CT angiography. All leakages were characterized by slow and delayed echo enhancement detected at longer than 150 seconds after contrast agent administration. DSA results confirmed findings in all patients; percutaneous treatment was performed. In group B, contrast-enhanced US did not show echo enhancement; in group C, results with this modality confirmed findings at CT angiography and DSA. CONCLUSION: Contrast-enhanced US depicts endoleaks after EVAR, particularly when depiction fails with other imaging modalities.     

Use of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in follow-up after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair.

PURPOSE: To investigate the use of contrast-enhanced ultrasound in the detection of endoleak after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eighteen patients underwent follow-up on 20 occasions after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair by arterial-phase contrast-enhanced spiral computed tomography (CT). All patients had unenhanced color Doppler ultrasound and Levovist-enhanced ultrasound on the same day. The ultrasound examinations were reported in a manner that was blind to the CT results. CT was regarded as the gold standard for the purposes of the study. RESULTS: There were three endoleaks shown by CT. Unenhanced ultrasound detected only one endoleak (sensitivity, 33%). Levovist-enhanced ultrasound detected all three endoleaks (sensitivity, 100%). Levovist-enhanced ultrasound indicated an additional six endoleaks that were not confirmed by CT (specificity, 67%; positive predictive value, 33%). In one of these six cases, the aneurysm increased in size, which indicates a likelihood of endoleak. Two of the remaining false-positive results occurred in patients known to have a distal implantation leak at completion angiography. CONCLUSION: In this small group of patients, contrast-enhanced ultrasound appears to be a reliable screening test for endoleak. The false-positive results with enhanced ultrasound may be due to the failure of CT to detect slow flow collateral pathways. Although the number of patients in this study is small, enhanced ultrasound may be more reliable than CT in detecting endoleak.