INCRAFT覆膜支架腔内修复腹主动脉瘤的单中心应用经验

目的 探讨INCRAFT覆膜支架腔内治疗腹主动脉瘤的临床效果.方法 回顾性分析上海交通大学医学院附属仁济医院2018年1月至2020年10月应用INCRAFT覆膜支架腔内治疗的51例腹主动脉瘤患者临床资料,患者根据入路直径分为入路狭窄组(30例)和入路正常组(21例),比较两组术后内漏和再干预情况.结果 技术成功率10...     

腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术中特殊远端锚定区的处理经验

目的探讨腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术中特殊远端锚定区的处理方法以及并发症。方法自1997年5月至2006年12月在150例包括髂总动脉瘤、髂内动脉瘤、髂动脉狭窄、严重成角等特殊远端锚定区的腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术中,根据情况选择不同的处理方式,术后观察内漏、缺血并发症、髂动脉瘤形态以及旁路血管的通畅性。结果围手术期死亡率4％（6／150）,总死亡率42．5％（51／120）。6例原发性远端I型内漏,5例自愈,1例转化为持续性内漏;3例髂内动脉返流引起的Ⅱ型内漏随访中均自愈。7例单臂支架型血管,股股旁路手术2年通畅率为86％;4例髂内动脉旁路手术2年通畅率为100％。11例栓塞单侧髂内动脉出现臀肌缺血症状,平均症状消失时间42 d（5-90 d）。结论结合传统外科技术以及腔内技术,并选择合适的产品处理腹主动脉瘤特殊远端锚定区可取得满意疗效。中远期结果仍需观察。     

腔内旁路移植术治疗腹主动脉瘤：附9例报告

探讨腔内旁路移植术治疗腹主动脉瘤研究其技术操作及临床应用。方法对９例腹主动脉现人经腹股沟部切口暴露股动脉,经股动脉小切口插入人造血管复合体,动脉造影表明达到腔内完全隔绝。结果８例成功,术后近期效果良好,恢复正常生活。     

腔内修复术治疗感染性主动脉瘤

目的 探讨腔内修复术治疗感染性主动脉瘤(IAA)的方法及其疗效.方法 回顾性分析2006年5月～2007年7月经腔内修复治疗7例IAA患者的临床资料.结果 7例均获得技术成功,术后行数字减影血管造影显示动脉瘤消失,无内漏,术后无并发症.随访8～22个月,瘤体无增大,人工血管支架通畅无移位、无内瘘及感染发生.结论 腔内修复术治疗IAA具有安全、微创等特点,近期疗效较好,远期效果尚需进一步随访.     

腔内隔绝术、联合血管旁路移植术治疗主动脉夹层动脉瘤

目的总结腔内隔绝术、联合血管旁路移植术治疗主动脉夹层动脉瘤的临床经验，以提高其治疗效果。方法自2002年9月至2006年12月，共完成腔内隔绝术或联合血管旁路移植术8例。对4例近端支架固定区〈15mm的患者于腔内隔绝术前行椎动脉-左颈总动脉端侧吻合术1例，应用8mm人工血管行左锁骨下动脉-左颈总动脉旁路移植术2例，左锁骨下动脉-左颈总动脉-右颈总动脉旁路移植术1例，手术后8～10d，行腔内隔绝手术。4例破口距左锁骨下动脉开口〉15mm的患者直接行腔内隔绝手术。结果行血管旁路移植的4例患者术后恢复良好，术后8～10d行腔内隔绝手术，8例患者腔内隔绝手术操作顺利，隔绝术后3～8d出院，无住院死亡。出院前增强CT扫描无内漏发生。随访4例，随访时间2～48个月，其中1例患者长期胸痛，经对症处理胸痛缓解；4例患者夹层内血栓机化良好，无内漏出现或夹层剥离的现象发生。结论腔内隔绝手术是一种创伤小、恢复快、疗效好的治疗方法，腔内隔绝术联合血管旁路移植术治疗主动脉夹层动脉瘤，扩大了腔内隔绝术的手术适应证。     

“烟囱”技术在Ⅲ型夹层动脉瘤和腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术中的应用

目的 总结“烟囱”技术在主动脉瘤腔内修复术中的应用体会和一期效果.方法 在30例主动脉瘤腔内修复术中使用“烟囱”技术增加近端覆膜支架锚定区,其中25例DebakeyⅢ型夹层动脉瘤使用“烟囱”支架保留左锁骨下动脉(23例)或左颈总动脉(3例),肾下腹主动脉瘤使用“烟囱”支架保留肾动脉(5例).结果 所有病例均顺利完成操作,放置“烟囱”支架的分支动脉术中造影均通畅.其中2例夹层动脉瘤(8％)和1例腹主动脉瘤残留(20％)少量Ⅰ型内漏,1例夹层动脉瘤左锁骨下动脉“烟囱”病例术后5d猝死,考虑为远侧破口所致夹层动脉瘤破裂.其余22例夹层动脉瘤和4例肾下腹主动脉瘤均无内漏.随访28例(90.3％),随访1～19个月,平均(6±5)个月.随访期超声或CTA示“烟囱”血管血流均通畅.1例腹主动脉瘤仍有内漏,2例夹层内漏病例随访中(尚未行CTA),其他病例瘤腔血栓形成.结论 “烟囱”技术能够有效的延长覆膜支架在主动脉瘤腔内修复术中的近端锚定区并保持重要分支动脉通畅.     

自制国产化支架-移植物腔内治疗腹主动脉瘤的实验研究

目的 探讨自制国产化支架、移植物在治疗犬腹主动脉瘤中的作用。方法 以国产镍钛合金丝纺织成网状管型支架,外套以国产真丝涤纶交织人造血管,装入导鞘制成支架-移植物系统;用胰蛋白酶灌注犬肾下腹主动脉段形成动脉瘤模型;用血管腔内技术将支架-移植物置入腹主动脉内,隔绝血流分别于第1周、1个月、3个月和6个月末观察通畅度及新生内膜生长。结果 20条模型犬接受手术,成功19条,支架置入后能充分展开并恢复形状,1个月末,支架内表面90%被新生内膜覆盖,3个月末几达100%,6个月末,79%的支架保持通畅,无移位、内漏等并发症。结论 自制国产化支架、移植物有良好的生物相容性和较高的通畅率,可用于腹主动脉瘤的治疗。     

腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术单中心经验

目的 分析腔内治疗腹主动脉瘤的各项几何参数的分布规律,并探讨其远期疗效及术后常见并发症的防治方法.方法 回顾性分析入选2003年1月至2010年12月完成的344例肾下腹主动脉瘤腔内修复病例资料,对原始数据及随访结果做统计学分析及比较.结果 腹主动脉瘤近端瘤颈直径(23±3)mm,近端瘤颈长度(26±12) nun,与主动脉夹角(25±28)度.即刻技术成功率99.7％(343/344),随访率81.8％ (279/341),随访时间3～84个月,平均(33 ±15)个月.随访期间死亡率1.1％ (3/279),再次手术率10.4％ (29/279),总并发症发生率12.9％(36/279),包括内漏5.7％(16/279),支架移位1.1％(3/279),动脉瘤增大或破裂5.4％(15/279)等.统计结果显示近端瘤颈＞60度更易出现Ⅰ型内漏(P=0.010).结论 术前评估是腹主动脉瘤腔内治疗取得成功的首要因素.内漏是术后远期并发症的主要类型,且为再次手术的重要原因,影响患者的远期疗效,因此术后终身随访极为重要.     

带膜支架腔内修复联合解剖外旁路术治疗Stanford A型主动脉夹层

目的探讨带膜支架腔内修复联合解剖外旁路术对Stanford A型主动脉夹层的临床效果。方法通过建立各种解剖外旁路来重建无名动脉、左颈总动脉或左锁骨下动脉以延长锚定区,然后一期或分期行带膜支架主动脉腔内修复术;可采取颈动脉入路或股动脉入路来完成主动脉腔内修复术。结果全组34例中升主动脉夹层8例,主动脉弓部夹层26例,除1例术中死亡外,其余33例均成功接受带膜支架主动脉腔内修复术。30d病死率为8．8％（3／34）,内漏发生率为11．8％（4／34）,脑梗死发生率为5．9％（2／34）。随访6—70个月,平均24．5个月,2例失访。结果显示假腔内完全血栓形成16例,部分血栓形成13例。结论带膜支架腔内修复联合解剖外旁路术为Stanford A型主动脉夹层提供了一种新的治疗方法,具有微创、安全性较高,并发症较少的特点,但应注意适应证的选择。     

合并双髂总动脉瘤的腹主动脉瘤的腔内治疗

目的总结腹主动脉瘤合并双髂总动脉瘤的腔内治疗经验。方法2009年1月～2012年3月,126例腹主动脉瘤接受腔内修复术（endovascularaneurysmrepair,EVAR）,其中33例合并双髂总动脉瘤（直径〉18mm）。27例双侧髂总动脉直径〉18-〈25mm,选择合适口径的髂腿移植物完成传统EVAR;6例因-侧髂总动脉直径≥25mm,选择该侧髂外动脉作为锚定区完成EVAR,并行髂内动脉栓塞术。结果所有腔内技术均获得成功,手术时间（115±36）min,出血量（173±65）m1。术中发现即刻内漏7例（21．2％）：I型内漏3例（近端1例,远端2例,均经球囊扩张后内漏消失）;11I型内漏1例,经扩张后内漏消失;II型内漏2例,Ⅳ型内漏1例,经随访瘤体直径未增大,未予处理。33例术后随访6～39个月,平均15．3月,无动脉瘤破裂,无远端迟发型I型内漏发生,髂动脉直径无明显扩张。结论对于部分合并双髂动脉瘤的腹主动脉瘤患者,根据髂总动脉直径选择合适的腔内治疗方法可以达到理想的治疗效果,近期效果满意。     

Mid-term Results of Endovascular Versus Open Repair for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in Patients Anatomically Suitable for Endovascular Repair

OBJECTIVES: to prospectively evaluate the mid-term results of endovascular and open repair in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) anatomically suitable for endovascular repair. MATERIAL AND METHODS: between January 1995 and March 1999, among 438 patients treated for AAA, 180 (41%) were suitable for endovascular repair as assessed by computed tomography (CT) scan and angiogram. Seventy-three were treated by various commercially available endovascular grafts (EV) and 107 by open repair (OR). Postoperatively, patients were followed every 6 months with clinical examination, duplex scan and in the EV group, CT scans. Patients> demographic data, intra- and postoperative events were recorded prospectively in a computerised database and compared for each group. RESULTS: median age, sex ratio, preoperative risk factors and aneurysm diameters were not statistically different between the two groups. Respectively in the EV and OR, the average duration of operation was 149+/-73 mn, and 133+/-44 mn (NS), blood loss 96 ml+/-28 and 985 ml+/-113 (p<0.01), duration of hospitalisation 7 days+/-2 and 13 days+/-7 (p<0.01). The one-month mortality was 2.7% (n=2) for EV and 2.8% (n=3) for OR. The rate of cardiac and pulmonary complications was significantly higher in the OR group (6. 9% versus 19.6%, p=0.017). At a mean follow-up of 1 year, the cumulative survival rate was 82.2%+/-7.5 for EV and 96%+/-2.12 for OR (log-rank test p=0.043). No patients died of rupture, but three patients had to be converted to open surgery. Twenty-two percent (n=16) patients in the EV and 7.5% (n=8) in the OR were submitted to a subsequent minor or major reintervention (p=0.007). At 1 year, the cumulative rates free of any reintervention were respectively 78. 8%+/-6.7% and 92.9%+/-2.7% (p=0.001). In the EV there were 17 early endoleaks (23.3%). At the end of patient's follow-up seven endoleaks (9.6%) persisted. The primary success rate defined by the absence of endoleak and the absence of reintervention was 54 (74%) with EV and 101 (94%) with OR (p=0.001). CONCLUSION: EV is a promising technique. However, with current devices and indications the immediate benefits, mainly less blood loss, fewer cardiac and pulmonary complications, and shorter hospitalisation time, are outweighed by a higher rate of reinterventions to treat endoleak, or to maintain patency of the graft.     

Length Measurements of the Aorta After Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair

BACKGROUND: successful endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) generally leads to a decrease in aneurysm size. Theoretically, this may lead to foreshortening of the excluded segment. If so, vertically rigid endografts may dislocate over time and cover renal or hypogastric arteries. AIM: to assess length changes of the infrarenal aorta after endovascular AAA exclusion. PATIENTS AND METHODS: forty-four consecutive patients were scheduled for the EndoVascular Technologies endograft, a vertically non-rigid prosthesis which would potentially accommodate longitudinal changes. Twenty-four patients had completed at least 6 months of follow-up. In 18/24 patients a decrease in size was established by aneurysm volume measurements at 6 months' follow-up. Helical computer tomography (CT) angiograms were processed on a workstation. Aortic lengths were measured along the central lumen line from the lower renal artery orifice to the native aortic bifurcation. The computer tomography angiogram (CTA) reconstruction thickness of 2 mm yields at least a 4-mm error for each length measurement. RESULTS: in the shrinking aneurysm group, the median length change was 0 mm (range -9 mm to +4 mm) at 6 months' follow-up (n =18) and also 0 mm (range -7 mm to +4 mm) at 12 months' follow-up ( n =10). In 16/18 patients, length changes remained within the measurement error range of 4 mm. CONCLUSION: in this group of shrinking aneurysms after endovascular AAA repair, foreshortening of the excluded aortic segment appears not to be a clinically significant problem.     

腔内修复术治疗破裂型腹主动脉瘤的效果评价

目的分析破裂型腹主动脉瘤(ruptured abdominal aneurysm,r AAA)行腔内修复术(endovascular aortic aneurysm repair,EVAR)与开放手术早期结果,评价EVAR治疗的效果。方法回顾性收集我院2004年1月~2014年1月收治的48例r AAA患者临床资料,根据其手术与否、手术方式的不同分为术前死亡组(n=20)、EVAR组(n=14)和开放手术组(n=14),三组性别、年龄等一般资料比较无统计学差异(P0.05),EVAR组和开放手术组在瘤体直径、收缩压、舒张压方面比较差异均无统计学意义(P0.05)。结果 EVAR组入院至检查时间为(1.2±0.8)h,与开放手术组(7.5±7.1)h比较差异有统计学意义(P=0.006);EVAR组检查至手术时间为(1.8±1.3)h,与开放手术组(16.8±17.7)h比较差异有统计学意义(P=0.007)。死亡组入院至死亡时间与EVAR组比较差异有统计学意义(P0.009)。EVAR组手术时间为(2.3±0.7)h,与开放手术组(5.6±2.0)h比较差异有统计学意义(P0.001);EVAR组的术中出血量为(142.9±279.3)ml,与开放手术组的(3 528.6±3 252.3)ml间差异有统计学意义(P0.001);EVAR组的输血量为(985.7±2 148.7)ml,与开放手术组的(3 100.0±2 285.1)ml间差异有统计学意义(P=0.018);EVAR组的住院时间为(7.1±2.7)d,与开放手术组的(13.7±4.9)d间差异有统计学意义(P0.001);EVAR组的总费用为(20.9±5.8)万元,与开放手术组的(10.1±11.5)万元间差异有统计学意义(P=0.005)。两组并发症率比较,差异无统计学意义(P=0.430)。结论缩短院内抢救准备时间,是r AAA成功救治的要点。EVAR应作为r AAA的一线治疗方案。     

Stanford B型主动脉夹层的腔内治疗（附134例报告）

目的探讨腔内胸主动脉修复术治疗Stanford B型夹层的临床价值。方法对我院2006年1月～2011年8月134例行腔内胸主动脉修复术的B型主动脉夹层患者的治疗情况进行回顾性分析。男93例,女41例。年龄32～82岁,（56.4±8.3）岁。全麻,数字减影动脉造影（digital subtraction angiography,DSA）监控下,切开股动脉,将带膜支架置于胸主动脉内膜破口处封堵破口。结合术前影像学、术后门诊影像学随访资料,观察夹层病变演化过程,观察有无内漏、移位和人工血管内支架塌陷等术后并发症。结果 134例原发胸主动脉夹层破口均完全封闭,真腔血流恢复,原受损脏器功能恢复正常。释放支架165枚。围手术期死亡2例,随访死亡1例。90例获得随访,随访时间3～63个月,（25.6±8.4）月,主动脉CT血管成像（CT angiography,CTA）复查显示无内漏、移位等并发症。12例支架尾部破口,再次行腔内隔绝,1例术后逆行性A型夹层。结论腔内胸主动脉修复术治疗Stanford B型夹层具有技术可靠、安全性高、术后恢复快等优点,临床应用前景良好。     

Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Measurements for Endovascular Repair: Intra- and Interobserver Variability of CT Measurements

OBJECTIVES: to evaluate the intra- and interobserver variability in measurements of the aorta and iliac arteries in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) considered for endovascular repair using computed tomography angiography (CTA). METHODS: the diameter of the neck, aneurysm, right and left iliac artery were measured by 5 observers in 10 consecutive patients. Measurements were performed on hard copy using a ruler and on a workstation using an electronic caliper. RESULTS: the intraobserver variability showed a decrease going from hard copy to workstation in the standard deviation of the differences of the paired observations for the neck from 3.54 mm to 1.18 mm; for the aorta from 4.16 to 1.72 mm; for the right iliac from 1.87 to 1.01 mm; for the left iliac from 2.07 to 0.87 mm. The interobserver variability showed a similar decrease for the neck in all ten pairs of observers; for the aorta in two, for the right iliac and left iliac in five. However, the difference between observers regularly exceeded 2 mm. CONCLUSION: the use of a workstation and electronic calipers results in lower intra- and interobserver variability. However, the results still show a clinically relevant difference between the observers. Therefore, it is necessary to develop an automatic observer-independent measurement technique.