Objective To compare the advantages and disadvantages between double Perclose ProGlide crossing suture and traditional suture for the closure of 20F or 22F access points so as to provide a basis for selecting appropriate approach to repair the puncture points in endovascular aortic repair. Methods Between June 2007 and May 2011, 103 patients (115 common femoral arteries) underwent endovascular aortic repair using sheaths of 20F or 22F (outer diameter); double Perclose ProGlide crossing suture was performed for closure of puncture sites in 57 cases (64 common femoral arteries) (double Perclose group) and traditional suture in 46 cases (51 common femoral arteries) (traditional group). There was no significant difference in age, gender, or disease duration between 2 groups (P gt; 0.05). Results The operation time, blood loss, and hospitalization days of double Perclose group were significantly better than those of traditional group (P lt; 0.05). Ecchymoma in inguinal region and lymphatic leakage occurred in 5 cases (5 common femoral arteries) and 2 cases (2 common femoral arteries) of double Perclose group respectively, in 2 cases (2 common femoral arteries) and 6 cases (8 common femoral arteries) of traditional group respectively; no significant difference was found in the rate of the early complication between double Perclose group and traditional group (7.8% vs. 15.7%, χ2=1.76, P=0.19). The technique success rate of double Perclose group was 96.9% (62/64), and was 100% (51/51) in traditional group, showing no significant difference (χ2=0.31, P=0.50). All patients were followed up, 2-19 months (mean, 15 months) in double Perclose group and 2-18 months (mean, 14 months) in traditional group. Pseudoaneurysm occurred in the puncture region at 3 months in 1 case (1 common femoral artery) of double Perclose group, and incision and suture therapy was performed; no arteriostenosis or pseudoaneurysm occurred in other cases; and the rate of mid-term complication was 1.6% (1/64) in double Perclose group and was 0 in traditional group, showing no significant difference (P=1.000). Conclusion Double Perclose ProGlide crossing suture has the same effectiveness to traditional surture in repairing the puncture point with 20F or 22F, but it is superior to traditional suture in reducing operation time, blood loss, and hospitalization days.
ObjectiveTo explore the effectiveness of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) for blunt thoracic aortic injury (BTAI) with hostile stent-graft proximal landing zone. MethodsA retrospective analysis was made on the clinical data of 13 patients with BTAI with hostile stent-graft proximal landing zone treated by TEVAR between December 2007 and December 2014. There were 10 males and 3 females with the mean age of 44 years (range, 24-64 years). The imaging examination indicated Stanford type B aortic dissection in 7 cases, pseudoaneurysm in 3 cases, aneurysm in 1 case, and penetrating ulcer in 2 cases. According to the partition method of thoracic aortic lesion by Mitchell, 8 cases underwent stent-graft with left subclavian artery (LSA) coverage, 3 underwent chimney stents for LSA, and 2 for left common carotid artery (LCCA). In 2 cases receiving chimney TEVAR involving LCCA, one underwent steel coils at the proximal segment of LSA to avoid type II endoleak and the other underwent in situ fenestration for endovascular reconstruction of LSA. ResultsAll TEVAR procedures were successfully performed. The mean operation time was 1.8 hours (range, 1-3 hours); the mean intraoperative blood loss was 120 mL (range, 30-200 mL); and the mean hospitalization time was 15 days (range, 7-37 days). No perioperative death and paraplegia occurred. The patients were followed up 3-30 months (mean, 18 months). Type I endoleak occurred in 1 case during operation and spontaneously healed within 6 months. Hematoma at brachial puncture site with median nerve compression symptoms occurred in 1 case at 3 weeks after operation; ultrasound examination showed brachial artery pseudoaneurysm and thrombosis, and satisfactory recovery was obtained after pseudoaneurysmectomy. No obvious chest pain, shortness of breath, left upper limbs weakness, numbness, and dizziness symptoms were observed. Imaging examination revealed that stentgraft and branched stent remained in stable condition. Meanwhile the blood flow was unobstructed. No lesions expanded and ruptured. No new death, bacterial infection, or other serious complications occurred. ConclusionAccording to Mitchell method, individualized plan may be the key to a promising result. More patients and further follow-up need to be included, studied, and observed.
ObjectiveTo evaluate clinical outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR)for the treatment of Stanford type B aortic dissection (AD)and descending aortic aneurysm. MethodsClinical data of 20 patients with Stanford type B AD or descending aortic aneurysm who underwent TEVAR in West China Hospital from March to June 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 19 male and 1 female patients with their age of 41-76 (58.3±10.2)years. Clinical outcomes were analyzed. ResultsAmong the 20 patients, 18 patients were successfully discharged, 1 patient refused further postoperative treatment and was discharged, and 1 patient died postoperatively. Sixteen patients (88.9%)were followed up for over 3 months. In all the patients during follow-up, true lumen diameter recovered within the scope of intravascular stents, and there was thrombosis in false lumen or aneurysm lumen. ConclusionTEVAR provides a new choice with significant advantages for the treatment of Stanford type B AD, especially for the elderly and patients with concomitant serious diseases, so it is worthy of clinical application.
Objective To retrospectively review our experience of correction of type Ⅰa endoleak after thoracic endovascular aortic repair(TEVAR). Methods From August 2009 to May 2016, 29 patients with type Ⅰa endoleak after TEVAR (25 males, 4 females at mean age of 56±10 years (range, 41–86 years) underwent treatment: open surgery in 15 patients (an open surgery group), hybrid aortic arch repair in 6 patients (a hybrid group) and cuff extension in 8 patients(a cuff group). A history of hypertension was noted in 25 patients, diabetes mellitus in 3 patients, coronary artery disease in 3 patients, lung infection in one patient, aortic root aneurysm in one patient and aberrant right subclavian artery in one patient. Results In the open surgery group, no death was observed. Continuous renal replacement therapy and re-intubation was done in one patient and drainage of pericardial effusion in one patient. No death was noted in the hybrid group and persistent type Ⅰa endoleak in one patient. In the cuff group, thrombosis of the left common artery was noted in one patient and bypass of the left axillary artery to the left axillary artery and the left common carotid artery was done. Unfortunately, he died of cerebral infarction and total in-hospital death rate was 3.4% (1/29). Bypass of the left axillary artery to the left axillary artery was done in one patient with left upper limb ischemia. There were 4 (14.2%) deaths during follow-up: 3 deaths in the open surgical group and one death in the cuff group. Endoleak was observed in one patient in the hybrid group and one in the cuff group. Conclusion The corresponding procedure, including open surgery, hybrid aortic arch repair or cuff extension, is scheduled to be done according to the characteristics of type Ⅰa endoleak. Satisfactory outcomes are achieved in patients with typeⅠa endoleak.
ObjectiveTo report a simple and safe method for in situ fenestration of left subclavian artery in thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).MethodsTwenty-eight patients received in situ fenestration of left subclavian artery in TEVAR from June 2018 to May 2019 in our center, including 23 males and 5 females at an average age of 57.7±9.6 years. Among them, 12 patients used adjustable sheath or guiding catheter (a group A) and 16 patients used "J. D"technique (a group B). The clinical efficacy of the two groups was compared.ResultsIn the group A, 1 patient failed to receive fenestration and was transferred to the chimney technique. In the group B, 1 patient due to the traction system shift during operation, was completed by traditional adjustable sheath puncture. The group B had shorter alignment-perforation time and trigger time and less complications. There was no significant difference in endoleak during short-term follow-up between the two groups.ConclusionThe "J. D" technique is simple, safe and easy to obtain materials. It effectively reduces the risk caused by difficult sheath alignment during the in situ fenestration of the left subclavian artery. Although the results of recent follow-up are not significantly different from traditional methods, it still needs to accumulate the cases to observe the possible risks and difficulties.