金属支架和冷冻象鼻假体在主动脉夹层手术中的远期效果

D. Sirota, M. Zhulkov, D. Khvan, A. G. Makaev, A. Fomichev, H. Agaeva, A. Sabetov, B. Kozlov, A. Chernyavskiy
{"title":"金属支架和冷冻象鼻假体在主动脉夹层手术中的远期效果","authors":"D. Sirota, M. Zhulkov, D. Khvan, A. G. Makaev, A. Fomichev, H. Agaeva, A. Sabetov, B. Kozlov, A. Chernyavskiy","doi":"10.21688/1681-3472-2022-2-89","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim. Comparative assessment of long-term results of bare metal stents and frozen elephant trunk prosthesis using in aortic dissection I DeBakey type.Methods. The retrospective comparative evaluation of different surgery results (2001–2017) in 213 patients with DeBakey type I aortic dissection was performed. Patients was divided in to 3 groups: Group 1 — standard treatment (hemiarch or total arch replacement) (n = 121), Group 2 — arch reconstruction with bare metal stent (n = 55), Group 3 — arch reconstruction with frozen elephant trunk prosthesis (n = 37). For groups equation we used propensity score matching analysis (PSM).Results. A pairwise comparison with the formation of three groups equated by the PSM method was performed. Long-term mortality in PSM 1 was 88 [82; 96] % (Group 1) и 89 [79; 100] % — (Group 2) respectively (p = 0.893). Long-term mortality in PSM 2 was 85 [71; 100] % in Group 1 and 94 [84; 100] % — Group 3 respectively (p = 0.342). Long-term mortality in PSM 3 was 88 [77; 100] % in Group 2 и 80 [64; 100] % — Group 3 respectively (p = 0.457). Freedom from aortic and mortality events (surrogate end point) in PSM 1 was 68% and 75% (p>0.999), PSM 2 was 50% and 100% (p = 0.006), PSM 3 was 73% and 89% (p = 0.22).Conclusion. There were no any statistical differences in long-term mortality and in surrogate end point (aortic events and mortality) between groups, but there was a trend to better results in Group 3.","PeriodicalId":19853,"journal":{"name":"Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya","volume":"140 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Long-term results of bare metal stents and frozen elephant trunk prosthesis using in aortic dissection surgery\",\"authors\":\"D. Sirota, M. Zhulkov, D. Khvan, A. G. Makaev, A. Fomichev, H. Agaeva, A. Sabetov, B. Kozlov, A. Chernyavskiy\",\"doi\":\"10.21688/1681-3472-2022-2-89\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Aim. Comparative assessment of long-term results of bare metal stents and frozen elephant trunk prosthesis using in aortic dissection I DeBakey type.Methods. The retrospective comparative evaluation of different surgery results (2001–2017) in 213 patients with DeBakey type I aortic dissection was performed. Patients was divided in to 3 groups: Group 1 — standard treatment (hemiarch or total arch replacement) (n = 121), Group 2 — arch reconstruction with bare metal stent (n = 55), Group 3 — arch reconstruction with frozen elephant trunk prosthesis (n = 37). For groups equation we used propensity score matching analysis (PSM).Results. A pairwise comparison with the formation of three groups equated by the PSM method was performed. Long-term mortality in PSM 1 was 88 [82; 96] % (Group 1) и 89 [79; 100] % — (Group 2) respectively (p = 0.893). Long-term mortality in PSM 2 was 85 [71; 100] % in Group 1 and 94 [84; 100] % — Group 3 respectively (p = 0.342). Long-term mortality in PSM 3 was 88 [77; 100] % in Group 2 и 80 [64; 100] % — Group 3 respectively (p = 0.457). Freedom from aortic and mortality events (surrogate end point) in PSM 1 was 68% and 75% (p>0.999), PSM 2 was 50% and 100% (p = 0.006), PSM 3 was 73% and 89% (p = 0.22).Conclusion. There were no any statistical differences in long-term mortality and in surrogate end point (aortic events and mortality) between groups, but there was a trend to better results in Group 3.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19853,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya\",\"volume\":\"140 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21688/1681-3472-2022-2-89\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21688/1681-3472-2022-2-89","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

的目标。裸金属支架与冷冻象鼻假体在主动脉夹层中的远期疗效比较对213例DeBakey I型主动脉夹层患者2001-2017年不同手术效果进行回顾性比较评价。患者分为3组:第1组-标准治疗(全弓或全弓置换)(n = 121),第2组-裸金属支架重建弓(n = 55),第3组-冷冻象鼻修复弓(n = 37)。对于群体方程,我们使用倾向得分匹配分析(PSM)。两两比较,形成三个组等价的PSM方法进行。PSM 1的长期死亡率为88 [82;96 %(第一组)89 [79;[100] % -(第二组),差异有统计学意义(p = 0.893)。PSM 2的长期死亡率为85 [71];1组100 %,94组84 %;[100] % - 3组(p = 0.342)。PSM 3的长期死亡率为88 [77;2组100 %,80例[64;[100] % - 3组(p = 0.457)。PSM 1组主动脉事件无发生率和死亡事件发生率(替代终点)分别为68%和75% (p>0.999), PSM 2组为50%和100% (p = 0.006), PSM 3组为73%和89% (p = 0.22)。两组之间的长期死亡率和替代终点(主动脉事件和死亡率)没有统计学差异,但第3组有更好的结果趋势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Long-term results of bare metal stents and frozen elephant trunk prosthesis using in aortic dissection surgery
Aim. Comparative assessment of long-term results of bare metal stents and frozen elephant trunk prosthesis using in aortic dissection I DeBakey type.Methods. The retrospective comparative evaluation of different surgery results (2001–2017) in 213 patients with DeBakey type I aortic dissection was performed. Patients was divided in to 3 groups: Group 1 — standard treatment (hemiarch or total arch replacement) (n = 121), Group 2 — arch reconstruction with bare metal stent (n = 55), Group 3 — arch reconstruction with frozen elephant trunk prosthesis (n = 37). For groups equation we used propensity score matching analysis (PSM).Results. A pairwise comparison with the formation of three groups equated by the PSM method was performed. Long-term mortality in PSM 1 was 88 [82; 96] % (Group 1) и 89 [79; 100] % — (Group 2) respectively (p = 0.893). Long-term mortality in PSM 2 was 85 [71; 100] % in Group 1 and 94 [84; 100] % — Group 3 respectively (p = 0.342). Long-term mortality in PSM 3 was 88 [77; 100] % in Group 2 и 80 [64; 100] % — Group 3 respectively (p = 0.457). Freedom from aortic and mortality events (surrogate end point) in PSM 1 was 68% and 75% (p>0.999), PSM 2 was 50% and 100% (p = 0.006), PSM 3 was 73% and 89% (p = 0.22).Conclusion. There were no any statistical differences in long-term mortality and in surrogate end point (aortic events and mortality) between groups, but there was a trend to better results in Group 3.
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
Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya
Patologiya krovoobrashcheniya i kardiokhirurgiya Medicine-Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
42
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Frequency and amplitude structure of ventricular fibrillation of canine heart during ischemia and reperfusion: an experimental study Remote magnetic-guided navigation versus manual radiofrequency ablation approach in the interventional treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation and enlarged left atrium: propensity-score matching assessment Nitric oxide and mitochondria injuries in kidney tissue upon a simulation of cardiopulmonary bypass and circulatory arrest: an experimental study Trial sequential analysis in anesthesiology and intensive care: a systematic review To 110th anniversary of cardiac surgeon and researcher Igor N. Meshalkin
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1