Bergin Gjosha, Gert Jan Boer, Bram Fioole, M G Buimer, Jorg L de Bruin, Arnela Suman, Lijckle van der Laan
{"title":"根据腹主动脉瘤破裂患者移植特异性指导评估血管内动脉瘤修复的适用性。","authors":"Bergin Gjosha, Gert Jan Boer, Bram Fioole, M G Buimer, Jorg L de Bruin, Arnela Suman, Lijckle van der Laan","doi":"10.1177/15266028231169180","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of the study is to ascertain endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) suitability in relation to stent-graft-specific instructions for use (IFU) in patients with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Using the preoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA), the aortic morphology of patients undergoing surgical repair of a RAAA in 2 Dutch hospitals between January 2014 and December 2019 was retrospectively assessed. Three-dimensional and central luminal line reconstructions were used. Anatomical suitability was defined according to the IFU of the stent graft system used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 128 included patients, 112 (88%) were men and the mean age was 74.1 (SD=7.6) years. Anatomy within IFU for EVAR was present in 31 patients (24%). Overall, 94 patients (73%) were treated with open surgical repair (OSR) and 34 patients (27%) were treated with EVAR. Anatomy within IFU was present in 15 OSR patients (16%) and 16 EVAR patients (47%). In patients with anatomy outside of IFU, 90% (87/97) had unsuitable neck anatomy and 64% (62/97) had insufficient neck length. An unsuitable distal iliac landing zone was observed in 35 patients. Perioperative mortality was 27% (34/128), with no difference between OSR and EVAR (25/94 vs 9/34; p=0.989).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most RAAA patients in this series did not have aortic anatomy within IFU for EVAR, mainly due to insufficient neck length. However, whether anatomy outside of IFU equates to unsuitability for EVAR in an emergency setting remains a matter of debate and warrants further research.</p><p><strong>Clinical impact: </strong>The treatment of a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm can consist of endovascular repair or open repair. Retrospective anatomical assessment shows that most patients do not have anatomy inside the instructions for use for endovascular aneurysm repair, mainly due to insufficient neck length. Whether anatomy outside the instructions for use equates unsuitability for endovascular aneurysm repair remains a matter of debate.</p>","PeriodicalId":50210,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"100-109"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Suitability According to Graft-Specific Instructions for Use in Patients With a Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.\",\"authors\":\"Bergin Gjosha, Gert Jan Boer, Bram Fioole, M G Buimer, Jorg L de Bruin, Arnela Suman, Lijckle van der Laan\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15266028231169180\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of the study is to ascertain endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) suitability in relation to stent-graft-specific instructions for use (IFU) in patients with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA).</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Using the preoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA), the aortic morphology of patients undergoing surgical repair of a RAAA in 2 Dutch hospitals between January 2014 and December 2019 was retrospectively assessed. Three-dimensional and central luminal line reconstructions were used. Anatomical suitability was defined according to the IFU of the stent graft system used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 128 included patients, 112 (88%) were men and the mean age was 74.1 (SD=7.6) years. Anatomy within IFU for EVAR was present in 31 patients (24%). Overall, 94 patients (73%) were treated with open surgical repair (OSR) and 34 patients (27%) were treated with EVAR. Anatomy within IFU was present in 15 OSR patients (16%) and 16 EVAR patients (47%). In patients with anatomy outside of IFU, 90% (87/97) had unsuitable neck anatomy and 64% (62/97) had insufficient neck length. An unsuitable distal iliac landing zone was observed in 35 patients. Perioperative mortality was 27% (34/128), with no difference between OSR and EVAR (25/94 vs 9/34; p=0.989).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Most RAAA patients in this series did not have aortic anatomy within IFU for EVAR, mainly due to insufficient neck length. However, whether anatomy outside of IFU equates to unsuitability for EVAR in an emergency setting remains a matter of debate and warrants further research.</p><p><strong>Clinical impact: </strong>The treatment of a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm can consist of endovascular repair or open repair. Retrospective anatomical assessment shows that most patients do not have anatomy inside the instructions for use for endovascular aneurysm repair, mainly due to insufficient neck length. Whether anatomy outside the instructions for use equates unsuitability for endovascular aneurysm repair remains a matter of debate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50210,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Endovascular Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"100-109\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Endovascular Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15266028231169180\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/4/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15266028231169180","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:本研究的目的是确定血管内动脉瘤修复(EVAR)在腹主动脉瘤破裂(RAAA)患者中与支架移植特异性使用指南(IFU)相关的适用性。材料和方法:采用术前计算机断层血管造影(CTA),回顾性评估2014年1月至2019年12月在荷兰2家医院接受RAAA手术修复的患者的主动脉形态。采用三维和中央腔线重建。根据所使用支架移植系统的IFU定义解剖适宜性。结果:纳入的128例患者中,男性112例(88%),平均年龄74.1岁(SD=7.6)。31例(24%)患者在IFU内进行EVAR解剖。总体而言,94例(73%)患者接受了开放式手术修复(OSR)治疗,34例(27%)患者接受了EVAR治疗。15例OSR患者(16%)和16例EVAR患者(47%)存在IFU内解剖。在IFU以外解剖结构的患者中,90%(87/97)的颈部解剖不合适,64%(62/97)的颈部长度不足。35例患者髂远端着陆点不合适。围手术期死亡率为27% (34/128),OSR和EVAR之间无差异(25/94 vs 9/34;p = 0.989)。结论:本系列大多数RAAA患者在IFU内未进行EVAR的主动脉解剖,主要原因是颈长不足。然而,在紧急情况下,IFU以外的解剖结构是否等同于不适合进行EVAR仍然存在争议,需要进一步研究。临床影响:腹主动脉瘤破裂的治疗包括血管内修复或切开修复。回顾性解剖评估显示,大多数患者没有血管内动脉瘤修复使用说明书内的解剖资料,主要原因是颈部长度不够。使用说明书以外的解剖结构是否等同于不适合血管内动脉瘤修复仍然是一个有争议的问题。
Assessing Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Suitability According to Graft-Specific Instructions for Use in Patients With a Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.
Purpose: The purpose of the study is to ascertain endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) suitability in relation to stent-graft-specific instructions for use (IFU) in patients with a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (RAAA).
Materials and methods: Using the preoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA), the aortic morphology of patients undergoing surgical repair of a RAAA in 2 Dutch hospitals between January 2014 and December 2019 was retrospectively assessed. Three-dimensional and central luminal line reconstructions were used. Anatomical suitability was defined according to the IFU of the stent graft system used.
Results: Of 128 included patients, 112 (88%) were men and the mean age was 74.1 (SD=7.6) years. Anatomy within IFU for EVAR was present in 31 patients (24%). Overall, 94 patients (73%) were treated with open surgical repair (OSR) and 34 patients (27%) were treated with EVAR. Anatomy within IFU was present in 15 OSR patients (16%) and 16 EVAR patients (47%). In patients with anatomy outside of IFU, 90% (87/97) had unsuitable neck anatomy and 64% (62/97) had insufficient neck length. An unsuitable distal iliac landing zone was observed in 35 patients. Perioperative mortality was 27% (34/128), with no difference between OSR and EVAR (25/94 vs 9/34; p=0.989).
Conclusion: Most RAAA patients in this series did not have aortic anatomy within IFU for EVAR, mainly due to insufficient neck length. However, whether anatomy outside of IFU equates to unsuitability for EVAR in an emergency setting remains a matter of debate and warrants further research.
Clinical impact: The treatment of a ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm can consist of endovascular repair or open repair. Retrospective anatomical assessment shows that most patients do not have anatomy inside the instructions for use for endovascular aneurysm repair, mainly due to insufficient neck length. Whether anatomy outside the instructions for use equates unsuitability for endovascular aneurysm repair remains a matter of debate.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Endovascular Therapy (formerly the Journal of Endovascular Surgery) was established in 1994 as a forum for all physicians, scientists, and allied healthcare professionals who are engaged or interested in peripheral endovascular techniques and technology. An official publication of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists (ISEVS), the Journal of Endovascular Therapy publishes peer-reviewed articles of interest to clinicians and researchers in the field of peripheral endovascular interventions.