性别对血管内主动脉瘤修补术的影响:全国多中心登记的结果。

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2022-11-20 DOI:10.1177/15266028221137498
Giacomo Isernia, Gioele Simonte, Enrico Gallitto, Luca Bertoglio, Aaron Fargion, Germano Melissano, Roberto Chiesa, Massimo Lenti, Carlo Pratesi, Gianluca Faggioli, Mauro Gargiulo
{"title":"性别对血管内主动脉瘤修补术的影响:全国多中心登记的结果。","authors":"Giacomo Isernia, Gioele Simonte, Enrico Gallitto, Luca Bertoglio, Aaron Fargion, Germano Melissano, Roberto Chiesa, Massimo Lenti, Carlo Pratesi, Gianluca Faggioli, Mauro Gargiulo","doi":"10.1177/15266028221137498","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Women are generally underrepresented in trials focusing on aortic aneurysm. Nevertheless, sex-related differences have recently emerged from several studies and registries. The aim of this research was to assess whether sex-related anatomical disparities existed in fenestrated and branched aortic repair candidates and whether these discrepancies could influence endovascular repair outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from all consecutive patients treated during the 2008-2019 period within the Italian Multicenter fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR) Registry were included in the present study. Propensity matching was performed using a logistic regression model adjusted for demographic data and comorbidities to obtain comparable male and female samples. The selection model led to a final study population of 176 patients (88 women and 88 men) among the total initial cohort of 596. Study endpoints were technical and clinical success, overall survival, aneurysm-related death, and reintervention rates evaluated at 30 days and during follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-eight patients (15.9%) received urgent/emergent repair. In most of the cases (71.6%), women received treatment for extensive thoracoabdominal pathology (Crawford type I, II, or III aneurysm rather than type IV or juxta-pararenal) versus 46.6% of men (p=0.001). Female patients presented with more challenging iliac accesses with at least one side considered hostile in 27.3% of the cases (vs 13.6% in male patients, p=0.039). Finally, women had significantly smaller visceral vessels. Women had significantly worse operative outcomes, with an 86.2% technical success rate versus 96.6% in the male population (p=0.016). No differences were recorded in terms of 30-day reinterventions between men and women. The 5-year estimate of freedom from late reintervention, according to Kaplan-Meier analysis, was 85.6% in men versus 81.6% in women (p=ns). No aneurysm-related death was recorded during follow-up (median observational time, 23 months [interquartile range, 7-45 months]).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Women presented a significantly higher incidence of thoracoabdominal aneurysms, smaller visceral vessels, and more complex iliofemoral accesses, resulting in a significantly lower technical success after F/BEVAR. Further studies assessing sex-related differences are needed to properly determine the impact on outcomes and stratify procedural risks.</p><p><strong>Clinical impact: </strong>Women are generally underrepresented in trials focusing on aortic aneurysms. Aiming to assess whether sex may affect outcomes after a complex endovascular aortic repair, a propensity score selection was applied to a total population of 596 patients receiving F/BEVAR aortic repair with the Cook platform, matching each treated female patient with a corresponding male patient. Women presented more frequently a thoracoabdominal aneurysm extent, smaller visceral vessels, and complex iliofemoral accesses, resulting in significantly worse operative outcomes, with an 86.2% technical success versus 96.6% (p=0.016). No differences were recorded in terms of short-term and mid-term reinterventions. According to these results, careful and critical assessment should be posed in case of female patients receiving complex aortic repair, especially regarding preoperative anatomical evaluation and clinical selection with appropriate surgical risk stratification.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sex Influence on Fenestrated and Branched Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair: Outcomes From a National Multicenter Registry.\",\"authors\":\"Giacomo Isernia, Gioele Simonte, Enrico Gallitto, Luca Bertoglio, Aaron Fargion, Germano Melissano, Roberto Chiesa, Massimo Lenti, Carlo Pratesi, Gianluca Faggioli, Mauro Gargiulo\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15266028221137498\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Women are generally underrepresented in trials focusing on aortic aneurysm. Nevertheless, sex-related differences have recently emerged from several studies and registries. The aim of this research was to assess whether sex-related anatomical disparities existed in fenestrated and branched aortic repair candidates and whether these discrepancies could influence endovascular repair outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Data from all consecutive patients treated during the 2008-2019 period within the Italian Multicenter fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR) Registry were included in the present study. Propensity matching was performed using a logistic regression model adjusted for demographic data and comorbidities to obtain comparable male and female samples. The selection model led to a final study population of 176 patients (88 women and 88 men) among the total initial cohort of 596. Study endpoints were technical and clinical success, overall survival, aneurysm-related death, and reintervention rates evaluated at 30 days and during follow-up.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-eight patients (15.9%) received urgent/emergent repair. In most of the cases (71.6%), women received treatment for extensive thoracoabdominal pathology (Crawford type I, II, or III aneurysm rather than type IV or juxta-pararenal) versus 46.6% of men (p=0.001). Female patients presented with more challenging iliac accesses with at least one side considered hostile in 27.3% of the cases (vs 13.6% in male patients, p=0.039). Finally, women had significantly smaller visceral vessels. Women had significantly worse operative outcomes, with an 86.2% technical success rate versus 96.6% in the male population (p=0.016). No differences were recorded in terms of 30-day reinterventions between men and women. The 5-year estimate of freedom from late reintervention, according to Kaplan-Meier analysis, was 85.6% in men versus 81.6% in women (p=ns). No aneurysm-related death was recorded during follow-up (median observational time, 23 months [interquartile range, 7-45 months]).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Women presented a significantly higher incidence of thoracoabdominal aneurysms, smaller visceral vessels, and more complex iliofemoral accesses, resulting in a significantly lower technical success after F/BEVAR. Further studies assessing sex-related differences are needed to properly determine the impact on outcomes and stratify procedural risks.</p><p><strong>Clinical impact: </strong>Women are generally underrepresented in trials focusing on aortic aneurysms. Aiming to assess whether sex may affect outcomes after a complex endovascular aortic repair, a propensity score selection was applied to a total population of 596 patients receiving F/BEVAR aortic repair with the Cook platform, matching each treated female patient with a corresponding male patient. Women presented more frequently a thoracoabdominal aneurysm extent, smaller visceral vessels, and complex iliofemoral accesses, resulting in significantly worse operative outcomes, with an 86.2% technical success versus 96.6% (p=0.016). No differences were recorded in terms of short-term and mid-term reinterventions. According to these results, careful and critical assessment should be posed in case of female patients receiving complex aortic repair, especially regarding preoperative anatomical evaluation and clinical selection with appropriate surgical risk stratification.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15266028221137498\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/11/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15266028221137498","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/11/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

介绍:在以主动脉瘤为研究对象的试验中,女性的比例普遍偏低。然而,最近的一些研究和登记中出现了与性别相关的差异。这项研究的目的是评估在主动脉瓣修复术和主动脉分支修复术的候选者中是否存在与性别相关的解剖学差异,以及这些差异是否会影响血管内修复术的结果:本研究纳入了意大利多中心主动脉瓣折叠或分支修复(F/BEVAR)登记处在 2008-2019 年期间治疗的所有连续患者的数据。采用逻辑回归模型对人口统计学数据和合并症进行调整后,进行倾向匹配,以获得具有可比性的男性和女性样本。通过选择模型,在最初的596名患者中,最终确定了176名患者(88名女性和88名男性)为研究对象。研究终点为技术和临床成功率、总存活率、动脉瘤相关死亡以及30天和随访期间的再介入率:28名患者(15.9%)接受了紧急/急诊修复。在大多数病例中(71.6%),女性接受治疗的原因是广泛的胸腹病变(克劳福德 I、II 或 III 型动脉瘤,而非 IV 型或并副动脉瘤),而男性接受治疗的比例为 46.6%(P=0.001)。女性患者的髂骨入路更具挑战性,27.3%的病例至少有一侧被认为是敌对的(男性患者为 13.6%,P=0.039)。最后,女性的内脏血管明显更小。女性的手术效果明显较差,技术成功率为86.2%,而男性为96.6%(P=0.016)。男性和女性在 30 天内再次进行手术方面没有差异。根据 Kaplan-Meier 分析,5 年内不再进行晚期再介入治疗的男性比例为 85.6%,而女性为 81.6%(P=ns)。随访期间没有记录到与动脉瘤相关的死亡病例(中位数观察时间为23个月[四分位间范围为7-45个月]):结论:女性胸腹动脉瘤发病率明显更高,内脏血管更小,髂股动脉入路更复杂,导致 F/BEVAR 术后技术成功率明显降低。需要进一步研究评估与性别相关的差异,以正确确定对预后的影响并对手术风险进行分层:临床影响:在以主动脉瘤为重点的试验中,女性的代表性通常较低。为了评估性别是否会影响复杂血管内主动脉修补术后的预后,我们对接受库克平台主动脉修补术(F/BEVAR)的596名患者进行了倾向评分选择,将每位接受治疗的女性患者与相应的男性患者进行配对。女性患者多为胸腹动脉瘤、内脏血管较小、髂股动脉入路复杂,因此手术效果明显较差,技术成功率为86.2%对96.6%(P=0.016)。在短期和中期再介入方面没有差异。根据这些结果,对于接受复杂主动脉修补术的女性患者,应进行仔细和严格的评估,尤其是术前解剖评估和临床选择,并进行适当的手术风险分层。
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
Sex Influence on Fenestrated and Branched Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair: Outcomes From a National Multicenter Registry.

Introduction: Women are generally underrepresented in trials focusing on aortic aneurysm. Nevertheless, sex-related differences have recently emerged from several studies and registries. The aim of this research was to assess whether sex-related anatomical disparities existed in fenestrated and branched aortic repair candidates and whether these discrepancies could influence endovascular repair outcomes.

Methods: Data from all consecutive patients treated during the 2008-2019 period within the Italian Multicenter fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic repair (F/BEVAR) Registry were included in the present study. Propensity matching was performed using a logistic regression model adjusted for demographic data and comorbidities to obtain comparable male and female samples. The selection model led to a final study population of 176 patients (88 women and 88 men) among the total initial cohort of 596. Study endpoints were technical and clinical success, overall survival, aneurysm-related death, and reintervention rates evaluated at 30 days and during follow-up.

Results: Twenty-eight patients (15.9%) received urgent/emergent repair. In most of the cases (71.6%), women received treatment for extensive thoracoabdominal pathology (Crawford type I, II, or III aneurysm rather than type IV or juxta-pararenal) versus 46.6% of men (p=0.001). Female patients presented with more challenging iliac accesses with at least one side considered hostile in 27.3% of the cases (vs 13.6% in male patients, p=0.039). Finally, women had significantly smaller visceral vessels. Women had significantly worse operative outcomes, with an 86.2% technical success rate versus 96.6% in the male population (p=0.016). No differences were recorded in terms of 30-day reinterventions between men and women. The 5-year estimate of freedom from late reintervention, according to Kaplan-Meier analysis, was 85.6% in men versus 81.6% in women (p=ns). No aneurysm-related death was recorded during follow-up (median observational time, 23 months [interquartile range, 7-45 months]).

Conclusion: Women presented a significantly higher incidence of thoracoabdominal aneurysms, smaller visceral vessels, and more complex iliofemoral accesses, resulting in a significantly lower technical success after F/BEVAR. Further studies assessing sex-related differences are needed to properly determine the impact on outcomes and stratify procedural risks.

Clinical impact: Women are generally underrepresented in trials focusing on aortic aneurysms. Aiming to assess whether sex may affect outcomes after a complex endovascular aortic repair, a propensity score selection was applied to a total population of 596 patients receiving F/BEVAR aortic repair with the Cook platform, matching each treated female patient with a corresponding male patient. Women presented more frequently a thoracoabdominal aneurysm extent, smaller visceral vessels, and complex iliofemoral accesses, resulting in significantly worse operative outcomes, with an 86.2% technical success versus 96.6% (p=0.016). No differences were recorded in terms of short-term and mid-term reinterventions. According to these results, careful and critical assessment should be posed in case of female patients receiving complex aortic repair, especially regarding preoperative anatomical evaluation and clinical selection with appropriate surgical risk stratification.

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
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
Mentorship in academic musculoskeletal radiology: perspectives from a junior faculty member. Underlying synovial sarcoma undiagnosed for more than 20 years in a patient with regional pain: a case report. Sacrococcygeal chordoma with spontaneous regression due to a large hemorrhagic component. Associations of cumulative voriconazole dose, treatment duration, and alkaline phosphatase with voriconazole-induced periostitis. Can the presence of SLAP-5 lesions be predicted by using the critical shoulder angle in traumatic anterior shoulder instability?
×
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