Annals of vascular surgery · 2012
The Kaiser Permanente experience with ultrasound-guided percutaneous endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sarmiento Jose M, Wisniewski Paul J, Do Natalie T, Slezak Jeff M, Tayyarah Majid, Aka Paul K, Vo Trung D, Hsu Jeffrey H
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to determine the effect of ultrasound (US)-guided percutaneous access for percutaneous endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (PEVAR) on conversion to open repair by femoral cutdown. We also sought to identify other risk factors associated with failure of percutaneous access and conversion to femoral cutdowns.
METHODS: This is a single-center, retrospective review of 101 patients who underwent PEVAR between January 1, 2005 and July 31, 2009 (56 months). Risk factors that were evaluated for unsuccessful PEVAR included gender, age (≤65 and ≥66 years), US-guided percutaneous access, mechanical failure, abdominal aortic aneurysm size, and the following comorbidities: diabetes, hypertension, vessel calcification, and obesity (body mass index: ≥30 kg/m(2)).
RESULTS: There were 10 (9.9%) conversions from percutaneous to femoral cutdown, yielding a success rate of 90.1% for a total percutaneous approach. Each converted patient had one groin converted, resulting in a cutdown rate per groin of 10/202 (5%). There were no 30-day mortalities. Univariate analysis showed that hypertension (P = 0.261), age ≥66 years (P = 0.741), current smoking history (P = 0.649), past smoking history (P = .093), diabetes (P = 0.908), vessel calcification (P = 0.8281), and body mass index ≥30 kg/m(2) (P = 0.052) did not significantly predict conversion to endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Mechanical failure significantly predicted conversion to cutdown EVAR (P = 0.0002), whereas US-guided percutaneous access influenced successful PEVAR (P = 0.030). Multivariate analysis showed that mechanical failure significantly predicted conversion to cutdown EVAR (P = 0.003) and US-guided percutaneous access influenced successful PEVAR (P = 0.040) after adjusting for smoking history and obesity.
CONCLUSION: PEVAR is a viable option for aortic aneurysm repair that may be improved with US-guided percutaneous access by reducing the rate of femoral cutdowns.
METHODS: This is a single-center, retrospective review of 101 patients who underwent PEVAR between January 1, 2005 and July 31, 2009 (56 months). Risk factors that were evaluated for unsuccessful PEVAR included gender, age (≤65 and ≥66 years), US-guided percutaneous access, mechanical failure, abdominal aortic aneurysm size, and the following comorbidities: diabetes, hypertension, vessel calcification, and obesity (body mass index: ≥30 kg/m(2)).
RESULTS: There were 10 (9.9%) conversions from percutaneous to femoral cutdown, yielding a success rate of 90.1% for a total percutaneous approach. Each converted patient had one groin converted, resulting in a cutdown rate per groin of 10/202 (5%). There were no 30-day mortalities. Univariate analysis showed that hypertension (P = 0.261), age ≥66 years (P = 0.741), current smoking history (P = 0.649), past smoking history (P = .093), diabetes (P = 0.908), vessel calcification (P = 0.8281), and body mass index ≥30 kg/m(2) (P = 0.052) did not significantly predict conversion to endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR). Mechanical failure significantly predicted conversion to cutdown EVAR (P = 0.0002), whereas US-guided percutaneous access influenced successful PEVAR (P = 0.030). Multivariate analysis showed that mechanical failure significantly predicted conversion to cutdown EVAR (P = 0.003) and US-guided percutaneous access influenced successful PEVAR (P = 0.040) after adjusting for smoking history and obesity.
CONCLUSION: PEVAR is a viable option for aortic aneurysm repair that may be improved with US-guided percutaneous access by reducing the rate of femoral cutdowns.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AgedAged, 80 and overAortic Aneurysm, AbdominalBlood Vessel Prosthesis ImplantationCaliforniaChi-Square DistributionDatabases, FactualEndovascular ProceduresFemaleFemoral ArteryHealth Maintenance OrganizationsHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisOdds RatioPostoperative ComplicationsReoperationRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeUltrasonography, Interventional