Zhonghua wai ke za zhi [Chinese journal of surgery] · 2000
[Abdominal aortic aneurysm treated by endovascular stent-graft and conventional surgical repair: a comparison].
Сравнительное исследованиеАннотация на английскомСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Guo W, Liang F, Zhang G, Gai L, Kong Q, Du L
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) treated by endovascular stent-graft.
METHODS: The clinical data of 52 patients with AAA treated by endovascular stent-graft (n = 20) and conventional surgical repair (n = 32) were analysed retrospectively. Patients conditions, operative hours, blood loss, function recovery and complications were compared.
RESULTS: No significant difference was observed in sex, age, other disease, anesthesia risk category, aneurysm type, aneurysm diameter, technical success rate, and mortality rate between the groups (P > 0.05). The patients who underwent intraluminal treatment had significant reductions in operative time, blood loss, intensive care unit and hospitalization. But there was a high complication rate in the endovascular stent-graft group. All complications were connected with the interventional technique; endo-leak was the chief complication after operation.
CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment has marked merits such as reduced trauma, short hospitalization stays, and early functional recovery. It is suitable for the patients who can't undergo open surgical repair. But the complications caused by this technique needs further study.
METHODS: The clinical data of 52 patients with AAA treated by endovascular stent-graft (n = 20) and conventional surgical repair (n = 32) were analysed retrospectively. Patients conditions, operative hours, blood loss, function recovery and complications were compared.
RESULTS: No significant difference was observed in sex, age, other disease, anesthesia risk category, aneurysm type, aneurysm diameter, technical success rate, and mortality rate between the groups (P > 0.05). The patients who underwent intraluminal treatment had significant reductions in operative time, blood loss, intensive care unit and hospitalization. But there was a high complication rate in the endovascular stent-graft group. All complications were connected with the interventional technique; endo-leak was the chief complication after operation.
CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment has marked merits such as reduced trauma, short hospitalization stays, and early functional recovery. It is suitable for the patients who can't undergo open surgical repair. But the complications caused by this technique needs further study.