Journal of veterinary internal medicine · 2011
Occlusion devices and approaches in canine patent ductus arteriosus: comparison of outcomes.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Singh M K, Kittleson M D, Kass P H, Griffiths L G
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: A comparison of transvascular occlusion methods for closing patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) in dogs has not been done.
OBJECTIVES: To determine if clinically important differences exist between the approaches and devices currently used.
ANIMALS: A total of 112 client-owned dogs with left-to-right shunting PDA.
METHODS: Retrospective study. Records from dogs that underwent attempted transvascular PDA occlusion from January 2006 to December 2009 were examined. Dogs were placed into 4 groups: Group 1: Amplatz Canine Duct Occluder (ACDO) (transarterial) - 36 dogs; Group 2: Gianturco or MReye Flipper Detachable Embolization (Flipper) coil (transarterial) - 38 dogs; Group 3: Amplatzer Vascular Plug (AVP) (transarterial) - 23 dogs; Group 4: Flipper coil (transvenous) - 15 dogs.
RESULTS: The overall success rate of the procedures was high (92%) with comparable success rates among groups (87-97%). There were significantly fewer complications (P < .0001) in dogs receiving an ACDO than in the remaining groups (3% for ACDO versus 26-33% for the other groups). Fluoroscopy time for the transvenous method was significantly longer (median, 13 minutes) than for the other groups (median, 6 minutes) (P < .0001). Severity of residual flow 24 hours postprocedure was significantly less in the ACDO group than in the remaining groups (P = .0001-.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The ACDO appears superior in ease of use, complication rate, and completeness of occlusion. The remaining limiting factor with this device is patient size. Until a smaller ACDO device is marketed, coils remain the only choice for interventional closure in very small dogs.
OBJECTIVES: To determine if clinically important differences exist between the approaches and devices currently used.
ANIMALS: A total of 112 client-owned dogs with left-to-right shunting PDA.
METHODS: Retrospective study. Records from dogs that underwent attempted transvascular PDA occlusion from January 2006 to December 2009 were examined. Dogs were placed into 4 groups: Group 1: Amplatz Canine Duct Occluder (ACDO) (transarterial) - 36 dogs; Group 2: Gianturco or MReye Flipper Detachable Embolization (Flipper) coil (transarterial) - 38 dogs; Group 3: Amplatzer Vascular Plug (AVP) (transarterial) - 23 dogs; Group 4: Flipper coil (transvenous) - 15 dogs.
RESULTS: The overall success rate of the procedures was high (92%) with comparable success rates among groups (87-97%). There were significantly fewer complications (P < .0001) in dogs receiving an ACDO than in the remaining groups (3% for ACDO versus 26-33% for the other groups). Fluoroscopy time for the transvenous method was significantly longer (median, 13 minutes) than for the other groups (median, 6 minutes) (P < .0001). Severity of residual flow 24 hours postprocedure was significantly less in the ACDO group than in the remaining groups (P = .0001-.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The ACDO appears superior in ease of use, complication rate, and completeness of occlusion. The remaining limiting factor with this device is patient size. Until a smaller ACDO device is marketed, coils remain the only choice for interventional closure in very small dogs.