“烟囱”技术在胸主动脉夹层动脉瘤腔内治疗中的应用

目的 探讨“烟囱”技术在胸主动脉夹层动脉瘤的腔内治疗中的适应证、技术要点及并发症的预防.方法 回顾性分析2010年～2012年我科采用“烟囱”技术治疗4例胸主动脉夹层动脉瘤患者的临床资料,其中破口累及左锁骨下动脉3例,累及左颈总动脉1例.结果 4例患者支架均释放准确,“烟囱”支架通畅.1例患者释放支架后即刻造影提示少量Ⅰ型内漏,术后CT血管造影复查未见明确内漏;1例术后第2天出现精神差、嗜睡,左侧肢体肌力较对侧减退,给予抗凝活血药物治疗1周后左侧肢体肌力恢复.随访6～12个月,均未出现支架闭塞或严重狭窄.结论 “烟囱”技术通过完全腔内方法重修分支血管,实现了微创腔内治疗.     

“烟囱”支架在急性期锚定区不足的Stanford B型主动脉夹层中的应用体会

目的:探讨应用胸主动脉腔内修复术（thoracic endovascular aotic repair,TEVAR）治疗急性期锚定区不足假腔未血栓化的Stanford B型主动脉夹层时“烟囱”支架重建左锁骨下动脉（left subclavian artery,LSA）的治疗效果。方法:回顾性分析2013年2月至2021...     

计算流体力学技术在胸主动脉疾病中的应用

计算流体力学(CFD)技术可以模拟正常或病理状态下主动脉的血流的力学特征和流场变化,从而协助研究者理解和揭示主动脉疾病的发生、发展和治疗转归.在主动脉疾病研究领域,CFD模拟研究经历了从理想化(正向工程)、刚性血管壁、等横截面、层流、稳定速度到个体化(逆向工程)、弹性血管壁(流-固耦合技术)、锥形递减横截面、湍流、脉动血流的数值模拟发展历程.本文总结了CFD技术在模拟正常胸主动脉、胸主动脉瘤和主动脉夹层的发生、发展及疾病治疗转归方面的研究现状、技术优势与应用前景,展望CFD技术可能深刻影响未来人们对于主动脉疾病的认识和治疗策略.     

象鼻技术在主动脉外科中的应用

象鼻技术（elephant trunk technique，ET）是一种分期治疗病变范围广泛的主动脉瘤或主动脉夹层的术式。Borst等首先报道了象鼻技术。随着该技术在主动脉疾病治疗中的应用，出现了不同的改进和创新。本文对象鼻技术在主动脉外科中的应用和发展趋势进行综述。     

"烟囱"技术在主动脉弓病变腔内修复术中的应用

目的 探讨"烟囱"技术在主动脉弓腔内修复术中应用的可行性.方法 针对近端锚定区偏短的主动脉弓病变,在腔内修复过程中先覆盖重要主动脉弓分支血管,然后通过腔内技术在被覆盖的分支血管内行"烟囱"支架置入术.回顾性统计2004年8月至2009年8月应用"烟囱"技术处理病变的临床资料,分析应用"烟囱"技术的原因、方法、结果和并发症状况等.结果 本组共27例主动脉弓病变腔内修复技术中应用了"烟囱"技术,男性25例,女性2例.年龄37～84岁,平均(67.2±3.8)岁.针对无名动脉的"烟囱"技术3例,针对左颈总动脉的"烟囱"技术11例,针对左锁骨下动脉的"烟囱"技术13例.5例术后即刻造影提示存在少量I型内漏(18.5%).1例术中因左颈总动脉穿刺造成了该动脉夹层.1例术后因呼吸衰竭死亡.无中风、出血等并发症发生.随访时间3～60个月,平均(16.8±5.9)个月.1例次要脑梗死,1例"烟囱"支架闭塞.1例术后4年因心肌梗死死亡.所有I型内漏均消失,无支架型血管和"烟囱"支架移位等并发症.结论 "烟囱"技术有效提高了锚定区长度,能很好的降低I型内漏的发生率.但应严格选择适应证,防止可能带来的并发症.     

“烟囱”技术用于缺乏锚定区的主动脉弓病变应用价值研究

目的 探讨“烟囱”技术在缺乏锚定区的主动脉弓病变中应用的可行性和价值。方法 回顾性分析了2011年1月至2012年5月南京医科大学第一附属医院血管外科应用“烟囱”技术治疗31例近侧锚定区不足的主动脉弓病变的临床资料。结果 31例病人在植入主动脉支架人造血管的同时分别植入“烟囱”支架共32枚,手术均获得成功。随访3个月,“烟囱”支架通畅,1例无名动脉及左颈总动脉双“烟囱”支架病人动脉瘤腔有少量内漏。结论 “烟囱”技术拓展了主动脉病变腔内治疗的适应证,远期疗效尚待观察。     

覆膜烟囱支架与单分支移植物治疗Stanford BC型主动脉夹层的效果

目的 探讨覆膜烟囱支架与单分支移植物治疗Stanford BC型主动脉夹层的效果。方法 收集2017年4月至2021年5月南充市中心医院收治的106例Stanford BC型主动脉夹层患者的临床资料,按照治疗方式的不同将其分为A组（n=42,使用单分支移植物治疗）与B组（n=64,使用覆膜烟囱支架治疗）。比较两组患者的手术相关指标、手术成功率、随访1年生存率、术中及术后并发症发生情况。结果 两组患者手术时间、术中出血量、首发症状至入院手术时间、术后进食时间、住院时间比较,差异均无统计学意义（P﹥0.05）。两组患者手术成功率、随访生存率比较,差异均无统计学意义（P﹥0.05）。两组患者术中及随访期并发症发生率比较,差异均无统计学意义（P﹥0.05）。两组患者胸段假腔完全血栓化率比较,差异无统计学意义（P﹥0.05）。A组患者腹段假腔完全血栓化率高于B组患者,差异有统计学意义（P=0.029）。结论 覆膜烟囱支架与单分支移植物治疗Stanford BC型主动脉夹层均能获得良好效果,并发症发生情况相当,单分支移植物治疗患者术后腹段完全血栓化效果更好。     

杂交技术在主动脉病变腔内修复中的应用

累及主动脉的血管病变主要包括夹层、真性动脉瘤、假性动脉瘤、感染性动脉瘤、血管损伤等。传统上这些病变都需要采用外科手术的方式加以处理。主要的手术方式是病变段血管切除加人工血管置换。传统手术方式创伤大,并发症发生率和死亡率极高,大多数胸段主动脉病变需要在深低温停循环下进行,许多高龄、伴存疾病严重的患者因无法耐受手术而失去治疗的机会。     

杂合技术在主动脉夹层病变治疗中的应用

目的探讨"杂合技术"——主动脉人工血管替换并降主动脉覆膜支架置入术治疗复杂主动脉夹层病变的效果。方法对4例主动脉夹层分离病人实施了同期外科手术结合支架置入的杂合技术治疗。结果全组手术经过顺利,主动脉阻断时间平均(147.0±30.1)min,体外循环时间平均(164.3±34.4)min,2例Stanford A型深低温停循环时间分别为45 min和43 min。1例术后因胸腔内大出血分别于术后第1 d和第8 d再次开胸止血,术后持续昏迷至第4 d清醒,气管切开接呼吸机辅助通气时间长达53 d,最终于术后77 d治愈出院。1例术后发生严重肺部感染和脓胸,最终诱发多器官功能衰竭,放弃治疗出院。另2例患者术后恢复顺利,痊愈出院。术后随访复查CTA显示升主动脉及主动脉弓部人工血管无扭曲、狭窄,血流通畅,血管内支架位置良好,降主动脉真腔较术前明显扩大,无内漏、假腔血栓形成。结论应用杂合技术治疗复杂主动脉病变方法简单,疗效可靠,并发症少,具有良好的应用前景。     

矫正性裸支架理念在治疗复杂主动脉疾病中的应用

目的探讨矫正性裸支架理念在复杂主动脉病变中应用价值。方法回顾分析接受腔内修复术联合矫正性裸支架治疗的13例复杂主动脉夹层及2例肾下腹主动脉瘤患者的资料。结果 13例主动脉夹层患者中,植入Valiant支架11例,Grikin支架2例;2例腹主动脉瘤患者均植入Zenith支架。对15例患者共植入矫正性裸支架19枚;主动脉夹层裸支架17枚,长度60~80mm,直径18~24mm;腹主动脉瘤裸支架2枚,长度均为60mm,直径分别为24mm和7mm。所有患者术后无严重并发症。15例中,14例完成随访,1例失访,随访期间无支架源性夹层或内漏发生及假性动脉瘤、髂支血栓形成。结论矫正性裸支架理念有助于拓宽主动脉病变腔内治疗的适应证,且安全、微创、近期疗效满意。     

Double-barrel technique for preservation of aortic arch branches during thoracic endovascular aortic repair

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) may involve either planned or inadvertent coverage of aortic branch vessels when stent grafts are implanted into the aortic arch. Vital branch vessels may be preserved by surgical debranching techniques or by placement of additional stents to maintain vessel patency. We report our experience with a double-barrel stent technique used to maintain aortic arch branch vessel patency during TEVAR. Seven patients underwent TEVAR using the double-barrel technique, with placement of branch stents into the innominate (n = 3), left common carotid (n = 3), and left subclavian (n = 1) arteries alongside an aortic stent graft. Gore TAG endografts were used in all cases, and either self-expanding stents (n = 6) or balloon-expandable (n = 1) stents were utilized to maintain patency of the arch branch vessels. In three cases the double-barrel stent technique was used to restore patency of an inadvertently covered left common carotid artery. Four planned cases involved endograft deployment proximally into the ascending aorta with placement of an innominate artery stent (n = 3) and coverage of the left subclavian artery with placement of a subclavian artery stent (n = 1). TEVAR using a double-barrel stent was technically successful with maintenance of branch vessel patency and absence of type I endoleak in all seven cases. One case of zone 0 endograft placement with an innominate stent was complicated by a left hemispheric stroke that was attributed to a technical problem with the carotid-carotid bypass. On follow-up of 2-18 months, all double-barrel branch stents and aortic endografts remained patent without endoleak, migration, or loss of device integrity. The double-barrel stent technique maintains aortic branch patency and provides additional stent-graft fixation length during TEVAR to treat aneurysms involving the aortic arch. Moreover, the technique uses commercially available devices and permits complete aortic arch coverage (zone 0) without a sternotomy. Although initial outcomes are encouraging, long-term durability remains unknown.     

Neurological complications of thoracic endovascular aortic repair

Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) has decreased the morbidity and mortality associated with open surgical repair of descending thoracic aortic diseases, but important complications unique to the procedure remain. Spinal cord ischemia and infarction is a recognized complication caused by endovascular coverage or injury to spinal cord collateral vessels. Stroke is a consequence of thromboembolism or coverage of aortic arch branch vessels with insufficient collateral circulation. Understanding the risk factors and the pathophysiology of neurological complications of TEVAR are important for the successful anesthetic and surgical management and treatment of patients undergoing endovascular procedures involving the thoracic aorta.     

Endograft migration after thoracic endovascular aortic repair

ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence, timing, and potential risk factors of late endograft migration after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).MethodsA retrospective analysis was conducted of 123 patients receiving TEVAR for thoracic aortic aneurysms (TAAs), dissections, penetrating aortic ulcer, intramural hematoma, or traumatic transection between January 2005 and December 2015 with a minimum imaging-based follow-up of 6 months. Imaging analysis was performed by three independent readers. Migration was defined according to the reporting standards as a stent graft shift of >10 mm relative to a primary anatomic landmark or any displacement that led to symptoms or required therapy. A standardized measurement protocol in accordance with the reporting guidelines was used. Median follow-up was 3 years (range, 0.5-10 years).ResultsMigration occurred in nine (7.3%) patients and took place at the proximal landing zone (n = 1), overlapping zone (n = 4), or distal landing zone (n = 5), resulting in type I or type III endoleaks in 44% (n = 4/9) of the cases. All cases of migration with endoleaks underwent reintervention; 75% (n = 3/4) of the migration associated with endoleaks could have been identified on previous imaging before an endoleak occurred. Freedom from migration was 99.1% after 1 year, 94.0% after 3 years, and 86.1% after 5 years. Aortic elongation and TAA were identified as predisposing factors for migration (P = .003 and P = .01, respectively). No influence of the proximal landing zone (zone 0-4), type of aortic arch (I-III), or type of endograft on the incidence of migration was found.ConclusionsGraft migration after TEVAR occurs in a relevant proportion of patients, predominantly in patients with TAA and aortic elongation. Follow-up imaging of these patients should be specifically evaluated regarding the occurrence of migration.