Stanford B型主动脉夹层腔内隔绝术中导管校准法和标记导管校准法比较

目的探讨导管校准和标记导管校法在Stanford B型主动脉夹层腔内隔绝术中测量主动脉直径的差异。方法收集30例接受经腔内隔绝术治疗的Standford B型主动脉夹层患者,分别以2种校准法测量左锁骨下动脉开口处主动脉直径,并将测量值与CTA测量结果进行对比。结果导管校准、标记导管校准、CTA测量值间差异有统计学意义(F=3.15,P0.05)。两两比较显示,导管校准法与CTA、标记导管校准法间测量值差异均有统计学意义(P均0.05),标记导管校准法与CTA间测量值差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。以CTA测量值为金标准,Bland-Altman分析显示标记导管校准法与CTA测量法一致性较导管校准法更好。结论在Stanford B型主动脉夹层腔内隔绝术中,标记导管校准法的测量值接近CTA的测量值,优于导管校准法,可为支架的选择提供更加精准的数据。

Comparison of catheter calibration method and centimeter sizing catheter calibration method in endovascular graft exclusion for Stanford type B aortic dissection

Objective To explore the differences of aortic diameter measured by catheter calibration method and centimeter sizing catheter calibration method in endovascular graft exclusion for Stanford type B aortic dissection. Methods A total of 30 patients with Stanford B type aortic dissections treated with endovascular graft exclusion were measured with the two calibration methods to measure aortic diameters at left subclavicular artery position. The measurement parameters were compared with CTA measurement results. Results Statistical differences of measurement parameters were found among catheter calibration, centimeter sizing catheter calibration and CTA (F=3.15, P<0.05), and paired comparison showed statistical differences between catheter calibration method and CTA result (P<0.05), and between the results of catheter calibration method and centimeter sizing catheter calibration method (P<0.05), while no statistical difference was found between centimeter sizing catheter calibration method and CTA result (P>0.05). Taking CTA as golden standard method, Bland-Altman analysis indicated that the centimeter sizing catheter calibration method exerted better consistency with CTA. Conclusion The measurement value of centimeter sizing catheter calibration method is identical to the CTA measurement result, and superior to catheter calibration method for precise stent selection in Stanford type B aortic dissection.