ObjectiveTo summarize the feasibility and effectiveness of endovascular treatment for vertebral artery stenosis ectopic originating from the aortic arch. MethodThe clinical data of 5 patients with vertebral artery stenosis ectopic originating from aortic arch admitted to Xuanwu Hospital of Capital Medical University from January 2020 to May 2023 were retrospectively analyzed. ResultsAll 5 patients underwent magnetic resonance angiography and CT angiography before treatment. The vertebral arteries of all patients originated from the aortic arch and were severe stenosis, with a median diameter of 1.3 mm (range, 1.1–1.5 mm) by CT angiography. All 5 patients were successfully treated with endovascular intervention. The operation time was 37–45 min, with a median of 39 min. There were no complications of vertebral artery rupture, embolism or occlusion, cerebral infarction, plaque abscission, hematoma at puncture site, pseudoaneurysm, postoperative hemorrhage, or perioperative pulmonary infection. The patients were followed-up for 13–30 months, with a median follow-up time of 20 months. The blood vessels of 5 patients remained unobstructed and no clinically significant vascular restenosis occurred. ConclusionsBased on the experiences of 5 cases of vertebral artery stenosis ectopic originating from the aortic arch, it is safe and effective to choose endovascular treatment for severe symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis. Especially, it is necessary to evaluate the stenosis degree of vertebral artery using CT angiography before treatment.
Objective To explore the effect of endovascular treatment guided by ultrasonography combined with portosystemic shunts on the patients with Budd-Chiari Syndrome （BCS）.Methods The clinical data of 136 patients with BCS treated by balloon angioplasty and stent implantation guided by Doppler ultrasonography in our hospital from January 1995 to January 2011 were retrospectively analyzed.After balloon angioplasty,53 patients were treated by inferior vena cava （IVC） stent implantation and 31 patients with hepatic venous occlusion underwent portosystemic shunts （PSSs） at one week after endovascular treatment.The long-and short-term effects after treatment were studied.Results After endovascular procedures,the IVC pressure of patients significantly decreased （P＜0.01）,while IVC diameter, flow velocity in the lesion,and right atrial pressure of patients showed significant increase（P＜0.01）.Slight heart dysfunction appeared in 13 cases of patients.After shunting,acute pancreatitis occurred in 3 cases, and 1 patient died of upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage on the 10 d after PSSs.Doppler ultrasonography for IVC and shunt vessels showed：the swollen liver and spleen lessened on 3d after endovascular procedures.The swollen liver lessened 2-7cm （mean 5.5cm）,swollen spleen lessened 3-8cm （mean 5.8cm）, and the time of ascites disappearance was 3-60d （mean 14d）.All the patients were followed up for 1 month to 15 years with an average of 3 years.Restenosis of the distal part of stent was found in 1 patient in 2 years after operation, hepatic vein occlusion occurred in 1 case in 1 year after treatment,hepatocellular carcinoma occurred in 1 patient in 3 years after stent implantation,and 1 patient died of C type hepatitis after 1 year,and 5 out of 6 cases of patients with infertility had babies after 1 year.All patients had no stent migration or occlusion of shunts and the symptoms of portal hypertension were obviously relieved.Conclusions Endovascular treatment guided by Doppler ultrasonography is a convenient,safe,and effective method for BCS.Portosystemic shunts are commended to patients with hepatic venous occlusions.The above mentioned methods provide a feasible and effective means for IVC stenosis and short segment occlusion with hepatic vein occlusion of BCS.
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical efficacy of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) in the treatment of patients with carotid artery stenosis, and to provide a more abundant evidence-based medicine for the treatment of CEA and CAS in patients with carotid artery stenosis. MethodsForty patients with carotid artery stenosis were randomly divided into CEA group and CAS group based on the operative indication. Patients in CEA group were given carotid endarterectomy treatment and those in CAS group were given carotid artery stenting treatment. Then clinical efficacy of the two groups were observed and compared. ResultsIn terms of the occurring rate of perioperative complications, cardiovascular events in 3 months after operation, and some major end events such as stroke, death and so on, the comparative difference between the two groups was of no statistical significance (P > 0.05). Through the followed-up visits of 12 months, the comparative difference between the two groups was also of no statistical significance (P > 0.05) in terms of the occurring rate of carotid artery restenosis and disabling or fatal stroke. ConclusionsFor patients with severe extracranial carotid stenosis under indication of operation treatment, carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting are of equivalent clinical efficacy, and both of them are of high security, although further study with large-amount and evidence-based medical data in long term from multiple centers is still in need.
Objective To systematically review the effectiveness and safety of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary stent implantation (PCI) in the treatment of patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCA). Methods Databases including The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2012), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were electronically searched from inception to September 2012 for randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness and safety of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus percutaneous coronary stent implantation (PCI) for ULMCA; References of the included studies were also retrieved. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed the methodological quality of the included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.0. Results Four studies were included involving 1 611 cases, of which, 802 cases are in the CABG group, while 809 cases were in the PCI group. The results of meta-analysis showed that: comparing with PCI, CABG significantly reduced the postoperative repeat revascularization rate (OR=0.45, 95%CI 0.31 to 0.66, Plt;0.000 1), but there was no significant difference between the two groups in reducing the myocardial infarction incidence (OR=1.28, 95%CI 0.47 to 3.48, P=0.63), mortality rate (OR=1.36, 95%CI 0.80 to 2.34, P=0.26), and the incidence of major adverse cardio-cerebral vascular events (OR=0.92, 95%CI 0.66 to 1.28, P=0.61). Conclusion This study indicates that CABG is superior to PCI in reducing postoperative rate of target vessel revascularization. But CABG and PCI are alike in reducing myocardial infarction incidence, mortality rate, and the incidence of major adverse cardio-cerebral vascular events. Due to the limited quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusion needs to be verified by more high quality RCTs.
Currently, transcatheter intervention has emerged as a first-line treatment for coarctation of the aortic. Due to the radiation exposure associated with catheter interventional therapy, there are numerous restrictions, which harms both patients and medical personnel and is dependent on sizable radiation apparatus. Here, we report for the first time a case of echo-guiding percutaneous aortic stent implantation for a 27 years female patient of reproductive age. After discharge, the patient's aortic coarctation pressure decreased to 18 mm Hg, and the surgical results were satisfactory.
ObjectiveTo evaluate safety and effectiveness of stent placement and emergency surgery in treatment of proximal colon cancer obstruction.MethodsThe PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials, CNKI, CBM, Wanfang Data, etc. were searched comprehensively. The literatures of Chinese and English randomized controlled trial and retrospective comparative study of stent placement and emergency surgery for the proximal colon cancer obstruction were retrieved. The RevMan 5.3 and Stata 12.0 softwares were used. The meta-analysis was made on the safety and effectiveness of these two treatments.ResultsA total of 9 literatures involving 636 patients were included, all of them were the retrospective studies, 4 of them only reported the clinical success rate and technical success rate. The technical success rate of stent placement was 0.94 [95% CI (0.91, 0.96)]. The clinical success rate was 0.90 [95% CI (0.87, 0.93)]. Compared with the emergency surgery group, the total complication rate and the temporary stoma rate were lower [OR=0.32, 95% CI (0.11, 0.94), P=0.04; OR=0.18, 95% CI (0.05, 0.65), P=0.009] and the hospital stay was shorter [MD=–2.97, 95% CI (–4.52, –1.41), P=0.000 2] in the stent placement group. The perioperative mortality rate, laparoscopic surgery rate, 5-year disease-free survival rate, and 5-year overall survival rate had no significant differences between these two groups (P>0.05).ConclusionCompared with emergency surgery, endoscopic stent placement for treatment of proximal colon cancer obstruction has a lower incidence of complications, temporary colostomy rate, shorter hospital stay, and it has no significant differences in mortality, laparoscopic surgery rate, and survival rate.
ObjectiveTo summarize the various treatment methods for reducing jaundice in the elderly patients with malignant obstructive jaundice (MOJ), and provide reference for the treatment of elderly MOJ.MethodUsing “malignant obstructive jaundice” as the Chinese keyword and the English keyword, a computer search of the literatures on the treatment of elderly MOJ patients was conducted and reviewed.ResultsThe treatment methods of reducing jaundice in elderly MOJ included radical surgery, cholangiojejunostomy, endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage, endoscopic biliary stent implantation, percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and stent implantation. Radical surgery was the most effective, but it was traumatic and had many complications for elderly patients. Cholangiojejunostomy was effective and suitable for elderly patients who cannot tolerate major surgery. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage was less traumatic to elderly patients, but technical difficulty. Endoscopic biliary stent implantation was currently the first-line choice for the treatment of elderly patients with advanced MOJ. Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage and stent implantation were suitable for elderly and frail patients with high obstruction.ConclusionThe treatment of elderly MOJ needs to be individualized and regionalized, and appropriate treatment methods should be selected according to the patient’s condition and the medical level of the medical center.
ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety in the treatment of malignant gastric outlet obstruction between gastrojejunostomy (GJ) and self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement.MethodsThe relevant literatures of efficacy and safety of GJ and SEMS placement in the treatment of malignant gastric outlet obstruction were searched in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Clinical Trial, VIP, CNKI, Wanfang Data databases. The data were extracted and evaluated by the RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 12 articles with 1 505 patients were included, of which 620 underwent the GJ (GJ group) and 885 underwent the SEMS placement (SEMS group); 3 RCTs, 9 non-RCTs. The meta-analysis results showed: the length of hospital stay [MD=5.83, 95%CI (4.24, 7.42), P<0.000 01] and time of postoperative recovery diet [MD=3.41, 95%CI (1.79, 5.03), P<0.000 1] of the SEMS group were significantly shorter than those of the GJ group; Although the incidence of complications of the GJ group was significantly higher than that of the SEMS group [OR=1.85, 95%CI (1.27, 2.70), P=0.001], the technical success rate [OR=2.72, 95%CI (1.13, 6.53), P=0.03] and clinical success rate [OR=1.86, 95%CI (1.35, 2.57), P=0.000 2] were higher and the survival time was longer [MD=38.31, 95%CI (28.98, 47.64), P<0.000 01] of the GJ group as compared with the SEMS group.ConclusionsSEMS placement is more effective in recovering dietary capacity, length of hospital stay, and incidence of complications, while GJ is more effective in survival time, technical success rate, and clinical success rate. In clinical practice, we could choose different surgical method according to patient situation.
Objective To update available evidence on safety and efficacy of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) versus carotid artery stenting (CAS) in treatment of carotid artery stenosis by a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods A comprehensive search was performed of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of science, WanFang, and CNKI databases (from January 1990 to July 2015), to collect articles and past systematic reviews, and then abstraced lists of recent scientific conferences which were related with safety and efficacy of CEA versus CAS in treatment of carotid artery stenosis. At last, Meta analysis was performed by RevMan 5.1 software. Results Fifteen RCTs enrolling 9 828 patients were included in the Meta-analysis. Compared with CAS, CEA was associated with a significantly lower incidences of any stroke or death within 30 days after surgery (OR=0.63, 95% CI: 0.51-0.77, P＜0.05) and any stroke or death during follow-up, or ipsilateral stroke after 30 days of operation (OR=0.61, 95% CI: 0.48-0.76, P＜0.05）, but associated with a significantly greater incidences of myocardial infarction (OR=1.81, 95% CI: 1.14-2.87, P=0.01) and cranial neuropathy (OR=18.28, 95% CI: 7.99-41.82, P＜0.05) within 30 days after surgery. Conclusion In comparison with CAS, CEA is associated with a lower incidences of stroke or death and a greater incidence of myocardial infarction and cranial neuropathy within 30 days after surgery, and was associated with a significantly lower incidence of any stroke or death during follow-up, or ipsilateral stroke after 30 days of operation. So the results of Meta-analysis support continued use of CEA as the standard method in treatment of carotid artery stenosis.