ObjectiveTo discuss the risk factors of type Ⅱ endoleak after endovascular aneurysm repair(EVAR). MethodsThe clinical data of 197 cases of abdominal aortic aneurysm who underwent EVAR in our hospital from Jan. 2006 to Mar. 2011 were analyzed retrospectively, and risk factors of type Ⅱ endoleak were explored by logistic regression. ResultsOf the 197 cases, 18 cases suffered from type Ⅱ endoleak. Result of logistic regression showed that the risk of type Ⅱ endoleak increased per 1 of the increase of lumbar artery number(OR=1.822, P=0.010) and per 1 mm of the increase of lumbar artery diameter(OR=1.256, P=0.040). All of the cases were followed up for 1-36 months(median value of 16.8 months). Only 1 case was intervened by inferior mesenteric artery embolism for the growth rate larger than 5 mm during half a year, who was not found growth of diameter after the embolism. The type Ⅱ endoleaks of other 17 cases closed ultimately or keeping stable. ConclusionsType Ⅱ endoleak after EVAR is affected by the number and diameter of lumbar artery. Persistent type Ⅱ endoleak without enlargement of diameter of aneurysm sac needs to beclosely followed-up instead of re-intervention.
ObjectiveTo explore the progresses of diagnosis and treatment for endoleaks after endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (EVAR). MethodsThe literatures on studying the classification, diagnosis and management, risk factor, and treatment for the endoleaks after EVAR were reviewed and analyzed. ResultsEndoleak was a common and particular complication after EVAR and its represented persistence meant failure of the EVAR treatment. Accurate detection and classification were essential for the proper management and the treatment method for the endoleak was determined by the different source. Type Ⅰ and type Ⅲ endoleak required urgent treatment， type Ⅱ and type Ⅴ were considered less urgently but may be observed continuously. A variety of techniques including extension endografts or cuff, balloon angioplasty, bare stents, and a combination of transvascular and direct sac puncture embolization techniques were allowed to treat the vast majority of these endoleaks. ConclusionsEndoleak after EVAR is still the main clinical problem to be solved. The characters of endoleak still are not fully revealed. The diagnosis and treatment remained equivocal, which requires further study.
Objective To explore the method of surgical treatment and endoluminal repairs of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA)so as to improve the safety of surgical treatment. Methods The information of surgical treatment was analysed restrospectively in 195 cases of infrarenal AAA treated from January 1981 to December 2004. Of the patients, 155 were males, 40 were females with a mean age of 56.5 years. The diametersof the aneurysm were larger than 5 cm in 183 patients (93.8%) and 4 to 5 cm in12 patients (6.2%). Of the 175 patients who underwent selective operation, graft replacements were performed in 139 and endovascular aneurysmal repairs in 36. Twenty patients (10.3%) suffering from aneurysm rupture were given emergency operation. Results There were 6 deaths in the patients underdingselective operation(6/175, 4.3%) and in those undergoing emergengcy surgery (6/20, 30%) respectively within 30 days. The other patients were followed up from 1 month to 21 years ( 8.7 years on average), and there were 16 deaths (8.9%) during the follow-up. Nodeath was found in the endoluminal repaired group. Endoleak occurred in 8 patients, including 5 cases of type Ⅰand 3cases of type Ⅱ. After 6 months, CT scan showed that endoleak disappeared in 6 and rernained in 2. Late type Ⅱ endoleak occurred in 1 and endoleak disappearedafter endoluminal embolization. Conclusion With improvement of vascular surgical technique and development of endogafting, the safety of AAA both on surgicaland interventional means would be improved.
ObjectiveTo determine the influence of proximal aneurysm neck anatomy on typeⅠA endoleak follo-wing endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (EVAR) for infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm. MethodsFrom September 2007 to February 2014, 111 consecutive patients with non-ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms were treated with EVAR. The preoperative CTA of abdominal aortic was obtained by every patient, and the three-dimensional imaging was reconstructed and measured by software of Osorix. Then, the relation between the recurrence of typeⅠA endoleak and the concerned data measured by Osorix was analyzed by the statistical software. ResultsThe recurrence of typeⅠA endo-leak was related to the proximal neck angle of the abdominal aortic aneurysm, which weren't related to the proximal neck diameter and variation rates, the mural thrombas and calcification rate, and the maximum diameter of abdominal aortic aneurysm by multivariate analysis. ConclusionsThe complicated proximal aneurysm neck anatomy is a major cause for the typeⅠA endoleak, the proximal neck angle of the abdominal aortic aneurysm is the independent factor. The applica-tion of EVAR depends largely on the shape of the proximal aneurysm neck.
This paper interprets clinical practice guideline for abdominal aortic aneurysm of American Society for Vascular Surgery in 2018.
Objective To review the progress of artificial intelligence (AI) and radiomics in the study of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). Method The literatures related to AI, radiomics and AAA research in recent years were collected and summarized in detail. Results AI and radiomics influenced AAA research and clinical decisions in terms of feature extraction, risk prediction, patient management, simulation of stent-graft deployment, and data mining. Conclusion The application of AI and radiomics provides new ideas for AAA research and clinical decisions, and is expected to suggest personalized treatment and follow-up protocols to guide clinical practice, aiming to achieve precision medicine of AAA.
ObjectiveTo understand risk factors of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture and the latest progress.MethodThe domestic and foreign related literatures on risk factors affecting AAA rupture were retrieved and reviewed.ResultsBesides some definite risk factors of AAA rupture, including age, gender, hypertension, smoking, family history, complications (such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension, dyslipidemia, etc.), the biomechanical factor was the crucial factor of AAA rupture, including the aortic compliance, aortic wall peak value of pressure, aortic wall calcification, and hemodynamics. The latest imaging methods such as the high resolution ultrasound, function and molecular imaging, and phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging could provide technical supports for the prediction of AAA rupture.ConclusionsThere are many risk factors affecting AAA rupture. Clinicians might prevent and make individualize treatment for AAA rupture according to its risk factors, and risks of AAA rupture could be more accurately assessed with help of new medical imaging examination.
Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) is a common lethal aortic disease in clinical practice. At present, the imaging diagnostic methods used for AAA mainly include Doppler ultrasound, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), but these methods can only observe the morphological changes of the aorta. These techniques used for the risk assessment of aneurysms, such as aneurysm rupture have some certain limitations. With the continuous development of molecular imaging technology and the further understanding of the pathogenesis of AAA, positron emission tomography (PET), molecular MRI and single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) techniques can be used to observe the pathological changes of the AAA and assess the risk of rupture from cell and molecular level. In this paper, the latest application of PET, molecular MRI, SPECT in the risk assessment was discussed.
Pregnancy complicated by aortic root aneurysm in patients with Marfan syndrome is one of the main causes of termination of pregnancy or even death in pregnant women. A very small number of pregnant women require cardiac surgery to preserve pregnancy under extracorporeal circulation, and all surgeries use aortic root replacement. We reported a 30-year-old patient with severe aortic regurgitation combined with giant aortic root aneurysm and Marfan syndrome in mid-pregnancy. Valve-sparing root replacement using reimplantation technology was performed via a multidisciplinary cooperation model. This not only achieved the patient’s desire to continue pregnancy but also avoided the anticoagulation and bleeding complications brought by mechanical valve replacement, reduced pregnancy risks and improved long-term quality of life. Postoperative echocardiography showed a small amount of aortic valve regurgitation, aortic valve coaptation height of 0.6 cm, effective height of 1.1 cm, maximum aortic flow velocity of 1.4 m/s, mean transvalvular pressure gradient of 4.4 mm Hg, and satisfactory clinical results.
ObjectiveTo systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of fenestrated endovascular aortic repair (F-EVAR) and chimney endovascular aortic repair (Ch-EVAR) in treatment of juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (JRAAA).MethodsThe databases including the PubMed, Cochrane Library, CNKI, etc. were searched to collect the randomized controlled trails (RCTs) and non-RCTs about the F-EVAR versus Ch-EVAR for the JRAAA. The retrieval time was from inception to November 2019. The studies were screened according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the data were extracted and the quality was evaluated by 2 reviewers independently. Then the meta-analysis was conducted using the RevMan 5.1 software.ResultsA total of 9 non-RCTs involving 536 patients were included, 315 of whom were in the F-EVAR group, 221 of whom were in the Ch-EVARF group. The results of meta-analysis showed that: Compared with the F-EVAR group, the Ch-EVAR group had a higher incidence of type Ⅰ endoleak [OR=0.31, 95%CI (0.12, 0.85), P=0.02] and a lower incidence of target organ injury [OR=2.96, 95%CI (1.30, 6.72), P=0.010]. But there were no differences in the technical success rate, vascular restenosis, re-intervention rate, and 30 d mortality between the 2 groups (P>0.05).ConclusionsBoth F-EVAR and Ch-EVAR are safe and effective treatments for JRAAA. F-EVAR has a relative low incidence of type Ⅰ endoleak, but a relatively high incidence of target organ damage. However, for the limitation of quantity and quality of the included studies, this conclusion still requires to be further proved by performing large scale and high quality RCTs. It suggests that doctors should choose a best therapy for patients with JRAAA according to an integrative disease assessment.