|本期目录/Table of Contents|

[1]谢方涛,王 端,戴向晨.经皮穿刺与股动脉切开主动脉腔内治疗早期疗效比较[J].天津医科大学学报,2015,21(05):423-425.
　XIE Fang-tao,WANG Duan,DAI Xiang-chen.Comparison of the early therapeutic effectiveness between total-percutaneous technique and open access to EVAR[J].Journal of Tianjin Medical University,2015,21(05):423-425.
点击复制

经皮穿刺与股动脉切开主动脉腔内治疗早期疗效比较(PDF)
分享到：

《天津医科大学学报》[ISSN:1006-8147/CN:12-1259/R]

卷:
21卷
期数:
2015年05期
页码:
423-425
栏目:
临床医学
出版日期:
2015-09-20

文章信息/Info

Title:
Comparison of the early therapeutic effectiveness between total-percutaneous technique and open access to EVAR
文章编号:
1006-8147(2015)05-0423-03
作者:
谢方涛; 王 端; 戴向晨
（天津医科大学总医院血管外科，天津 300052）
Author(s):
XIE Fang-tao;  WANG Duan;  DAI Xiang-chen
（Department of Vascular Surgery，General Hospital，Tianjin Medical University，Tianjin 300052, China）
关键词:
主动脉腔内治疗; 完全经皮穿刺; 股动脉切开; 主动脉夹层; 主动脉瘤
Keywords:
endovascular aortic repair;  totally percutaneous technique;  surgical femoral exposure method;  aorta dissection;  aorta aneurysm
分类号:
R654.3
DOI:
-
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
?目的：评价全穿刺技术与股动脉切开在主动脉腔内修复术的疗效差异。方法：随机选取血管外科行腔内治疗的肾下型腹主动脉瘤及非复杂性B型主动脉夹层共201例，对其中98例采用经皮穿刺术式，另103例采取股动脉切开，对比两组手术时间、伤口处理时间、术中出血量、手术费用、术后住院时间、并发症等情况。结果：两组患者年龄、性别、体质量指数、心血管危险因素、术中出血量及手术费用无统计学差异 (P>0.05)，在手术时间、伤口处理时间、术后住院时间以及并发症发生率上，经皮穿刺组显著低于股动脉切开组 (P<0.05)。结论：经皮穿刺行主动脉腔内治疗，可减低术后住院时间、手术时间和伤口相关并发症，而手术费用无明显差异，可作为股动脉切开安全有效的替代术式。
Abstract:
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of EVAR by totally percutaneous technique and surgical femoral exposure method. Methods: Two hundred and one patients with infrarenal aorta aneurysm or uncomplicated type B aorta dissection for endovascular repair were enrolled in this study. The patients were divided into PEVAR group(n=98) and OEVAR group(n=103). The operation time, incision treatment time, intra-operative blood loss, surgery costs,postoperative hospital stay and complications were compared between two groups. Results: No significant difference was observed in the age, gender, BMI，cardiovascular risk factors, intra-operative blood loss and surgery costs between the two groups(P>0.05). Compared with OEVAR group, the operation time, incision treatment time, postoperative hospital stay and complication rates of PEVAR group were significantly decreased. Conclusion: Total percutaneous technique could reduce the operation time, incision treatment time, postoperative hospital stay and complication rates. However, the surgery costs remain the same as OEVAR. In summary，EVAR by totally percutaneous method could be a safe and effective replacement for traditional EVAR.

参考文献/References:

[1] Schermerhorn M L, Bensley R P, Giles K A, et al. Changes in abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture and short-term mortality, 1995-2008: a retrospective observational study [J]. Ann Surg, 2012, 256(4): 651

[2] Lee W A, Brown M P, Nelson P R, et al. Total percutaneous access for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair ("Preclose" technique) [J]. J Vasc surg, 2007, 45(6): 1095

[3] Lee W A, Brown M P, Nelson P R, et al. Midterm outcomes of femoral arteries after percutaneous endovascular aortic repair using the Preclose technique [J]. J Vasc Surg, 2008, 47(5): 919

[4] Jahnke T, Schafer J P, Charalambous N, et al. Total percutaneous endovascular aneurysm repair with the dual 6-F Perclose-AT preclosing technique: a case-control study [J]. J Vasc interv Radiol,, 2009, 20(10): 1292

[5] Mousa A Y, Abu-Halimah S, Nanjundappa A, et al. Current update on the status of totally percutaneous aneurysm repair [J]. Vasc Endovasc surg , 2013, 47(6): 409

[6] Bechara C F, Barshes N R, Pisimisis G, et al. Predicting the learning curve and failures of total percutaneous endovascular aortic aneurysm repair [J]. J Vasc Surg , 2013, 57(1): 72.

[7] Georgiadis G S, Antoniou G A, Papaioakim M, et al. A meta-analysis of outcome after percutaneous endovascular aortic aneurysm repair using different size sheaths or endograft delivery systems [J]. J Endovasc Ther. , 2011, 18(4): 445

[8] Starnes B W, Andersen C A, Ronsivalle J A, et al. Totally percutaneous aortic aneurysm repair: experience and prudence [J]. J Vasc Surg , 2006, 43(2): 270

[9] Manunga J M, Gloviczki P, Oderich G S, et al. Femoral artery calcification as a determinant of success for percutaneous access for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair [J]. J Vasc Surg , 2013, 58(5): 1208

[10] Smith S T, Timaran C H, Valentine R J, et al. Percutaneous access for endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: can selection criteria be expanded? [J]. Ann Vasc Surg , 2009, 23(5): 621

[11] Metcalfe M J, Brownrigg J R, Black S A, et al. Unselected percutaneous access with large vessel closure for endovascular aortic surgery: experience and predictors of technical success [J]. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg, 2012, 43(4): 378

[12] Nelson P R, Kracjer Z, Kansal N, et al. A multicenter, randomized, controlled trial of totally percutaneous access versus open femoral exposure for endovascular aortic aneurysm repair (the PEVAR trial) [J]. J Vasc Surg , 2014, 59(5): 1181

相似文献/References:

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
作者简介 谢方涛（1990-），男，硕士在读，研究方向：血管外科；

通信作者：戴向晨， E-mail：13302165917@163.com。

更新日期/Last Update: 2015-09-22