首页> 外文期刊>Journal of endovascular therapy: an official journal of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists >Endovascular treatment of malignant superior vena cava syndrome: is bilateral wallstent placement superior to unilateral placement?
【24h】

Endovascular treatment of malignant superior vena cava syndrome: is bilateral wallstent placement superior to unilateral placement?

机译:恶性上腔静脉综合征的血管内治疗:双侧支架置入是否优于单侧置入?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Purpose: To report our experience with unilateral versus bilateral stent placement in the treatment of malignant superior vena cava syndrome (SVCS).Methods: The records and films of 84 consecutive patients (69 men; mean age 64+/-10 years, range 39-79) referred for stent placement in malignant SVCS were reviewed for venous compromise, technical and clinical success, complications, and reocclusions. Wallstents were placed covering the SVC and both (bilateral technique) brachiocephalic veins (BCV) preferentially; unilateral stenting of only one BCV in addition to the SVC was performed based on operator preference or inability to access both sides. Technical success was defined as the ability to stent the SVC and at least one BCV; clinical success was the elimination of SVCS symptoms.Results: Technical success was achieved in 83 (99%) patients, using the unilateral technique in 22 and bilateral stenting in 61 patients. The groups did not differ with regard to age, sex, underlying diseases, or location and extent of venous compromise. Immediate clinical success was achieved in 20 (91%) of 22 patients in the unilateral group and 55 (90%) of 61 patients in the bilateral group. Two patients suffered late occlusion in the unilateral group, while in the bilateral group, 8 patients had early occlusion and 9 had late occlusion. Thus, the total occlusion rate was significantly (p<0.05) lower in the unilateral group. There was 1 other complication (pericardial tamponade) in the bilateral group, for a 28% total complication rate, which was significantly higher (p=0.039) than the 9% in the unilateral group. The 1, 3, 6, and 12-month primary stent patency rates were 90%, 81%, 76%, and 69%, respectively. Patency tended to last longer in the unilateral group, but the difference was not significant (p=0.11).Conclusions: Although bilateral Wallstent placement achieved equal technical and clinical success, it tended to confer shorter-lived patency and caused more complications.
机译:目的:报告我们单侧或双侧支架置入治疗恶性上腔静脉综合征(SVCS)的经验。方法:84例连续患者(69名男性;平均年龄64 +/- 10岁,范围39)的记录和影像-79)评估了在恶性SVCS中放置支架的静脉损害,技术和临床成功率,并发症和重新闭塞的情况。优先放置覆盖SVC和双侧(双侧)头臂静脉(BCV)的壁支架;根据操作员的喜好或无法进入两侧,仅对SVC进行单侧BCV的单侧支架置入术。技术上的成功定义为能够植入SVC和至少一个BCV的能力。结果:83例(99%)患者获得了技术成功,其中22例采用单侧技术,61例采用了双侧支架置入术。两组在年龄,性别,基础疾病或静脉损害的位置和程度方面无差异。单侧组22例患者中有20例(91%),双侧组61例患者中55例(90%)获得了立即的临床成功。单侧组有2例晚期闭塞,而双侧组有8例早期闭塞,9例有晚期闭塞。因此,单侧组的总阻塞率显着降低(p <0.05)。双边组中有1例其他并发症(心包填塞),总并发症发生率为28%,比单侧组的9%明显更高(p = 0.039)。 1、3、6和12个月的主要支架通畅率分别为90%,81%,76%和69%。单侧患者通畅的时间倾向于持续更长的时间,但差异不显着(p = 0.11)。结论:尽管双侧Wallstent放置在技术和临床上均取得了成功,但往往使患者的通畅时间较短,并引起更多的并发症。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号