首页> 外文期刊>Journal of vascular and interventional radiology: JVIR >Use of the peripheral cutting balloon to treat hemodialysis-related stenoses.
【24h】

Use of the peripheral cutting balloon to treat hemodialysis-related stenoses.

机译:使用外围切割球囊治疗与血液透析相关的狭窄。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of use of the peripheral cutting balloon (PCB) versus standard percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) for the treatment of hemodialysis-related stenoses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective, randomized multicenter clinical trial included 340 patients with stenotic or thrombosed hemodialysis grafts who were randomized to receive treatment with the PCB or PTA for venous outflow stenosis. One hundred seventy-three patients underwent treatment with the PCB, 101 with stenotic grafts and 72 with thrombosed grafts. PTA was used to treat 167 patients, 94 patients with stenotic grafts and 73 with thrombosed grafts. The follow-up period extended for 6 months. RESULTS: The procedural success rates were 80.8% and 75.4% for the PCB and PTA groups, respectively (P = .24). With use of the PCB, the primary patency rates of the target lesions were 84.3%, 65.8%, and 47.9% at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months, respectively. With PTA, the primary patency rates of thetarget lesions were 77.7%, 63.4%, and 40.5% at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months, respectively. The primary patency rates of the entire vascular access circuit were 82.6%, 61.0%, and 43.3% at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months, respectively, with use of the PCB. For patients who were treated with PTA, the primary patency rates of the vascular access circuit were 75.9%, 61.0%, and 36.3% at 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months, respectively. When comparing the PCB and PTA, there was no difference in the 6-month primary patency rates in the target lesion (P = .373) or the entire vascular access circuit (P = .531). There were nine device-related complications in the PCB group (5.2%): five venous ruptures (2.9%), three venous dissections (1.7%), and one case of thrombosis (0.6%). There were no device-related complications in the PTA group. CONCLUSION: This prospective, randomized trial comparing use of the PCB versus standard PTA for treatment of hemodialysis-related venous stenoses demonstrated that the PCB provides equivalent 6-month patency to PTA for stenotic and thrombosed grafts.
机译:目的:比较外围切割球囊(PCB)与标准经皮腔内血管成形术(PTA)治疗血液透析相关狭窄的有效性和安全性。材料与方法:这项前瞻性,随机,多中心临床试验纳入了340例狭窄或血栓性血液透析移植物的患者,这些患者被随机分配接受PCB或PTA治疗静脉流出狭窄。 173例接受了PCB治疗,101例接受了狭窄的移植,72例接受了血栓的移植。 PTA用于治疗167例患者,其中94例使用了狭窄的移植,73例使用了血栓的移植。随访期延长了6个月。结果:PCB和PTA组的手术成功率分别为80.8%和75.4%(P = .24)。使用PCB时,目标病变在1个月,3个月和6个月时的通畅率分别为84.3%,65.8%和47.9%。使用PTA,在1个月,3个月和6个月时,目标病变的主要通畅率分别为77.7%,63.4%和40.5%。使用PCB时,在1个月,3个月和6个月时,整个血管通路的主要通畅率分别为82.6%,61.0%和43.3%。对于接受PTA治疗的患者,在1个月,3个月和6个月时,血管通路的主要通畅率分别为75.9%,61.0%和36.3%。比较PCB和PTA时,目标病变(P = .373)或整个血管通路(P = .531)的6个月初次通畅率没有差异。 PCB组有9例与器械相关的并发症(5.2%):5例静脉破裂(2.9%),3例静脉解剖(1.7%)和1例血栓形成(0.6%)。 PTA组没有与设备相关的并发症。结论:该前瞻性随机试验比较了使用PCB与标准PTA治疗血液透析相关静脉狭窄的情况,该研究表明PCB对狭窄和血栓形成的移植物提供了与PTA等效的6个月通畅。

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