Applicability of Zenith p-branch Standard Fenestrated Endograft in Our Series
| Autor: | Ángel Plaza-Martínez, Pau Bargay-Juan, Luis Ariel Pepén-Moquete, José Miguel Zaragozá-García, Francisco Gómez-Palonés, Sara Mercedes Morales-Gisbert |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2015 |
| Předmět: |
medicine.medical_specialty
Aortography Time Factors Computed Tomography Angiography medicine.medical_treatment 030204 cardiovascular system & hematology 030230 surgery Prosthesis Design Prosthesis 03 medical and health sciences Aortic aneurysm Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation 0302 clinical medicine Blood vessel prosthesis medicine Humans Computed tomography angiography medicine.diagnostic_test business.industry Endovascular Procedures General Medicine medicine.disease Trunk Abdominal aortic aneurysm Surgery Blood Vessel Prosthesis Treatment Outcome Spain Stents Anatomic Landmarks Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine business Abdominal surgery Aortic Aneurysm Abdominal |
| Zdroj: | Annals of vascular surgery. 33 |
| ISSN: | 1615-5947 |
| Popis: | Background In the endovascular treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) with short or absent infrarenal neck, the delay in the availability of fenestrated device and its high cost, have led to the manufacture of standardized models. Another option is the endografts with stents in parallel; however, regulated criteria for their use and long-term studies are lacking. The aim of this study was to assessed whether the AAA treated with fenestrated device or stents in parallel in our department, complied with the characteristics for the placement of the new endograft p-branch ® . Furthermore, the differences between the p-branch and the implanted prosthesis were analyzed. Methods Single-center and descriptive study of 41 aneurysms treated consecutively from 2008 to 2015. The anatomic characteristics analyzed were: relative distances between the visceral arteries, time position, diameter in the sealing area and number of fenestrations, and its compatibility with the p-branch. Results The anatomic compatibility rate with the p-branch options was 73.2% (30 cases). Of the 11 incompatible cases, 6 were due to misalignment of the visceral branches, 2 due to the aortic neck diameter being greater, another because the femoral access was inappropriate, and 2 more due to the fenestration configuration. Of the 30 cases in which compatibility existed, in 12 (40%) the configuration used coincided with the p-branch. In 13 cases, the number of fenestrations was higher than those actually used, with 23 fenestrations carried out and 39 hypothetical fenestrations with the new endograft. In the 5 remaining cases, a fenestration for the celiac trunk was necessary to achieve an adequate seal. Conclusions The p-branch could meet the needs of three-quarters of the aortic anatomies of our series, with favorable expectations on cost and waiting time. However, in most cases either a higher number of fenestrations are needed for visceral arteries or the proximal seal was shorter than would be ideal. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|