Sealing Devices in Chimney Aortic Repair (CH EVAS) Versus Chimney Aortic Repair with Conventional Devices (CH EVAR): A Systematic Review
| Autor: | Giovanni Nano, Lorenzo Muzzarelli, Federico Ambrogi, Alberto M. Settembrini, Valentina Milani, Daniela Mazzaccaro |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2019 |
| Předmět: |
Male
Complete data medicine.medical_specialty Time Factors Endoleak Prosthesis Design Aortic repair 030218 nuclear medicine & medical imaging Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation 03 medical and health sciences Postoperative Complications 0302 clinical medicine Risk Factors medicine Humans Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging Chimney Aged business.industry Endovascular Procedures Graft Occlusion Vascular Chimney graft medicine.disease Abdominal aortic aneurysm Blood Vessel Prosthesis Surgery Treatment Outcome Female Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine business Aortic Aneurysm Abdominal |
| Zdroj: | CardioVascular and Interventional Radiology. 42:487-494 |
| ISSN: | 1432-086X 0174-1551 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/s00270-018-2149-z |
| Popis: | The aim of this study was to review the literature about the occurrence of postoperative type I endoleak (EL) and chimney graft thrombosis (CGT) after the use of sealing devices in chimney endovascular aortic repair (Ch EVAS), compared to chimney EVAR using conventional devices (Ch EVAR). A systematic review of the literature on PubMed and MEDLINE with the terms “Chimney” and “Parallel grafts” was performed. The review was set up following the PRISMA guidelines. Case series about the use of the chimney/snorkel technique during endovascular repair of juxtarenal/pararenal aneurysms (AAA) were considered. Only papers with full text available in English and reporting complete data with at least 1 month of follow-up about at least 5 cases were included in the analysis. In total, 90 papers were assessed for eligibility. According to the inclusion criteria, only 25 papers could be analyzed (20 in the Ch EVAR group and 5 in the Ch EVAS group). A type I EL occurred in 9.3% after Ch EVAR (95% CI 7.1–12.2%) and in 8.3% after Ch EVAS (95% CI 3.5–18.5%), being not significantly different. CGT occurred in 10.7% of cases after Ch EVAR (95% CI 8.8–13%) and in 8.8% of cases after Ch EVAS (95% CI 3.3–21.3%), being also not significantly different. The reported rate of type I EL and CGT occurring after Ch EVAR tended to be slightly higher than those reported after Ch EVAS, even if the difference was not statistically significant. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Full text from SpringerLink