A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Safety and efficacy of physician-modified thoracic endovascular aortic repair using a low-profile device for aortic arch lesions. | LitMetric

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study focused on the safety and effectiveness of a new low-profile device for treating lesions in the aortic arch, with 42 patients participating and an average age of 67.2 years.
  • Results showed no major complications during the procedure, with only one minor stroke observed post-operation, and most patients showed good recovery after an average follow-up of 18 months.
  • The findings suggest that this physician-modified approach is a promising and efficient method for treating aortic arch issues, but further long-term studies are needed to assess its durability and outcomes over time.

Article Abstract

Background: We investigated the safety and efficacy of physician-modified thoracic endovascular aortic repair using a low-profile device for aortic arch lesions.

Methods: A total of 42 consecutive patients (mean age 67.2 ± 12.7 years; 32 men) with aortic arch lesions were treated by physician-modified thoracic endovascular aortic repair using a low-profile device (Zenith Alpha Thoracic Endovascular Graft) with four scallops or 13 fenestrations for the common carotid artery and 38 fenestrations or 30 branches for the left subclavian artery. The aortic repair indications were acute type B aortic dissection (n = 17, 40.5%), degenerative aneurysm (n = 14, 33.3%), chronic dissection aneurysmal degeneration (n = 4, 9.5%), and ulcer-like projection (n = 2, 4.8%). The mean iliac artery diameter was 7.6 ± 1.1 mm.

Results: There were no branches covered unintentionally or patients who died and suffered from severe spinal cord ischemia perioperatively. One patient (2.4%) experienced a postoperative minor stroke with full neurological recovery. The mean follow-up time was 18 ± 11 months, with 28 patients (66.7%) having at least 12 months. One access-related complication (2.4%) occurred. Two residual Ia (4.8%) and three residual IIIa (7.1%) endoleaks were treated by reintervention. There were no open repair conversions, ruptures, or other aortic complications.

Conclusion: Physician-modified thoracic endovascular aortic repair using the low-profile device may be a safe, feasible, and time-saving method for preserving the cervical artery and has high reproducibility and anatomical reconstruction. However, its durability requires long-term follow-up.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02184923231168295DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

thoracic endovascular
20
aortic repair
20
physician-modified thoracic
16
endovascular aortic
16
repair low-profile
16
low-profile device
16
aortic arch
12
aortic
10
safety efficacy
8
efficacy physician-modified
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!