Cargando…

Comparative study on clinical efficacy of different methods for the treatment of intramural aortic hematoma

To explore the difference of curative effect between different treatment modalities, in order to provide reference for the treatment of aortic intramural hematoma (IMH). 168 patients with aortic intramural hematoma diagnosed and treated from January 2010 to July 2020 were selected in the Second Affi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Luo, Junfu, Zhao, Wenpeng, Xu, Jiasheng, Zou, Rui, Zhang, Kaihua, Wan, Yanhua, Wan, Shasha, Wang, Riwei, Zeng, Qingfu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8175714/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34083629
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-91151-0
_version_ 1783703102032969728
author Luo, Junfu
Zhao, Wenpeng
Xu, Jiasheng
Zou, Rui
Zhang, Kaihua
Wan, Yanhua
Wan, Shasha
Wang, Riwei
Zeng, Qingfu
author_facet Luo, Junfu
Zhao, Wenpeng
Xu, Jiasheng
Zou, Rui
Zhang, Kaihua
Wan, Yanhua
Wan, Shasha
Wang, Riwei
Zeng, Qingfu
author_sort Luo, Junfu
collection PubMed
description To explore the difference of curative effect between different treatment modalities, in order to provide reference for the treatment of aortic intramural hematoma (IMH). 168 patients with aortic intramural hematoma diagnosed and treated from January 2010 to July 2020 were selected in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University. Among them, 48 patients were diagnosed with Stanford A aortic intramural hematoma and 120 were diagnosed with Stanford B aortic intramural hematoma. According to the therapeutic methods, patients were divided into conservative treatment group and endovascular treatment group (TEVAR). For endovascular treatment group, according to the different timing of surgery, can be divided into acute phase group (onset within 72 h) and non-acute phase group (time of onset > 72 h).The clinical data and follow-up data were collected and analyzed by variance analysis and χ(2) test. There were 168 patients diagnosed with aortic intramural hematoma 39 of them were (81.25%) Stanford A aortic intramural hematoma patients with pleural or pericardial effusion. For patient with Stanford A aortic intramural hematoma, endovascular treatment was performed in 15 patients (31.2%), and 33 cases (68.8%) for conservative treatment. The average follow-up (24.9 ± 13.9) was months. There were 120 patients with Stanford type B aortic intramural hematoma (71.4%), 60 patients received endovascular treatment (50%), and 60 patients (50%) received conservative treatment, with an average follow-up of (27.8 ± 14.6) months. For Stanford A type aortic intramural hematoma patients when the maximum aortic diameter ≥ 50 mm or hematoma thickness ≥ 11 mm, with high morbidity and mortality, positive endovascular treatment can reduce complications and death. For patients with Stanford type B aortic intramural hematoma, when the maximum aortic diameter ≥ 40 mm or hematoma thickness ≥ 10 mm, with high morbidity and mortality, positive endovascular treatment can reduce complications and death. Both Stanford type A and B aortic intramural hematoma patients could benefit from the endovascular treatment when the initial maximum aortic diameter is ≥ 50 mm or the hematoma thickness is ≥ 11 mm.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8175714
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-81757142021-06-07 Comparative study on clinical efficacy of different methods for the treatment of intramural aortic hematoma Luo, Junfu Zhao, Wenpeng Xu, Jiasheng Zou, Rui Zhang, Kaihua Wan, Yanhua Wan, Shasha Wang, Riwei Zeng, Qingfu Sci Rep Article To explore the difference of curative effect between different treatment modalities, in order to provide reference for the treatment of aortic intramural hematoma (IMH). 168 patients with aortic intramural hematoma diagnosed and treated from January 2010 to July 2020 were selected in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Nanchang University. Among them, 48 patients were diagnosed with Stanford A aortic intramural hematoma and 120 were diagnosed with Stanford B aortic intramural hematoma. According to the therapeutic methods, patients were divided into conservative treatment group and endovascular treatment group (TEVAR). For endovascular treatment group, according to the different timing of surgery, can be divided into acute phase group (onset within 72 h) and non-acute phase group (time of onset > 72 h).The clinical data and follow-up data were collected and analyzed by variance analysis and χ(2) test. There were 168 patients diagnosed with aortic intramural hematoma 39 of them were (81.25%) Stanford A aortic intramural hematoma patients with pleural or pericardial effusion. For patient with Stanford A aortic intramural hematoma, endovascular treatment was performed in 15 patients (31.2%), and 33 cases (68.8%) for conservative treatment. The average follow-up (24.9 ± 13.9) was months. There were 120 patients with Stanford type B aortic intramural hematoma (71.4%), 60 patients received endovascular treatment (50%), and 60 patients (50%) received conservative treatment, with an average follow-up of (27.8 ± 14.6) months. For Stanford A type aortic intramural hematoma patients when the maximum aortic diameter ≥ 50 mm or hematoma thickness ≥ 11 mm, with high morbidity and mortality, positive endovascular treatment can reduce complications and death. For patients with Stanford type B aortic intramural hematoma, when the maximum aortic diameter ≥ 40 mm or hematoma thickness ≥ 10 mm, with high morbidity and mortality, positive endovascular treatment can reduce complications and death. Both Stanford type A and B aortic intramural hematoma patients could benefit from the endovascular treatment when the initial maximum aortic diameter is ≥ 50 mm or the hematoma thickness is ≥ 11 mm. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-06-03 /pmc/articles/PMC8175714/ /pubmed/34083629 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-91151-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Luo, Junfu
Zhao, Wenpeng
Xu, Jiasheng
Zou, Rui
Zhang, Kaihua
Wan, Yanhua
Wan, Shasha
Wang, Riwei
Zeng, Qingfu
Comparative study on clinical efficacy of different methods for the treatment of intramural aortic hematoma
title Comparative study on clinical efficacy of different methods for the treatment of intramural aortic hematoma
title_full Comparative study on clinical efficacy of different methods for the treatment of intramural aortic hematoma
title_fullStr Comparative study on clinical efficacy of different methods for the treatment of intramural aortic hematoma
title_full_unstemmed Comparative study on clinical efficacy of different methods for the treatment of intramural aortic hematoma
title_short Comparative study on clinical efficacy of different methods for the treatment of intramural aortic hematoma
title_sort comparative study on clinical efficacy of different methods for the treatment of intramural aortic hematoma
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8175714/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34083629
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-91151-0
work_keys_str_mv AT luojunfu comparativestudyonclinicalefficacyofdifferentmethodsforthetreatmentofintramuralaortichematoma
AT zhaowenpeng comparativestudyonclinicalefficacyofdifferentmethodsforthetreatmentofintramuralaortichematoma
AT xujiasheng comparativestudyonclinicalefficacyofdifferentmethodsforthetreatmentofintramuralaortichematoma
AT zourui comparativestudyonclinicalefficacyofdifferentmethodsforthetreatmentofintramuralaortichematoma
AT zhangkaihua comparativestudyonclinicalefficacyofdifferentmethodsforthetreatmentofintramuralaortichematoma
AT wanyanhua comparativestudyonclinicalefficacyofdifferentmethodsforthetreatmentofintramuralaortichematoma
AT wanshasha comparativestudyonclinicalefficacyofdifferentmethodsforthetreatmentofintramuralaortichematoma
AT wangriwei comparativestudyonclinicalefficacyofdifferentmethodsforthetreatmentofintramuralaortichematoma
AT zengqingfu comparativestudyonclinicalefficacyofdifferentmethodsforthetreatmentofintramuralaortichematoma