摘要
随着腔内技术的发展,腹主动脉疾病全腔内治疗的安全性和有效性已经得到广泛验证。但在胸腹主动脉疾病中,因为解剖条件更复杂,所以全腔内治疗的难度大,而其安全性和有效性也有待进一步验证。本研究总结笔者团队采用开窗/分支支架治疗胸腹主动脉扩张性病变的单中心经验,并介绍团队针对复杂性胸腹主动脉病首创的双主干技术,以期为同行提供参考和借鉴。
回顾性收集2021年10月—2023年7月在上海市第一人民医院接受开窗/分支支架治疗并至少重建2个分支动脉的37例胸腹主动脉扩张性病变患者资料。37例患者中,夹层术后远端瘤样扩张20例,胸腹主动脉瘤17例;在完善术前CTA及评估后,分别行单主干腔内治疗(26例)与双主干腔内治疗(11例)。收集患者的相关临床资料(基线资料、术前解剖参数、围术期指标、随访结局指标),分析整体治疗效果,以及双主干技术的安全性和疗效。
手术总共重建了162个分支动脉,手术技术成功率为100%。围术期发生死亡3例(8.11%)、移植物植入后综合征3例(8.11%)、Ⅲ型内漏1例(2.70%)。中位随访时间为13.73(2.33~26.74)个月,总体存活率为91.9%(34/37)。随访期间,发生Ⅲ型内漏2例(5.41%),支架再狭窄或栓塞3例(8.11%),夹层进展1例(2.70%);5例(13.51%)接受了再次干预治疗。单主干组与双主干组的重建方式、4分支重建比例以及平均所用支架数量存在明显差异(均P<0.05),其余各项指标在两组间的差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。
胸腹主动脉病变由于累及内脏分支动脉,因此治疗难度大、风险高。其治疗方式包括传统的开放手术、腔内治疗和杂交手
腔内治疗方法主要有烟囱、开窗和分支支架等。有Meta分
胸腹主动脉疾病的腔内治疗面临的难题在于隔绝病变的同时实现分支动脉重建。国内现有胸腹主动脉病变的腔内治疗主要是通过医生在手术台上对1个主体支架进行开窗或者自制分支改

图1 双主干技术重建内脏分支动脉过程示意图 A:建立双侧股动脉和左肱动脉入路;B:于近端动脉瘤释放分叉型主动脉覆膜支架;C:通过左股总动脉入路导入自制髂分支支架;D:重建双侧肾动脉;E:导入第2个髂分支支架;F:重建腹腔干和肠系膜上动脉;G-H:延长远端锚定于双侧髂总动脉
Figure 1 Illustration of the double-trunk technique for reconstructing visceral branch arteries A: Establishment of bilateral femoral artery and left brachial artery access; B: Deployment of a bifurcated aortic covered stent at the proximal aneurysm; C: Introduction of a custom-made branched stent-graft via the left femoral artery for iliac branch reconstruction; D: Reconstruction of bilateral renal arteries; E: Introduction of a second iliac branched stent-graft; F: Reconstruction of the celiac trunk and superior mesenteric artery; G-H: Extension of the distal anchoring to both iliac arteries
本研究回顾性分析2021年10月—2023年7月单中心接受了f/b EVAR治疗的胸腹主动脉病变患者,总结f/b EVAR在胸腹主动脉病变治疗中的临床结果,探讨腔内治疗胸腹主动脉病变的可行性,以及双主干技术的安全性与疗效。
通过医院信息系统检索上海市第一人民医院2021年10月—2023年7月诊断为:主动脉夹层、B型夹层、A型夹层、胸腹主动脉瘤及腹主动脉瘤等的患者。根据术前CTA筛选出至少有2条内脏动脉受累的患者,根据治疗方式进一步筛选出采用腔内治疗的患者,收集患者一般资料。患者的入组标准包括:⑴ 主动脉瘤最大主动脉直径>5 cm;⑵ 主动脉直径增长过快,半年增长>5 mm;⑶ 主动脉相关临床表现,如压迫症状,疼痛等。排除标准包括:⑴ 主动脉破裂患者;⑵ 临床资料缺失者;⑶ 拒绝行腔内治疗。本研究经上海市第一人民医院伦理委员会批准[批号:院伦快(2023)387号]。
将患者术前CTA的数据导入Radiant dicom viewer(2023.1),进行3D MPR重建。测量胸腹主动脉段的最大直径、瘤颈角度(锚定区和瘤体中心线成角)、内脏分支开口及走行等解剖参数。
所有手术均在全麻下进行。手术过程如下:采用改良Seldinger技术建立双侧股动脉及左侧肱动脉入路。胸降主动脉造影明确主动脉病变及分支开口情况后,于病变段近端植入1个分叉型主动脉支架。通过一侧股动脉入路,导入自制髂分支支架与分叉主体支架重叠后部分释放。调整髂分支支架,使得分支部分位于肾动脉开口2 cm左右。依次超选双侧肾动脉,超选成功后,释放Viabahn支架重建肾动脉。重建完成后,再次释放第2个髂分支支架与分叉主体支架重叠后,采用相同方法重建腹腔干动脉及肠系膜上动脉。分支动脉重建完成后,远端锚定于双侧髂总动脉。术后再次造影,明确动脉瘤隔绝情况及分支动脉血供(

图2 双主干技术治疗胸腹主动脉瘤病例资料 A-B:台上自制的分支支架主体和带分支髂支;C-E:经左侧肱动脉入路引入分支髂支重建腹腔干及肠系膜上动脉;F-H:经上肢入路依次重建双肾动脉;I-K:支架释放前后的对比
Figure 2 Data from cases treated with the dual main trunk technique for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm A-B: The main body of the self-made branched stent-graft with iliac branches; C-E: Reconstruction of the celiac trunk and superior mesenteric artery by introducing the iliac branch via the left brachial artery access; F-H: Sequential reconstruction of bilateral renal arteries via upper limb access; I-K: Comparison before and after stent deployment
技术成功定义为动脉病变隔绝完全,无Ⅰ型内漏发生。主要并发症包括内漏、移植物植入后综合征、肾功能损伤、分支再狭窄或栓塞、夹层进展、主动脉相关再干预、死亡等。肾功能损伤定义为术后新发肾功能不全或肌酐较术前升高30%。于术后第1、3、6、12个月及之后每年复查CTA。
最终纳入37例全腔内治疗的胸腹主动脉病变患者。在37例患者中,男性33例,女性4例;平均年龄为(60.4±13.2)岁。合并高血压32例、糖尿病3例、冠心病6例;有吸烟史患者6例;肾功能不全者3例。有行胸主动脉腔内修复术(thoracic endovascular aortic repair,TEVAR)史者18例、行腹主动脉腔内修复术(endovascular abdominal aortic repair,EVAR)3例。夹层术后远端扩张患者20例、胸腹主动脉瘤患者17例。胸腹主动脉瘤患者中Crawford Ⅱ型2例、Ⅲ型2例、Ⅳ型11例、Ⅴ型2例。单主干组患者与双主干组患者各项基线资料差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)(
变量 | 全组(n=37) | 单主干组(n=26) | 双主干组(n=11) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
年龄(岁,) | 60.35±13.23 | 59.85±13.10 | 61.55±14.10 | 0.726 |
男性[n(%)] | 33(89.19) | 23(88.46) | 10(90.91) | 1.000 |
吸烟[n(%)] | 6(16.22) | 5(19.23) | 1(9.09) | 0.646 |
TEVAR史[n(%)] | 18(48.65) | 12(46.15) | 6(54.55) | 0.728 |
EVAR史[n(%)] | 5(40.54) | 3(11.54) | 2(18.18) | 0.623 |
主动脉开放手术史[n(%)] | 4(10.81) | 4(15.38) | 0(0.00) | 0.296 |
冠心病史[n(%)] | 6(16.22) | 5(19.23) | 1(9.09) | 0.646 |
糖尿病[n(%)] | 3(8.11) | 2(7.69) | 1(9.09) | 1.000 |
高血压[n(%)] | 33(89.19) | 21(80.77) | 11(100.00) | 0.295 |
肾功能不全[n(%)] | 3(8.11) | 3(11.54) | 0(0.00) | 0.0812 |
疾病分型[n(%)] | ||||
胸腹主动脉瘤 | 17(45.95) | 11(42.31) | 6(54.55) | 0.720 |
Ⅱ型 | 2(5.41) | 2(7.69) | 0(0.00) | 1.000 |
Ⅲ型 | 2(5.41) | 1(3.85) | 1(9.09) | 0.512 |
Ⅳ型 | 11(29.73) | 6(23.08) | 5(45.45) | 0.244 |
Ⅴ型 | 2(5.41) | 2(7.69) | 0(0.00) | 1.000 |
夹层术后远端扩张 | 20(54.05) | 15(57.69) | 5(45.45) | 0.720 |
住院时间[d,M(IQR)] | 11.00(8.00~15.00) | 9.50(7.75~15.25) | 13.00(10.00~15.00) | 0.205 |
注: 1)单主干组与双主干组间比较
Note: 1) Single-trunk group vs. double-trunk group
病变段的平均最大直径为(56.11±24.67)mm。夹层病变的平均最大假腔直径为(30.61±18.42)mm,平均真腔直径为(22.21±6.37)mm。动脉瘤病变的平均瘤颈角度为(38.55±18.72)°。双主干组和单主干组的解剖参数没有明显差异(均P>0.05)(
变量 | 全组(n=37) | 单主干组(n=26) | 双主干组(n=11) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
病变段最大直径(mm,) | 56.11±24.67 | 51.94±24.77 | 61.42±28.66 | 0.317 |
瘤颈部角度(°,) | 38.95±24.11 | 37.05±17.45 | 41.31±22.31 | 0.591 |
真腔直径(mm,) | 22.21±13.24 | 22.89±15.25 | 20.05±11.59 | 0.708 |
假腔直径(mm,) | 30.61±18.42 | 31.87±20.19 | 26.58±11.90 | 0.588 |
注: 1)单主干组与双主干组间比较
Note: 1) Single-trunk group vs. double-trunk group
手术技术成功率为100.0%。37例患者中重建分支的方法包括开窗(18/37,48.65%)、分支(15/37,40.54%)以及开窗联合分支(4/37,10.81%)技术。总共重建了162个分支动脉,其中27条腹腔干、34条肠系膜上动脉(有1个共干)、33条右肾动脉、31条左肾动脉、1条左副肾动脉、18条右髂动脉和18条左髂动脉,平均重建分支数量为(4.37±1.36)条。共置入244个支架,支架平均数为(6.59±2.69)个。平均手术时间(4.65±0.76)h。经股动脉入路4例、股动脉合并左肱动脉入路28例、股动脉合并右肱动脉入路2例、股动脉合并左侧桡血管入路1例、股动脉合并右侧桡血管2例;全组中位11.00(8.00~15.00)d。单主干组的重建方式包括开窗(69.23%)与分支(30.77%),无开窗+分支,双主干组的重建方式包括分支(63.64%)与开窗+分支(36.36%),无单存开窗;双主干组的患者4分支重建比例明显高于单主干组的[81.82%(9/11)vs. 42.31%(11/26),P=0.007],双主干组的平均支架数量也相应更多[(8.82±2.40)枚vs.(5.81±2.06)枚,P=0.001](
项目 | 全组(n=37) | 单主干组(n=26) | 双主干组(n=11) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
重建方式[n(%)] | ||||
开窗 | 18(48.65) | 18(69.23) | 0(0.00) | <0.001 |
分支 | 15(40.54) | 8(30.77) | 7(63.64) | |
开窗+分支 | 4(10.81) | 0(0.00) | 4(36.36) | |
受累血管数量[n(%)] | ||||
腹腔干动脉 | 27(72.97) | 17(65.38) | 10(90.91) | 0.224 |
肠系膜上动脉 | 34(91.89) | 24(92.31) | 10(90.91) | 1.000 |
右肾动脉 | 33(89.19) | 22(84.62) | 11(100.00) | 0.296 |
左肾动脉 | 31(83.78) | 20(76.92) | 11(100.00) | 0.151 |
内脏动脉区重建血管数[n(%)] | ||||
2 | 5(13.51) | 5(19.23) | 0(0.00) | 0.007 |
3 | 12(32.43) | 10(38.46) | 2(18.18) | |
4 | 20(54.05) | 11(42.31) | 9(81.82) | |
支架数量(个,) | 6.59±2.69 | 5.81±2.06 | 8.82±2.40 | 0.001 |
手术时间(h,) | 4.65±0.76 | 4.56±0.75 | 4.86±0.78 | 0.516 |
血管入路[n(%)] | ||||
股动脉 | 4(10.81) | 2(7.69) | 2(18.18) | 0.616 |
股动脉+左肱动脉 | 28(75.68) | 21(80.77) | 7(63.64) | |
股动脉+右肱动脉 | 2(5.41) | 1(3.85) | 1(9.09) | |
股动脉+左侧桡动脉 | 1(2.7) | 1(3.85) | 0(0.00) | |
股动脉+右侧桡动脉 | 2(5.41) | 1(3.85) | 1(9.09) | |
住院时间[d,M(IQR)] | 11.00(8.00~15.00) | 9.50(7.75~15.25) | 13.00(10.00~15.00) | 0.205 |
注: 1)单主干组与双主干组间比较
Note: 1) Single-trunk group vs. double-trunk group
单主干组死亡2例患者,1例患者术后7 h死于突发的呼吸衰竭伴心衰,1例患者术后10 d死于腹主动脉瘤破裂出血伴多脏器功能衰竭;双主干组中1例患者死于病毒感染诱发多脏器功能衰竭。围术期Ⅲ型内漏发生率为2.7%(n=1)。移植物植入后综合征发生率为8.1%(n=3)、截瘫发生率为0。随访期间发生Ⅲ型内漏2例(5.4%)、分支动脉狭窄3例(8.1%)(其中1例为肾动脉狭窄,1例为左锁骨下动脉狭窄,1例为肠系膜下动脉段狭窄),夹层进展累及头臂干及颈动脉1例(2.7%),后腹膜血肿1例(2.7%),再干预5例(13.5%)(2例内漏、肾动脉狭窄、左锁骨下动脉狭窄及夹层进展患者接受再干预)。单主干组和双主干组的术后ICU时间、围术期相关指标、随访期再干预率等差异均无统计学意义(均P>0.05)(
变量 | 全组(n=37) | 单主干组(n=26) | 双主干组(n=11) | |
---|---|---|---|---|
ICU时间[n(%)] | ||||
0 | 5(13.51) | 4(15.38) | 1(9.09) | 0.874 |
<24 h | 11(29.73) | 8(30.77) | 3(27.27) | |
1~7 d | 17(45.95) | 12(46.20) | 5(45.45) | |
>7 d | 4(10.81) | 2(7.69) | 2(18.18) | |
死亡[n(%)] | 3(8.11) | 2(7.69) | 1(9.09) | 1.000 |
Ⅰ型内漏[n(%)] | 0(0.00) | 0(0.00) | 0(0.00) | 1.000 |
Ⅲ型内漏[n(%)] | 3(8.11) | 3(11.54) | 0(0.00) | 1.000 |
移植物植入后综合征[n(%)] | 3(8.11) | 2(7.69) | 1(9.09) | 1.000 |
分支再狭窄或栓塞[n(%)] | 3(8.11) | 2(7.69) | 1(9.09) | 1.000 |
动脉瘤进展[n(%)] | 1(2.70) | 1(3.85) | 0(0.00) | 1.000 |
再干预[n(%)] | 5(13.51) | 4(15.38) | 1(9.09) | 0.591 |
后腹膜血肿[n(%)] | 1(2.70) | 1(3.85) | 0(0.00) | 1.000 |
注: 1)单主干组与双主干组间比较
Note: 1) Single-trunk group vs. double-trunk group

图3 双主干组与单主干组患者术后免于再干预率曲线
Figure 3 Curves of re-intervention-free rate after surgery for patients in the double-trunk group and single-trunk group
对于胸腹主动脉扩张性病变,传统的开放手术的仍然是一线治疗方
目前胸腹主动脉瘤的腔内治疗的方法包括平型支架技术和开窗/分支支架技术。平行支架包括多烟囱支架技术(八爪鱼技术)和潜望镜技术(逆向烟囱技术)
1997年Inoue
开窗/分支支架可以分为商品化支架(company-manufactured device,CMD)和医生自制支架(physician-modified endograft,PMEG)。现有的国外商品化支架如t-branch覆膜支架(Cook,美国),TAMBE覆膜支架(Gore,美国),Valiant胸腹主动脉瘤覆膜支架(Medtronic,美国)
释放1个主体支架同时精确定位4根分支动脉难度大。此外,当内脏动脉开口朝上发出时,分支的开口方向也会影响分支动脉超选。针对这种情况,本团队在f/b EVAR技术的基础上,设计了一种双主干技
再干预也影响着腔内治疗的疗效。在本研究37例患者中,有5例随访期接受了再干预治疗,其中单主干组4例,双主干组1例。主动脉最大径、真腔直径、锚定区直径、主动脉成角(锚定区和瘤体成角)、锚定区有无钙化以及内脏动脉直径、开口方向、是否合并夹层等因素,这与患者预后密切相关。单主干组中,夹层患者比例较高。相比于胸腹主动脉瘤,夹层术后远端扩张患者真腔狭小,血管形态不规则,主体支架进入后调整位置困难甚至出现支架扭曲情况。此外夹层患者中常有内脏动脉起自假腔,这都会导致分支支架挤压造成植入困难影响的预后情况。此外,内漏也是影响患者长期预后的一个重要因素。在本研究中,Ⅲ型内漏是最常见的内漏。Ⅲ型内漏和靶血管成角以及开口处的主动脉直径有
综上所述,自制开窗/分支支架治疗胸腹主动脉扩张性病变是一个可行的方案,具有较好的短期疗效。而且对于高龄、多合并症的患者来说,腔内治疗可能比开放手术、杂交手术更加适合。胸腹主动脉病变腔内治疗的具体策略的制定需要综合考虑患者的一般情况、解剖条件、分期等多种因
总之,开窗/分支支架治疗胸腹主动脉病变患者是一种安全有效的方法。在开窗/分支支架基础上,采用双主干技术仍然取得较好的短期疗效。但还需要有进一步的研究来验证其安全性和有效性。
作者贡献声明
何孟伟,冯家烜,曾照祥,冯睿负责研究思路构思;何孟伟,霍威学,曾照祥,冯睿负责方法设计;何孟伟,霍威学,张恒,陆烨,田文负责临床数据收集;何孟伟,张恒,陆烨,田文,冯家烜,曾照祥,冯睿负责数据的整理和分析;何孟伟,曾照祥负责初稿撰写;何孟伟,霍威学,张恒,陆烨,田文,冯家烜,曾照祥,冯睿负责初稿的审阅和修改、研究结果可视化。
利益冲突
本研究未受到任何机构或个人的赞助,所有作者均未披露与本研究相关的利益冲突。
参考文献
耿印帅, 李观强, 张喜成. 胸腹主动脉瘤外科治疗现状及进展[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2021, 30(6):730-735. doi: 10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.2021.06.014. [百度学术]
Geng YS, Li GQ, Zhang XC. Current status and progress of surgical treatment of thoracic-abdominal aortic aneurysm[J]. China Journal of General Surgery, 2021, 30(6):730-735. doi: 10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.2021.06.014. [百度学术]
Kahlberg A, Ferrante AMR, Miloro R, et al. Late patency of reconstructed visceral arteries after open repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm[J]. J Vasc Surg, 2018, 67(4):1017-1024. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2017.08.067. [百度学术]
胡楠, 李晓强. 开窗及分支支架技术治疗累及腹腔内脏动脉的胸腹主动脉病变[J]. 中华血管外科杂志, 2021, 6(2):85-87. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn101411-20210510-00044. [百度学术]
Hu N, Li XQ. Fenestration and branch stent technology for the treatment of thoracic-abdominal aortic aneurysms involving[J]. Chinese Journal of Vascular Surgery, 2021, 6(2):85-87. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn101411-20210510-00044. [百度学术]
依地热斯·艾山, 李新喜, 田野, 等. 开窗支架与烟囱技术腔内治疗腹主动脉瘤疗效比较的Meta分析[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2019, 28(6):696-705. doi: 10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.2019.06.008. [百度学术]
Yidiresi·AS, Li XX, Tian Y, et al. Fenestrated endografts versus chimney stent repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms: a Meta-analysis[J]. China Journal of General Surgery, 2019, 28(6):696-705. doi: 10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.2019.06.008. [百度学术]
郭伟, 贺元. 复杂腹主动脉瘤对近端锚定区的要求及不同技术的评价[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2020, 29(6):645-648. doi: 10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.2020.06.001. [百度学术]
Guo W, He Y. Proximal landing zone requirements in complex abdominal aortic aneurysms and evaluation of different techniques[J]. China Journal of General Surgery, 2020, 29(6):645-648. doi: 10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.2020.06.001. [百度学术]
胡佳腾, 李逢时, 徐昕童, 等. 3D打印辅助预开窗及分支支架腔内修复术治疗胸腹主动脉瘤[J]. 中华普通外科杂志, 2023, 38(7):491-495. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn113855-20230507-00230. [百度学术]
Hu JT, Li FS, Xu XT, et al. 3D printing-assisted pre-fenestration and branch stent endovascular repair for the treatment of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms[J]. Chinese Journal of General Surgery, 2023, 38(7):491-495. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.cn113855-20230507-00230. [百度学术]
刘益明, 刘昭, 吴凡, 等. 3D打印辅助体外预开窗技术在复杂主动脉疾病腔内治疗的应用[J]. 中国血管外科杂志: 电子版, 2023, 15(1):38-42. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-7429.2023.01.009. [百度学术]
Liu YM, Liu Z, Wu F, et al. Application of pre-fenestrated stent-graft technique guided by 3-dimensional printing in endovascular treatment of complicated aortic diseases[J]. Chinese Journal of Vascular Surgery: Electronic Edition, 2023, 15(1):38-42. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-7429.2023.01.009. [百度学术]
Zeng Z, Zhao Y, Ainiwaer A, et al. Physician-modified branched double-trunk stent-graft (PBDS) for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm[J]. Heart Lung Circ, 2021, 30(6):896-901. doi: 10.1016/j.hlc.2020.10.022. [百度学术]
JrUpchurch GR, Escobar GA, Azizzadeh A, et al. Society for Vascular Surgery clinical practice guidelines of thoracic endovascular aortic repair for descending thoracic aortic aneurysms[J]. J Vasc Surg, 2021, 73(1S):55S-83S. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.05.076. [百度学术]
Isselbacher EM, Preventza O, Hamilton Black J, et al. 2022 ACC/AHA guideline for the diagnosis and management of AorticDisease[J]. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2022, 80(24):e223-393. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2022.08.004. [百度学术]
Khan FM, Naik A, Hameed I, et al. Open repair of descending thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms: A Meta-analysis[J]. Ann Thorac Surg, 2020, 110(6):1941-1949. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.04.069. [百度学术]
Coselli JS, LeMaire SA, Preventza O, et al. Outcomes of 3309 thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repairs[J]. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2016, 151(5):1323-1337. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2015.12.050. [百度学术]
Gombert A, Frankort J, Keszei A, et al. Outcome of elective and emergency open thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in 255 cases: a retrospective single centre study[J]. Eur J Vasc Endovascular Surg, 2022, 63(4):578-586. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2022.02.003. [百度学术]
Gaudino M, Lau C, Munjal M, et al. Open repair of ruptured descending thoracic and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms[J]. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2015, 150(4):814-823. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2015.06.077. [百度学术]
Antoniou GA, Juszczak MT, Antoniou SA, et al. Editor's choice–fenestrated or branched endovascular versus open repair for complex aortic aneurysms: meta-analysis of time to event propensity score matched data[J]. Eur J Vasc Endovascular Surg, 2021, 61(2):228-237. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2020.10.010. [百度学术]
Shu C, Luo MY, Li QM, et al. Early results of left carotid chimney technique in endovascular repair of acute non-A-non-B aortic dissections[J]. J Endovascular Ther, 2011, 18(4):477-484. doi: 10.1583/11-3401.1. [百度学术]
Simons JP, Bing SE, Flahive JM, et al. Trends in use of the only Food and Drug Administration-approved commercially available fenestrated endovascular aneurysm repair device in the United States[J]. J Vasc Surg, 2017, 65(5):1260-1269. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.10.101. [百度学术]
Kusadokoro S, Hori D, Yuri K, et al. Dissected thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair with modified parallel endografting[J]. J Cardiac Surg, 2020, 35(11):3220-3223. doi: 10.1111/jocs.14962. [百度学术]
Han SM, Wartman S, Ham SW, et al. Multilayered parallel endografting for urgent endovascular repair of a severely angulated thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm[J]. Ann Vasc Surg, 2017, 42:56-61. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2017.02.007. [百度学术]
Inoue K, Iwase T, Sato M, et al. Transluminal endovascular branched graft placement for a pseudoaneurysm: reconstruction of the descending thoracic aorta including the celiac axis[J]. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 1997, 114(5):859-861. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5223(97)70096-5. [百度学术]
Chuter TAM, Gordon RL, Reilly LM, et al. Multi-branched stent-graft for type Ⅲ thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm[J]. J Vasc Interv Radiol, 2001, 12(3):391-392. doi: 10.1016/s1051-0443(07)61924-1. [百度学术]
Chuter TAM, Gordon RL, Reilly LM, et al. An endovascular system for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair[J]. J Endovascular Ther, 2001, 8(1):25-33. doi: 10.1583/1545-1550(2001)0080025: aesfta>2.0.co;2. [百度学术]
Bosiers M, Kölbel T, Resch T, et al. Early and midterm results from a postmarket observational study of Zenith t-Branch thoracoabdominal endovascular graft[J]. J Vasc Surg, 2021, 74(4):1081-1089.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2021.01.070. [百度学术]
Oderich GS, Ribeiro M, Reis de Souza L, et al. Endovascular repair of thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms using fenestrated and branched endografts[J]. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2017, 153(2):S32-41. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2016.10.008. [百度学术]
Atkins AD, Atkins MD. Branched and fenestrated aortic endovascular grafts[J]. Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J, 2023, 19(2):15-23. doi: 10.14797/mdcvj.1200. [百度学术]
Gao JP, Zhang HP, Xiong J, et al. First-in-Human Clinical Trial of the WeFlow-JAAA Endograft System in Patients With Juxtarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms[J]. J Endovasc Ther, 2023. doi: 10.1177/15266028231210480. [Online ahead of print] [百度学术]
Yang GM, Zhang M, Zhang YP, et al. Endovascular repair of postdissection aortic aneurysms using physician-modified endografts[J]. Ann Thorac Surg, 2021, 112(4):1201-1208. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.11.016. [百度学术]
朱杰昌, 戴向晨, 罗宇东, 等. 体外开窗腔内主动脉修复术治疗胸腹主动脉病变的早期结果分析[J]. 中华医学杂志, 2018, 98(12):921-925. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0376-2491.2018.12.009. [百度学术]
Zhu JC, Dai XC, Luo YD, et al. Early results of fenestrated endovascular aortic repair for the treatment of patients with thoracoabdominal pathologies[J]. National Medical Journal of China, 2018, 98(12):921-925. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0376-2491.2018.12.009. [百度学术]
Yang G, Zhang M, Zhang Y, et al. Midterm outcomes of physician-modified endovascular grafts for repair of postdissection and degenerative thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms[J]. JTCVS Tech, 2023, 18:1-10. doi: 10.1016/j.xjtc.2022.12.008. [百度学术]
Gennai S, Simonte G, Mattia M, et al. Analysis of predisposing factors for type Ⅲ endoleaks from directional branches after branched endovascular repair for thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms[J]. J Vasc Surg, 2023, 77(3):677-684. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2022.10.041. [百度学术]
Manzur M, Magee GA, Ziegler KR, et al. Caudally directed in situ fenestrated endografting for emergent thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair[J]. J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech, 2021, 7(3):553-557. doi: 10.1016/j.jvscit.2020.12.024. [百度学术]
Chen ZP, Liu Z, Cai J, et al. Risk factors for target vessel endoleaks after physician-modified fenestrated or branched endovascular aortic repair for postdissection thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms[J]. J Vasc Surg, 2023, 77(3):685-693. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2022.10.012. [百度学术]
Ouzounian M, Tadros RO, Svensson LG, et al. Thoracoabdominal aortic disease and repair: JACC focus seminar, part 3[J]. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2022, 80(8):845-856. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.05.056. [百度学术]
Bertoglio L, Kahlberg A, Gallitto E, et al. Role of historical and procedural staging during elective fenestrated and branched endovascular treatment of extensive thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysms[J]. J Vasc Surg, 2022, 75(5):1501-1511. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2021.11.056. [百度学术]