腹主动脉瘤腔内修复与开放手术疗效初探  

A comparision between endovascular aortic repair and open aortic surgery for treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm

作　　者：张永杰[1] 霍鑫[1] 

机构地区：[1]山东省淄博市中心医院血管外科,山东淄博255036

出　　处：《中国普通外科杂志》2009年第6期555-557,共3页China Journal of General Surgery

摘　　要：目的比较腹主动脉瘤开放手术与腔内治疗的效果。方法对42例分别行开放手术和腔内修复的腹主动脉瘤患者的手术相关情况、围手术期并发症发生率、病死率、随访情况以及相关的费用进行对比分析。结果腔内修复组手术时间、术中出血量、输血量均少于开放手术组(P<0.01),两组围手术期并发症差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),两组术后2年生存率差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),但腔内修复组术后远期并发症发生率高于开放手术组(P<0.01)。住院费用腔内修复组明显高于开放手术组(P<0.01)。结论腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术具有手术时间短、微创的特点,但具有较高的远期并发症,开放手术组6个月生存质量优于腔内修复组。Objective To evaluate the use of endovascular aortic repair （EVAR） and open aortic surgery （ IAS ） for treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Methods A retrospective review of patients treated with EVAR or IAS between 2002 and 2007 was performed. The occurrence rate of perioperative complications, morbidity and mortality, survival rate, quality of life, and cost of treatment were compared. Results Forty-two patients （301NS, 12EVAR ） were treated. Operating time, the intraoperative blood loss, and intraoperative blood transfusion were less in EVAR group than in the IAS group （ P 〈 0.01 ） , the occurrence rate of perioperative complicatines, the rate of survival after 2 years, and cost of treatment in ENAR group were higher than that of IAS group. Conclusions EVAR has the advantages of less invasion and short operating time, but with more complications on long-term follow up. The quality of life at 6 months after open operation is better than that of EVAR.

关 键 词：主动脉瘤 腹/外科学 腔内修复术 开放手术 对比研究 

分 类 号：R654.3[医药卫生—外科学]