Back to Search Start Over

Comparative effectiveness and safety of laser, needle, and 'quick fenestrater' in in situ fenestration during thoracic endovascular aortic repair

Authors :
Xiaokai Wang
Jianjin Wu
Kangkang Zhi
Sili Zou
Jie Jin
Jun Bai
Lefeng Qu
Source :
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine, Vol 10 (2023)
Publication Year :
2023
Publisher :
Frontiers Media S.A., 2023.

Abstract

BackgroundSpecial instruments are needed for the revascularization of aortic branches in in situ fenestration during thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). This prospective study compared the effectiveness and safety of three currently used fenestraters: laser, needle, and Quick Fenestrater (QF).MethodsIn all, 101 patients who underwent TEVAR for aortic disease (dissection, n = 62; aneurysm, n = 16, or ulcer, n = 23) were enrolled. All patients were randomly assigned to three groups: 34 were assigned to laser fenestration, 36 to needle fenestration, and 31 to QF fenestration. The epidemiological data, treatment, imaging findings, and follow-up outcomes were analyzed using data from the medical records.ResultsThe technical success rates of the laser, needle, and QF fenestration groups were 94.1%, 94.4%, and 100% (p > 0.05). After correction of mixed factors such as age and gender, it was showed the average operative time (Laser group: 130.01 ± 9.36 min/ Needle group: 149.80 ± 10.18 min vs. QF group: 101.10 ± 6.75 min, p 0.05): One case of sheath thermal injury and one case of vertebral artery ischemia occurred in the laser fenestration group; one case each of access site hematoma and brachial artery thrombosis were reported in the needle fenestration group. 89 (88.1%, 89/101) patients were followed for a median of 12.6 ± 1.6 months. The overall postoperative complication rates of the laser, needle, and QF fenestration groups were 3.3%, 6.5%, and 0% (p > 0.05): In the laser fenestration group, there was one death due to postoperative ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; in the needle fenestration group, one patient developed occlusion of the bridge stent; no complications occurred in the QF group.ConclusionAll three fenestration methods were effective in reconstructing supra-arch artery during TEVAR. QF fenestration required less contrast agent, with a shorter surgery duration and fewer complications than laser and needle fenestration.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
2297055X
Volume :
10
Database :
Directory of Open Access Journals
Journal :
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
edsdoj.097bf998317e4712a8b47c9512efcbf9
Document Type :
article
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2023.1250177