摘要
目的对支架象鼻术和分站式杂交术治疗StanfordB型复杂型主动脉夹层进行比较分析。方法StanfordB型复杂型主动脉夹层患者79例，其中采用支架象鼻术37例为A组，分站式杂交术42例为B组，比较两组患者术后并发症、监护及治疗情况。结果两组患者术前一般资料比较差异无统计学意义。B组患者术后肺部感染、胸腔积液、肺不张、ICU综合征发生率分别为2．4％、2．4％、2．4％和7．1％，A组分别为16．2％、18．9％、18．9％和24．3％，两组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）；B组患者术后呼吸机辅助时间、ICU滞留时间、住院时间分别为（11．7±4．3）h、（59．4±21．8）h和（18．1±5．5）d；A组患者分别为（15．5±6．9）h、（93．1±29．2）h和（24．6±6．8）d，两组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05），两组患者术后用血量比较，差异有统计学意义（P〈0．05）。结论分站式杂交术可以作为治疗部分复杂型的StanfordB型夹层优先选择的治疗方式。
Objective To compare and evaluate the stented elephant trunk implantation and twostation hybrid surgical approach for Stanford B aortic dissection. Methods From May 2009 to May 2014, 79 consecutive patients with complex Stanford B aortic dissection were enrolled, including 37 cases of stented elephant trunk implantation（ Group A）and 42 cases of two-station hybrid surgical approach（ Group B）. The postoperative complications, treatment and nursing were compared between groups. Results There was no significant difference in the general data between the groups. The incidence rates of postoperative pulmonary infection,pleural effusion,pulmonary atelectasis and ICU syndrome were 2.4% ,2.4%, 2.4% and 7.1% in Group B and 16.2%, 18.9%, 18.9%, and 24.3% in Group A, respectively, and there were significant differences between the groups. Compared with Group A, the mechanical ventilation time, ICU retention time, and length of hospital stay were （ 11.7 ± 4.3 ） h, （ 59.4 ± 21.8 ） h and （ 18.1 ± 5.5）d in Group B and（15.5 ±6.9）h,（93.1 ±29.2）h and（24.6 ±6.8）d in Group A,and there were significant differences between the groups. Conclusion The two-station hybrid surgical approach can be the preferred for complex Stanford B aortic dissection.
出处
《临床外科杂志》
2015年第8期588-590,共3页
Journal of Clinical Surgery
关键词
主动脉夹层
支架象鼻术
分站式杂交术
锚定区
左锁骨下动脉
aortic dissection
stented elephant trunk technique
two-station hybrid
anchor area
left subclavian artery
