AIM： To evaluate patterns of obstruction, etiological spectrum and non-surgical treatment in patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome in India. METHODS： Forty-nine consecutive cases of Budd- Chiari syndrome （BCS） were p...AIM： To evaluate patterns of obstruction, etiological spectrum and non-surgical treatment in patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome in India. METHODS： Forty-nine consecutive cases of Budd- Chiari syndrome （BCS） were prospectively evaluated. All patients with refractory ascites or deteriorating liver function were, depending on morphology of inferior vena cava （IVC） and/or hepatic vein （HV） obstruction, triaged for radiological intervention, in addition to anticoagulation therapy. Asymptomatic patients, patients with diuretic-responsive ascites and stable liver function, and patients unwilling for surgical intervention were treated symptomatically with anticoagulation. RESULTS： Mean duration of symptoms was 41.5 ± 11.2 （range = 1-240） too. HV thrombosis （HVT） was present in 29 （59.1%）, IVC thrombosis in eight （16.3%）, membranous obstruction of IVC in two （4%） and both IVC-HV thrombosis in 10 （20.4%） cases. Of 35 cases tested for hypercoagulability, 27 （77.1%） were positive for one or more hypercoagulable states. Radiological intervention was technically successful in 37/38 （97.3%）： IVC stenting in seven （18.9%）, IVC balloon angioplasty in two （5.4%）, combined IVC-HV stenting in two （5.4%）, HV stenting in 11 （29.7%）, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt （TIPS） in 13 （35.1%） and combined TIPS-IVC stenting in two （5.4%）. Complications encountered in follow-up： death in five, re-stenosis of the stent in five （17.1%）, hepatic encephalopathy in two and hepatocellular carcinoma in one patient. Of nine patients treated medically, two showed complete resolution of HVT. CONCLUSION： IN our series, HVT was the predominant cause of BCS. In the last five years with the availability of sophisticated tests for hypercoagulability, etiologies were defined in 85.7% of cases. Non-surgical management was successful in most cases.展开更多
Percutaneous transluminal renal artery stenting （PTRAS） has been proved to have no more benefit than medication alone in treating atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis （ARAS）. Whether PTRAS could improve left ven-...Percutaneous transluminal renal artery stenting （PTRAS） has been proved to have no more benefit than medication alone in treating atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis （ARAS）. Whether PTRAS could improve left ven- tricular hypertrophy （LVH） and reduce adverse events when based on percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） for patients with coronary artery disease （CAD） and ARAS is still unclear. A retrospective study was conducted, which explored the effect of concomitant PCI and PTRAS versus PCI alone for patients with CAD and ARAS complicated by heart failure with preserved ejection fraction （HFpEF）. A total of 228 patients meeting inclusion criteria were divided into two groups： （1） the HFpEF-I group, with PCI and PTRAS; （2） the HFpEF-II group, with PCI alone. Both groups had a two-year follow-up. The left ventricular mass index （LVMI） and other clinical characteristics were compared between groups. During the follow-up period, a substantial decrease in systolic blood pressure （SBP） was observed in the HFpEF-I group, but not in the HFpEF-II group. There was marked decrease in LVMI in both groups, but the HFpEF-I group showed a greater decrease than the HFpEF-II group. Regression analysis demonstrated that PTRAS was significantly associated with LVMI reduction and fewer adverse events after adjusting for other factors. In HFpEF patients with both CAD and ARAS, concomitant PCI and PTRAS can improve LVH and decrease the incidence of adverse events more than PCI alone. This study highlights the beneficial effect of ARAS revascularization, as a new and more aggressive revascularization strategy for such high-risk patients.展开更多
文摘AIM： To evaluate patterns of obstruction, etiological spectrum and non-surgical treatment in patients with Budd-Chiari syndrome in India. METHODS： Forty-nine consecutive cases of Budd- Chiari syndrome （BCS） were prospectively evaluated. All patients with refractory ascites or deteriorating liver function were, depending on morphology of inferior vena cava （IVC） and/or hepatic vein （HV） obstruction, triaged for radiological intervention, in addition to anticoagulation therapy. Asymptomatic patients, patients with diuretic-responsive ascites and stable liver function, and patients unwilling for surgical intervention were treated symptomatically with anticoagulation. RESULTS： Mean duration of symptoms was 41.5 ± 11.2 （range = 1-240） too. HV thrombosis （HVT） was present in 29 （59.1%）, IVC thrombosis in eight （16.3%）, membranous obstruction of IVC in two （4%） and both IVC-HV thrombosis in 10 （20.4%） cases. Of 35 cases tested for hypercoagulability, 27 （77.1%） were positive for one or more hypercoagulable states. Radiological intervention was technically successful in 37/38 （97.3%）： IVC stenting in seven （18.9%）, IVC balloon angioplasty in two （5.4%）, combined IVC-HV stenting in two （5.4%）, HV stenting in 11 （29.7%）, transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt （TIPS） in 13 （35.1%） and combined TIPS-IVC stenting in two （5.4%）. Complications encountered in follow-up： death in five, re-stenosis of the stent in five （17.1%）, hepatic encephalopathy in two and hepatocellular carcinoma in one patient. Of nine patients treated medically, two showed complete resolution of HVT. CONCLUSION： IN our series, HVT was the predominant cause of BCS. In the last five years with the availability of sophisticated tests for hypercoagulability, etiologies were defined in 85.7% of cases. Non-surgical management was successful in most cases.
基金Project supported by the Guangdong Provincial Scientific Grant(No.2013B031800024),China
文摘Percutaneous transluminal renal artery stenting （PTRAS） has been proved to have no more benefit than medication alone in treating atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis （ARAS）. Whether PTRAS could improve left ven- tricular hypertrophy （LVH） and reduce adverse events when based on percutaneous coronary intervention （PCI） for patients with coronary artery disease （CAD） and ARAS is still unclear. A retrospective study was conducted, which explored the effect of concomitant PCI and PTRAS versus PCI alone for patients with CAD and ARAS complicated by heart failure with preserved ejection fraction （HFpEF）. A total of 228 patients meeting inclusion criteria were divided into two groups： （1） the HFpEF-I group, with PCI and PTRAS; （2） the HFpEF-II group, with PCI alone. Both groups had a two-year follow-up. The left ventricular mass index （LVMI） and other clinical characteristics were compared between groups. During the follow-up period, a substantial decrease in systolic blood pressure （SBP） was observed in the HFpEF-I group, but not in the HFpEF-II group. There was marked decrease in LVMI in both groups, but the HFpEF-I group showed a greater decrease than the HFpEF-II group. Regression analysis demonstrated that PTRAS was significantly associated with LVMI reduction and fewer adverse events after adjusting for other factors. In HFpEF patients with both CAD and ARAS, concomitant PCI and PTRAS can improve LVH and decrease the incidence of adverse events more than PCI alone. This study highlights the beneficial effect of ARAS revascularization, as a new and more aggressive revascularization strategy for such high-risk patients.
