Comparison on radiation doses of in vitro pre-fenestration and in situ fenestration thoracic endovascular aortic repair in treatment of aortic disease
10.13929/j.issn.1672-8475.2024.09.010
- VernacularTitle:对比体外预开窗与原位开窗胸主动脉腔内修复术治疗主动脉疾病辐射剂量
- Author:
Fang XUE
1
;
Xiaofeng HAN
;
Gang WANG
;
Lei SHAO
;
Guangrui LIU
;
Tiezheng LI
;
Xi GUO
;
Wei QIU
;
Xiaohai MA
Author Information
1. 天津中医药大学第一附属医院 国家中医针灸临床医学研究中心介入中心,天津 300381
- Keywords:
aortic diseases;
radiation dosage;
in vitro fenestration technique;
in situ fenestration technique
- From:
Chinese Journal of Interventional Imaging and Therapy
2024;21(9):553-556
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To compare the radiation dose of in vitro pre-fenestration and in situ fenestration thoracic endovascular aortic repair(TEVAR)in treatment of aortic disease.Methods Data of 51 patients with aortic diseases who received in vitro pre-fenestration(group A)and 21 cases who underwent in situ fenestration(group B)TEVAR were retrospectively analyzed.The fluoroscopy duration,total reference air kerma(AK),total dose area product(DAP)and TEVAR time were compared between groups.Results TEVAR was successfully completed in all 72 patients.Fluoroscopy duration([21.42±8.04]min vs.[34.57±9.07]min)and total DAP(44315.0[31157.0,56307.5]μGy·m2 vs.72153.0[45460.0,82354.0]μGy·m2)in group A were both significantly lower than those in group B(both P＜0.05),while total AK(2423[1638,3533]mGy vs.3600[1898,3921]mGy)and TEVAR time([83.41±22.89]min vs.[81.00±22.13]min)in group A were not significant different from those in group B(both P＞0.05).Conclusion Compared with in situ fenestration TEVAR,both the fluoroscopy time and total DAP of in vitro pre-fenestration TEVAR significantly reduced for treating aortic diseases.
