Objective: To explore the differences and consistency among three objective refraction methods, namely, retinoscopy after cycloplegia, the Spot binocular vision screener, and automated computer refractometry in preschool children, so as to provide evidence for optimizing refractive assessment strategies in this population. Methods: A total of 116 preschool children aged 2-6 years who were referred to the Ophthalmology Department of Anhui Women and Children s Medical Center because of abnormal vision screening results between August 2025 and March 2026 were enrolled by using purposive sampling. After adequate cycloplegia was achieved with 1% atropine ophthalmic gel, objective refraction was performed by using cycloplegic retinoscopy, the Spot Vision Screener, and an autorefractor. Differences in spherical equivalent (SE) among the three methods were compared using the Friedman test, while differences in myopia detection rates were assessed using Cochran s Q test. Cycloplegic retinoscopy was used as the reference standard to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of the Spot Vision Screener and the autorefractor for myopia detection. Results: The median (interquartile range) spherical equivalent (SE) values for the right eye were identical across the three methods:1.50 (0.75, 2.50) D for cycloplegic retinoscopy, the Spot Vision Screener, and the autorefractor. For the left eye, the corresponding values were 1.50 (0.50, 2.50), 1.50 (0.50, 2.50), and 1.63 (0.75, 2.50) D, respectively. There were no significant differences in SE measurements among the three methods for either eye ( χ 2=3.77, 3.28, both P >0.05). The myopia detection rates of cycloplegic retinoscopy, the Spot Vision Screener, and the autorefractor were 13.79%, 12.07%, and 13.79%, respectively, for the right eye, and 13.79%, 14.66%, and 12.93%, respectively, for the left eye, with no significant differences among the three methods (Cochran s Q =1.60, 1.14, both P >0.05). Using cycloplegic retinoscopy as the reference standard, both the Spot Vision Screener and the autorefractor demonstrated high diagnostic accuracy and reliability for detecting myopia. Compared with the Spot Vision Screener, the autorefractor showed higher sensitivity (right eye:93.75%, 81.25%; left eye:88.24%, 76.47% ), Youden index (right eye:0.93, 0.80; left eye:0.86, 0.74), overall agreement (right eye:98.28%, 96.55%; left eye:96.55%, 94.83%), and Cohen s Kappa coefficient (right eye:0.93, 0.85; left eye:0.86, 0.78). Conclusion Under standardized cycloplegic conditions, the Spot Vision Screener and the autorefractor can serve as alternatives to retinoscopy for assessing refractive status, particularly in large scale screening and in children with poor cooperation.

Objective:To assess the safety and efficacy of fenestrated endovascular aortic repair for the treatment of diseases involving in the aortic arch.Methods:The clinical data of 52 patients with aortic arch diseases treated with fenestrated endovascular aortic repair technique at Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University from Nov 2021 to Jan 2024 was retrospectively analyzed.Results:Fenestration technique was used to reconstruct the branches of the arch for all 52 patients, with a success rate of 100%. A total of 56 stent grafts in the thoracic aorta and 56 bridging stents in the branch artery were implanted. The follow-up time ranged from 3 to 24 months, with an average of 11.3 months. One patient with type B aortic dissection underwent secondary intervention treatment after six months due to the distal reentry tear, and none of the patients experienced branch vessel ischemia, spinal cord ischemia, renal dysfunction, or aortic disease-related deaths during the following-up period.Conclusion:Fenestrated technique in endovascular aortic repair is safe and effective for treating aortic arch diseases.

Objective:To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of physician modified stent grafts technique and in situ fenestration technique for reconstructing the left subclavian artery in endovascular repair of thoracic aortic lesions with insufficient proximal landing area.Methods:A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 75 patients with aortic arch lesions treated with physician modified stent grafts and in situ fenestration techniques at the Interventional Diagnosis and Treatment Department of Beijing Anzhen Hospital affiliated with Capital Medical University from November 2021 to March 2024. Among them, 52 patients received within physician modified stent grafts (PMSGs group) and 23 patients received in situ fenestration (ISF group). Based on two fenestration techniques, to analyze the technical success rate of endovascular repair in reconstructing the left subclavian artery in the perioperative and early following up adverse events both groups.Results:The success rate of PMSGs group technique was 92.31% (48/52), while the success rate of ISF technique was 91.30%(21/23). In the PMSGs group, there was 1 case of TypeⅠa endoleak and 3 cases of TypeⅠc endoleak immediately during endovascular repair; There was 1 case of TypeⅠa endoleak and 1 case of vascular injury in the ISF group immediately during endovascular repair. One case of perioperative cerebral infarction and one case of transient blindness occurred in the PMSGs group; One case of transient blindness and 1 case of brachial artery thrombosis occurred in the perioperative period in the ISF group. During the follow-up period, there was 1 case of distal dissection aneurysm formation in the PMSGs group, and 3 cases of minor typeⅠc endoleak were found after 3 months; One case of subclavian artery stent occlusion and 2 cases of minor typeⅠc endoleak occurred in the ISF group 6 months later. There were no cases of aortic-related deaths during the follow-up period in both groups. There was no statistically significant difference in the technical success rate, incidence of adverse events during the perioperative period and follow-up period, and re-intervention rate between the two groups. The average fluoroscopy time consumed in the ISF group was significantly higher than that in the PMSGs group (34.57 min vs. 21.42 min, P<0.001), but the average hospitalization time in the PMSGs group was significantly higher than that in the ISF group (9.33 days vs. 4.71 days, P<0.001). Conclusion:PMSGs and ISF techniques for reconstructing the left subclavian artery in the treatment of thoracic aortic arch lesions showed good safety and effectiveness. The appropriate fenestration technique selected based on aorta arch anatomical and lesion conditions could achieve satisfactory efficacy in short-term, but long-term effects need to be further observed.

Objective:To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of physician modified stent grafts technique and in situ fenestration technique for reconstructing the left subclavian artery in endovascular repair of thoracic aortic lesions with insufficient proximal landing area.Methods:A retrospective analysis was conducted on the clinical data of 75 patients with aortic arch lesions treated with physician modified stent grafts and in situ fenestration techniques at the Interventional Diagnosis and Treatment Department of Beijing Anzhen Hospital affiliated with Capital Medical University from November 2021 to March 2024. Among them, 52 patients received within physician modified stent grafts (PMSGs group) and 23 patients received in situ fenestration (ISF group). Based on two fenestration techniques, to analyze the technical success rate of endovascular repair in reconstructing the left subclavian artery in the perioperative and early following up adverse events both groups.Results:The success rate of PMSGs group technique was 92.31% (48/52), while the success rate of ISF technique was 91.30%(21/23). In the PMSGs group, there was 1 case of TypeⅠa endoleak and 3 cases of TypeⅠc endoleak immediately during endovascular repair; There was 1 case of TypeⅠa endoleak and 1 case of vascular injury in the ISF group immediately during endovascular repair. One case of perioperative cerebral infarction and one case of transient blindness occurred in the PMSGs group; One case of transient blindness and 1 case of brachial artery thrombosis occurred in the perioperative period in the ISF group. During the follow-up period, there was 1 case of distal dissection aneurysm formation in the PMSGs group, and 3 cases of minor typeⅠc endoleak were found after 3 months; One case of subclavian artery stent occlusion and 2 cases of minor typeⅠc endoleak occurred in the ISF group 6 months later. There were no cases of aortic-related deaths during the follow-up period in both groups. There was no statistically significant difference in the technical success rate, incidence of adverse events during the perioperative period and follow-up period, and re-intervention rate between the two groups. The average fluoroscopy time consumed in the ISF group was significantly higher than that in the PMSGs group (34.57 min vs. 21.42 min, P<0.001), but the average hospitalization time in the PMSGs group was significantly higher than that in the ISF group (9.33 days vs. 4.71 days, P<0.001). Conclusion:PMSGs and ISF techniques for reconstructing the left subclavian artery in the treatment of thoracic aortic arch lesions showed good safety and effectiveness. The appropriate fenestration technique selected based on aorta arch anatomical and lesion conditions could achieve satisfactory efficacy in short-term, but long-term effects need to be further observed.

Objective:To assess the safety and efficacy of fenestrated endovascular aortic repair for the treatment of diseases involving in the aortic arch.Methods:The clinical data of 52 patients with aortic arch diseases treated with fenestrated endovascular aortic repair technique at Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University from Nov 2021 to Jan 2024 was retrospectively analyzed.Results:Fenestration technique was used to reconstruct the branches of the arch for all 52 patients, with a success rate of 100%. A total of 56 stent grafts in the thoracic aorta and 56 bridging stents in the branch artery were implanted. The follow-up time ranged from 3 to 24 months, with an average of 11.3 months. One patient with type B aortic dissection underwent secondary intervention treatment after six months due to the distal reentry tear, and none of the patients experienced branch vessel ischemia, spinal cord ischemia, renal dysfunction, or aortic disease-related deaths during the following-up period.Conclusion:Fenestrated technique in endovascular aortic repair is safe and effective for treating aortic arch diseases.

Objective:To report a single-center experience with the Cordis Incraft endograft with low-profile in abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) with severe infrarenal neck.Methods:All patients underwent EVAR with Incraft stent grafts between September 2019 and September 2022, were prospectively enrolled, and retrospectively analyzed. Anatomical details of the proximal aortic neck were evaluated, divided into the severe infrarenal neck (SIN, 13 cases) and normal infrarenal neck (NIN, 50 cases) groups. Early endpoints were intraoperative unplanned cuff or coil embolism, technical success (TS), 30-day morbidity/mortality, and reinterventions. Follow-up endpoints were occurrence of endoleaks, endograft migration, branch stent/ iliac stent-graft stenosis or occlusion, reintervention. The postoperative endoleak, aneurysm sac shrinkage, patency of iliac stent-graft/branch stent, and freedom from reinterventions between the two groups were compared.Results:A total of sixty-three patients were enrolled in this trial, all of whom were successfully treated. There was no significant difference in patient and lesion characteristics, excluding aneurysm neck length, neck angle and maximum aneurysm sac diameter. Proximal aneurysm neck length was shorter in the SIN group [(9.9±8.3)mm vs. (29.6±12.3)mm, P<0.001] and the neck angle was more tortile in the SIN group [(39.1±30.4)°vs.(25.1±15.4)°, P=0.036], as well maximum sac diameter was larger in the SIN group [(57.5±13.4)mm vs. (45.5±12.4)mm, P=0.016]. Although the results showed no differences between the two groups regarding the oversize rate of the main body stent graft, endoleak in operative and perioperative period, as well the hospital stay, the operative time was significantly longer in the SIN group [(96.36±31.83)min vs. (63.58±26.68)min, P=0.001]. Over the 3 years of follow-up (median time, 18 months), there were significant differences between the two groups regarding the complication occurrence of endoleak, renal stent or iliac stent-graft stenosis/occlusion ( P=0.012), and reintervention ( P=0.044). Conclusion:Data from this trial demonstrated excellent early and mid-term outcomes of EVAR using Incraft stent grafts, including severe infrarenal neck, with acceptable safety and efficacy in the short and middle terms.

Objective:To summarize and analyze the early clinical outcomes of aortic endovascular remodeling device (AERD) for single-stage complete repair of acute aortic dissection.Methods:A total of 19 patients with acute aortic dissection who underwent proximal aortic dissection repair combined with distal AERD implantation at the Center for Aortic Surgery of Beijing Anzhen Hospital, Capital Medical University between May 2023 and October 2023, of whom 6 had type A aortic dissection and 13 had type B aortic dissection, were retrospectively analyzed. One-month postoperative follow-up and aortic CTA were completed to compare pre- and postoperative abdominal branch outcomes and aortic wall remodeling.Results:The success rate of AERD implantation in this patient cohort was 100%, and no complications such as paraplegia or visceral ischemia were observed during the perioperative and postoperative follow-up periods. All abdominal branches were patent postoperatively, and 15 branches had preoperative " high-risk" subtype malperfusion, 14 of which improved postoperatively. All patients showed significant increase of the true lumen volume compared with the preoperative one, and 89.5% (17/19) had a postoperative true lumen/overall volume ratio of more than 70%.Conclusion:The single-stage complete repair of proximal aortic dissection repair combined with distal AERD implantation is simple, safe and effective, associated with satisfactory early outcomes.

Objective:This study aims to summarize the pathological anatomy characteristics of residual aortic dissection (RAD) in patients with acute aortic dissection (AAD) during the perioperative period by measuring and analyzing the preoperative and postoperative 60-day computed tomography angiography (CTA) images of the aorta, with the intention of guiding further clinical treatment.Methods:A retrospective cohort study design was adopted. A total of 224 patients hospitalized with acute aortic dissection from December 2021 to October 2022 at a single center were included according to inclusion and exclusion criteria and divided into two groups based on Stanford classification. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) images of the aorta during the perioperative period (preoperative or postoperative 60 days) were collected, and relevant indicators were measured to describe the pathological anatomy characteristics of residual aortic dissection.Results:Among the measured range, there were 4 patients (1.8%) without distal tears, with a total of 648 identified distal tears. The numbers of tears in the A, B, and C segments were 211 (32.6%), 203 (31.3%), and 234 (36.1%), respectively. The average numbers of tears in the A, B, and C segments were 0.9±1.1, 0.9±0.9, and 1.0±1.2 per person, respectively. The corresponding average tear areas were(34.9±46.7)mm 2, (29.0±30.5)mm 2, and(18.6±23.9)mm 2, respectively. The average distances from tears to the upper and lower edges of the celiac trunk were(36.8±33.2)mm and(2.3±3.8)mm, respectively; to the upper and lower edges of the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) were(2.3±4.1 )mm and(1.2±2.6) mm, respectively; to the upper and lower edges of the left renal artery were(0.1±0.6) mm and(38.5±24.4) mm, respectively; and to the upper and lower edges of the right renal artery were(0.7±2.6) mm and(8.1±17.3) mm, respectively. True lumen blood supply for the celiac trunk was observed in 151 cases (67.4%); dual luminal supply in 49 cases (21.9%); and false lumen supply in 24 cases (10.7%). True lumen blood supply for the SMA was observed in 187 cases (83.5%); dual luminal supply in 32 cases (14.3%); and false lumen supply in 5 cases (2.2%). True lumen blood supply for the left renal artery was observed in 150 cases (67.0%); dual luminal supply in 27 cases (12.1%); and false lumen supply in 47 cases (21.0%). True lumen blood supply for the right renal artery was observed in 148 cases (66.1%); dual luminal supply in 30 cases (13.4%); and false lumen supply in 46 cases (20.5%). True lumen blood supply for both renal arteries was observed in 83 cases (37.1%); dual luminal supply in 4 cases (1.8%); and false lumen supply in 1 case (0.5%). Conclusion:The results of this study suggest that the average number of distal tears per person in patients with AAD is 2.9±1.9, with only 1.8% of patients having no distal tears. The average tear areas in the A, B, and C segments are(34.9±46.7) mm 2, (29.0±30.5) mm 2, and (18.6±23.9) mm 2, respectively. 61.2% of patients have tears in the abdominal aortic branch segment, and the tears are located at the same level as the abdominal aortic branches. Among the branches of the abdominal aorta, the renal arteries are most commonly affected by dissection, while the SMA is least affected. This study elucidates the anatomical basis for the limitations of existing repair methods and provides a theoretical basis for the design of subsequent repair techniques.

Objective:To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of ARAHKEY(arterial closure using an additional hemostatic device that is deeply compatible with an extravascular suturing device) technique during percutaneous transluminal repair of thoracic aortic disease(TEVAR).Methods:From January 2021 to January 2023, a total of 202 patients underwent TEVAR in our center.24 patients were treated with ARAHKEY technology, which involves using an additional 7F Exosel at the femoral artery puncture site to achieve hemostatic effect when two ProGlide embedded sutures cannot achieve hemostatic effect.Results:All patients achieved complete hemostasis.The mean time for compression hemostasis was(5.8±2.6)min.In this study cohort, no complications including recurrent bleeding, infection, and late acquired hematoma were observed.Conclusion:ARAHKEY technology is a safe method that can be considered as the primary choice when using ProGlide during TEAVR without achieving hemostatic effects.

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.