Endovascular Versus Open Repair in Adolescent Patients With Difficult-to-Access Vascular Injuries

被引:0
|
作者
Otaibi, Banan W. [1 ]
Bhogadi, Sai Krishna [1 ]
Khurshid, Muhammad Haris [1 ]
Stewart, Collin [1 ]
Hosseinpour, Hamidreza [1 ]
Spencer, Audrey L. [1 ]
Hejazi, Omar [1 ]
Nelson, Adam [1 ]
Magnotti, Louis J. [1 ]
Joseph, Bellal [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Arizona, Coll Med, Dept Surg, Div Trauma Crit Care Burns & Emergency Surg, Tucson, AZ USA
关键词
Endovascular repair; Iliac artery injury; Open repair; Subclavian artery injury; ARTERIAL INJURY; MANAGEMENT; OUTCOMES; TRAUMA;
D O I
10.1016/j.jss.2024.07.068
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Introduction: Management of subclavian artery injuries (SAI) and iliac artery injuries (IAI) in adolescent trauma patients poses a considerable challenge due to their complex anatomical locations. The aim of our study was to determine the association between the injury mechanism and type of repair with the outcomes of patients with traumatic SAI and IAI. Methods: In this retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program database2017-2020, adolescent (<18 y) patients with SAI and IAI undergoing either endovascular or open repair were included. Patients were stratified by mechanism (blunt versus penetrating) and type of repair (endovascular [E] versus open [O]) and compared. Outcomes measured were mortality and major complications. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed. Results: Over 4 y, 170 pediatric patients were identified, of which 73 (43%) sustained an SAI and 97 (57%) had IAI. The mean age was 15 and 79% were male. Overall, 39% were managed endovascularly. Both groups had comparable median injury severity score (E: 23 versus O: 25, P = 0.278). For patients with blunt injury (n = 60), the type of repair was neither associated with major complications (E: 39% versus O: 33%, P = 0.694) nor mortality (E: 2.6% versus O: 4.8%, P = 0.651). For patients with penetrating injuries (n = 110), the endovascular repair had significantly lower morbidity (19% versus 41%, P = 0.034) and mortality (3.7% versus 21%, P = 0.041). On multivariable logistic regression, endovascular repair was identified as the only modifiable risk factor associated with reduced mortality (adjusted odds ratio: 0.201, 95% confidence interval [0.14-0.76], P = 0.038). Conclusions: Difficult-to-access vascular injuries result in significant morbidity and mortality. Endovascular repair was found to be the only modifiable factor associated with decreased mortality of patients with penetrating injury, whereas the type of repair was not associated with mortality in those with blunt injury.
引用
收藏
页码:385 / 392
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Comparison of percutaneous versus open femoral cutdown access for endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms
    Chen, Samuel L.
    Kabutey, Nii-Kabu
    Whealon, Matthew D.
    Kuo, Isabella J.
    Fujitani, Roy M.
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 2017, 66 (05) : 1364 - 1370
  • [32] Cost-Effectiveness of Endovascular Aneurysm Repair Versus Open Surgical Repair for Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Systematic Review
    Dolatshahi, Zeinab
    Mezginejad, Fateme
    Nargesi, Shahin
    Saliminejad, Moslem
    IRANIAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY, 2021, 18 (03)
  • [33] Endovascular treatment of axillosubclavian arterial injuries is a safe alternative to open repair
    Siada, Sammy S.
    Dirks, Rachel C.
    Davis, James W.
    O'Banion, Leigh Ann
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2022, 224 (06) : 1385 - 1387
  • [34] Current challenges in open versus endovascular repair of ruptured thoracic aortic aneurysm
    Harky, Amer
    Chan, Jeffrey Shi Kai
    Wong, Chris Ho Ming
    Francis, Chris
    Bashir, Mohamad
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 2018, 68 (05) : 1582 - 1592
  • [35] Midterm survival after endovascular versus open repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms
    Gouëffic, Y
    Becquemin, JP
    Desgranges, P
    Kobeiter, H
    JOURNAL OF ENDOVASCULAR THERAPY, 2005, 12 (01) : 47 - 57
  • [36] Endovascular Treatment versus Open Surgical Repair for Isolated Iliac Artery Aneurysms
    Choi, Eol
    Kwon, Tae Won
    VASCULAR SPECIALIST INTERNATIONAL, 2024, 40
  • [37] Open repair versus endovascular treatment of complex aortoiliac lesions in low risk patients
    Antonello, Michele
    Squizzato, Francesco
    Bassini, Silvia
    Porcellato, Luca
    Grego, Franco
    Piazza, Michele
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 2019, 70 (04) : 1155 - +
  • [38] Outcomes and cost of open versus endovascular repair of intact thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm
    Locham, Satinderjit
    Dakour-Aridi, Hanaa
    Nejim, Besma
    Dhaliwal, Jasninder
    Alshwaily, Widian
    Malas, Mahmoud
    JOURNAL OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 2018, 68 (04) : 948 - +
  • [39] A comparison of Percutaneous femoral access in Endovascular Repair versus Open femoral access (PiERO): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
    Bastiaan P. Vierhout
    Ben R. Saleem
    Alewijn Ott
    Jan Maarten van Dijl
    Ties D. van Andringa de Kempenaer
    Maurice E. N. Pierie
    Jan T. Bottema
    Clark J. Zeebregts
    Trials, 16
  • [40] National Trends of Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair Versus Open Repair in Blunt Thoracic Aortic Injury
    Grigorian, Areg
    Spencer, Dean
    Donayre, Carlos
    Nahmias, Jeffry
    Schubl, Sebastian
    Gabriel, Viktor
    Barrios, Cristobal, Jr.
    ANNALS OF VASCULAR SURGERY, 2018, 52 : 72 - 78