ObjectiveTo investigate the effect of in vitro fenestration on reconstruction of left subclavian artery in endovascular treatment of aortic dissection.MethodsA total of 89 patients with aortic dissection involving left subclavian artery were treated by endovascular treatment in the Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University from February 2017 to January 2020. There were 44 patients in the test group, including 36 males and 8 females, with an average age of 58.02±13.58 years. There were 45 patients in the control group, including 35 males and 10 females, with an average age of 54.10±12.32 years. The left subclavian artery was reconstructed by in vitro fenestration in the test group and by chimney technique in the control group. The clinical data were compared between the two groups.ResultsThe operation time of the test group was longer than that of the control group (126.16±7.53 min vs. 96.49±6.52 min, P<0.01). The median follow-up time was 31 (13-48) months. The incidence of endoleak in the test group (4.7%) was lower than that in the control group (18.6%, P=0.04) during the follow-up. There was no statistical difference in the incidence of stroke, myocardial infarction, false lumen thrombosis, retrograde aortic dissection or left subclavian artery occlusion between the two groups (P>0.05).Conclusion In vitro fenestration for reconstructing left subclavian artery in thoracic endovascular aortic repair of aortic dissection is safe and feasible, which is worthy of further clinical promotion.
The authors analysed the medical records of 30 patients with congenital cystic disease of the liver treated in this hospital and with a review of the article some problems of diagnosis and treatment are discussed. B-altrasonic scaner (B-US), computerized tomographic scanning and magnetic resonance imaging appeared to be most helpful in diagnosing and treating this disease. After comparing different treatments, such as aspiration .alcohol sclerotherapy, fenetration, cyst resection and partial hepatectomy, the arthors state the best results could be achieved by alcohol sclerotherapy under B-US guidence (6 cases) or fenestration (15 cases) with no postoperative complication. Malignant change was found in one patient of this group.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the long-term effects of fenestration on patients at different risk levels, who performed external conduit total cavo-pulmonary connection operation.MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis which enrolled 383 patients undergoing external conduit total cavo-pulmonary connection in Fuwai Hospital from 2008 to 2015. Based on the preoperative data and whether fenestration in the operation, the whole cohorts were divided into four subgroups: a high risk group with fenestration(mean age: 10.53±7.06 years, 55 males), a high risk group with non-fenestration(mean age: 9.30±7.83 years, 43 males), a low risk group with fenestration(mean age: 8.91±7.13 years, 65 males) and a low risk group with non-fenestration(mean age: 8.23±5.34 years, 67 males). Then we collected and analyzed the perioperative data and long-term prognosis of this cohorts in different risk levels.ResultIn the high-risk group, the duration of chest drainage in fenestration group was significantly shorter than that of the non-fenestration group (12.39±12.03 d vs. 23.30±15.36 d, P=0.001). The incidence of delayed chest drainage in the fenestration group was lower than that in the non-fenestration group (25.0% vs. 47.1%, P=0.002). In addition, the length of hospital stay was shorter than that of the non-fenestration group (18.91±12.79 d vs. 29.68±37.77 d, P=0.004), with significant statistical difference. In the low risk group, there were 3 (2.7%) and 2 (1.6%) deaths at the follow-up in the non-fenestration and fenestration groups respectively (P=0.761). And 1 patient (1.3%), 1 patient (1.4%) died in the fenestration and non-fenestration group (P=0.593) in high risk group. However, there was no statistically significant difference among the fenestration and non-fenestration groups in terms of long-term intestinal protein loss syndrome and arrhythmia in different risk level groups.ConclusionFenestration can reduce the incidence of early complications and hospital stay, effectively, especially for the high-risk patient. Fenestration is recommended for high-risk patients with external conduit total cavo-pulmonary connection operation.
Objective To compare the effectiveness of posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) by unilateral fenestration and bilateral decompression with ultrasounic osteotome and traditional tool total laminectomy decompression PLIF in the treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Methods The clinical data of 48 patients with single-stage degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis between January 2017 and June 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 27 patients were treated with unilateral fenestration and bilateral decompression PLIF with ultrasonic osteotome (group A), and 21 patients were treated with total laminectomy and decompression PLIF with traditional tools (group B). There was no significant difference in gender, age, stenosis segment, degree of spinal canal stenosis, and disease duration between the two groups (P>0.05), which was comparable. The time of laminectomy decompression, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, and the occurrence of operation-related complications were recorded and compared between the two groups. Bridwell bone graft fusion standard was applied to evaluate bone graft fusion at last follow-up. Visual analogue scale (VAS) score was used to evaluate the patients’ lumbar and back pain at 3 days, 3 months, and 6 months after operation. Oswestry disability index (ODI) score was used to evaluate the patients’ lumbar and back function improvement before operation and at 6 months after operation. Results The time of laminectomy decompression in group A was significantly longer than that in group B, and the intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage volume were significantly less than those in group B (P<0.05). There was no nerve root injury, dural tear, cerebrospinal fluid leakage, and hematoma formation during and after operation in the two groups. All patients were followed up after operation, the follow-up time in group A was 6-18 months (mean, 10.5 months) and in group B was 6-20 months (mean, 9.3 months). There was no complication such as internal fixation fracture, loosening and nail pulling occurred during the follow-up period of the two groups. There was no significant difference in VAS scores between the two groups at 3 days after operation (t=1.448, P=0.154); the VAS score of group A was significantly lower than that of group B at 3 and 6 months after operation (P<0.05). The ODI scores of the two groups were significantly improved at 6 months after operation (P<0.05), and there was no significant difference in ODI scores between the two groups before operation and at 6 months after operation (P>0.05). At last follow-up, according to Bridwell criteria, there was no significant difference in bone graft fusion between the two groups (Z=–0.065, P=0.949); the fusion rates of groups A and B were 96.3% (26/27) and 95.2% (20/21) respectively, with no significant difference (χ2=0.001, P=0.979 ). Conclusion The treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis with unilateral fenestration and bilateral decompression PLIF with ultrasonic osteotome can achieve similar effectiveness as traditional tool total laminectomy and decompression PLIF, reduce intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage, and reduce lumbar back pain during short-term follow-up. It is a safe and effective operation method.
ObjectiveTo investigate the clinical effect of in situ fenestration combined with chimney technique in the treatment of aortic dissection involving left common carotid artery.MethodsFrom January 2012 to June 2019, 53 patients with aortic dissection involving left common carotid artery were selected. There were 21 patients in the test group, including 14 males and 7 females, with an average age of 57.2±11.2 years; there were 32 patients in the control group, including 20 males and 12 females, with an average age of 56.7±12.1 years. In the test group, the left subclavian branch was reconstructed by in situ fenestration and the left common carotid artery was reconstructed by chimney technique. In the control group, the left common carotid artery was reconstructed by hybrid operation. The clinical data of the patients were compared.ResultsThe operation time of the test group was significantly longer than that of the control group (151.8±35.2 min vs. 101.3±29.6 min, P=0.00). The patients in the two groups were followed up for 6-20 months. There was no significant difference in the incidence of pulmonary infection, stroke, steal blood syndrome, false lumen thrombosis or internal leakage between the two groups (P>0.05). The diameters of the distal and proximal ends of the true cavity in the test group increased significantly compared with those in the control group (P<0.05).ConclusionIn situ fenestration combined with chimney technique is an effective method for the treatment of aortic dissection involving left common carotid artery, which is worthy of further clinical promotion.
Objective To observe and evaluate the clinical effect of the new fenestration rammer in the treatment of thoracolumbar burst fracture by posterior internal fixation and reduction of lamina with finite fenestration decompression. Methods Patients with thoracolumbar burst fractures admitted to Zigong Fourth People’s Hospital between September 2017 and January 2020 were retrospectively selected. The patients were divided into observation group and control group according to different surgical methods. The observation group used a new tamping device with finite fenestration rammer of unilateral lamina to reduce the spinal occupying bone mass, and the control group used conventional instruments for reduction of intraspinal fracture masses. The operation time, intraoperative blood loss, CT measurement of sagittal diameter ratio of spinal canal and the number of cases of postoperative vertebral empty shell phenomenon were recorded in the two groups, and Frankel grading evaluation of spinal nerve function was conducted. Results A total of 67 patients were included. There were 33 cases in the observation group and 34 cases in the control group. The patients in both groups were followed up for 12 to 16 months, with an average of (14.45±2.25) months. The improvement rate of Frankel rating in each group was 100%. In the control group and the observation group, except for the sagittal diameter ratio of spinal canal before operation (P=0.616), the operation time [(150.44±26.47) vs. (120.91±20.86) min], the intraoperative blood loss [(244.41±42.97) vs. (183.33±34.56) mL], the sagittal diameter ratio of spinal canal one week after operation [(92.50±2.32)% vs. (93.72±2.40)%], the sagittal diameter ratio of spinal canal at the last follow-up [(91.50±2.96)% vs. (93.17±3.27)%] and the occurrence of empty shell phenomenon (13 vs. 5 cases) were statistically significant (P<0.05). The intragroup comparison showed that the sagittal diameter ratio of spinal canal was improved one week after operation and at the last follow-up compared with that before operation (P<0.05), there was no significant difference in the sagittal diameter ratio of spinal canal between one week after operation and the last follow-up (P>0.05). Conclusions The new fenestration rammer can effectively reduce the spinal occupying bone mass in thoracolumbar burst fracture, effectively restore the volume of the spinal canal, achieve the purpose of decompression, effectively prevent the formation of vertebral shell, maximize the retention of the stable structure of the posterior column, and avoid iatrogenic nerve injury. It is safe and effective.
ObjectiveTo analyze the effectiveness of in vitro fenestration versus bypass surgery techniques in the treatment of type B aortic dissection involving the left subclavian artery by thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR).MethodsAmong the 53 patients with type B aortic dissection involving the left subclavian artery admitted to our center from January 2017 to October 2020, 23 underwent in vitro fenestration + TEVAR (a fenestration group with 18 males and 5 females aged 53.6±5.3 years), and 30 patients underwent left common carotid artery-left subclavian artery bypass + TEVAR (a bypass group with 24 males and 6 females aged 51.8±3.8 years). The effectiveness and safety between the two groups were compared.ResultsThe surgical success rate was 100.0% in both groups. And there was no death within postoperative 30 days and during the follow-up. There was no endoleak immediately postoperatively and during 1-year follow-up in the two groups. The operation time and hospitalization expenses in the fenestration group was less or shorter than those in the bypass group (P<0.05). The reduction in blood pressure of the left upper limb in the fenestration group was greater than that in the bypass group (P<0.05). There was no symptom of left upper limb ischemia, dizziness or hoarseness in both groups.ConclusionThe two methods of reconstruction of the left subclavian artery are safe and effective. In vitro fenestration can reduce surgical trauma and costs, and bypass surgery can provide better forward blood flow for the left subclavian artery.
ObjectiveTo explore the clinical efficacy of percutaneous endoscopic interlaminar discectomy (PEID) and interlaminar fenestration discectomy in the treatment of lumbar (L) 5-Sacral (S) 1 lumbar disc herniation (LDH).MethodsLDH patients were retrospectively included from January 2016 to Januray 2018. And the patients were divided into the PEID group and the fenestration group according to their choice of different surgical methods. The operation time, intra-operative blood loss, and bed rest time in the two groups were recorded. The preoperative and postoperative [1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and last follow-up (>12 months)] Visual Analogue Score (VAS) of the lumbago and leg pain between the two groups were compared; the preoperative and postoperative [1 week, and last follow-up (>12 months)] Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and also the postoperative [(>12 months)] therapeutic effect (modified MacNab) between the two groups were compared.ResultsA total of 66 patients were included, with 31 in the PEID group and 35 in the fenestration group. There was no significant difference in age, gender and course of disease between the two groups (P>0.05). There were leakage of cerebrospinal fluid and transient lumbago, leg pain and numbness, which were worse than those before operation in the PEID group (1 and 1 patient, respectively) and the fenestration group (2 and 3 patients, respectively). There were statistically significant differences between the PEID group and the fenestration group, in the operative time [(90.65±9.98) vs. (66.23±16.50) minutes], intra-operative blood loss [(51.77±18.64) vs. (184.29±78.38) mL], and bed time [(2.87±0.92) vs. (7.49±1.20) d] (t=−7.365, t’=−9.697, t=−17.374, P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the preoperative VAS score (lumbar-leg pain) and ODI index, and the ODI index at each postoperative time point, between the two groups (P>0.05). VAS score (lumbago) and VAS score (leg pain) in the PEID group at each postoperative time point were lower than those in the fenestration group (P<0.05); VAS scores (leg pain) at other time points were not statistically significant between the two groups (P > 0.05). VAS (lumbar-leg pain) score and ODI index at each postoperative time point were lower than those before the surgery. The was no statistically significant difference in the PEID group (90.32%) and fenestration group (85.71%) in the excellent rate (χ2=0.328, P=0.713).ConclusionsPEID has less surgical trauma, less bleeding, short bed rest, fast recovery, and better relief of postoperative lumbago symptoms. It is worthy of further promotion in clinical work.