KẾT QUẢ ĐIỀU TRỊ CAN THIỆP NỘI MẠCH PHÌNH ĐỘNG MẠCH CHỦ BỤNG CÓ GIẢI PHẪU ĐỘNGMẠCH CHẬU KHÔNG THUẬN LỢI TẠI BỆNH VIỆN CHỢ RẪY

Abstract

Background: Endovascular intervention techniques for abdominal aortic aneurysms are trending because they are less invasive, have a quick recovery time, and have few complications and short-term mortality. However, patients with unfavorable iliac artery anatomy, such as a short or absent lower placement area in the common iliac artery, tortuosity, narrowing of the external iliac artery entrance, and calcification, pose challenges in endovascular treatment that we need to consider [1]. Many studies in the world on this issue, such as the study by Zuccon et al. (2023), studying factors affecting type 1B endoleak in patients with unfavorable iliac arteries, recorded a rate of 2-8% of type 1B endoleak [2]. Author Gray, D. et al. (2017), also showed that the rate of type 1B was higher in the group of iliac arteries larger than 20 mm compared to the group of iliac arteries smaller than 20 mm [3]. That is also the reason why we conducted this study to evaluate the results of endovascular intervention in patients with unfavorable iliac artery anatomy at our center. Methods: Retrospective description of case series. Results: Interventional treatment of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms with unfavorable iliac artery anatomy has a high technical success rate, low complication rate, and high survival rate in the follow-up period. However, the rate of type 1B endoleak is high; more studies with large sample sizes and longer follow-up are needed to confirm this issue. Conclusion: EVAR treatment of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm has a high technical success rate, few complications, and a high survival rate in the follow-up period. Therefore, this method is effective, safe, and has few complications.