Open AccessComparison of three different treatment methods for traumatic and Iatrogenic peripheral artery pseudoaneurysms
Author(s) -
Zhao Baocheng,
Zhang Jinli,
Ma Jianxiong,
Huang Mei,
Li Jin,
Ma Xinlong
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
orthopaedic surgery
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.666
H-Index - 23
eISSN - 1757-7861
pISSN - 1757-7853
DOI - 10.1111/os.13315
Subject(s) - medicine , anesthesia , surgery , complication , significant difference , peripheral , blood transfusion
Objective To compare the efficacy of open surgery (OS), endovascular interventions (EIs), and ultrasound‐guided thrombin injection (UGTI) for the treatment of peripheral arterial pseudoaneurysms (PAs). Methods From January 1, 2001, to February 10, 2021, 38 patients diagnosed with traumatic and iatrogenic PAs treated with OS, EI, and UGTI were retrospectively analyzed. There were 18 females and 20 males, with an age of 56.47 ± 14.08 years (range,17–87 years). Anesthesia modality, operation duration, blood transfusion, duration of hospital stay, primary and secondary success rates, and complication rate were used to evaluate the surgical outcomes. Results There were 11 cases under regional anesthesia and 4 under general anesthesia in OS group, 9 under regional anesthesia and 1 under general anesthesia in EI group, and no regional or general anesthesia was required in UGTI group. There was no significant differences between any two groups ( χ 2 = 39.80, p < 0.05). The blood tranfusion amount (units) were 3.6 ± 6.0, 0.8 ± 2.5, 0.0 ± 0.0 for OS, EI, and UGTI groups, respectively, with significant difference between OS and UGTI groups ( F = 3.03, p < 0.05). The operation duration (minutes) of OS, EI, and UGTI groups were 80.0 ± 41.9, 56.0 ± 8.4, and 22.7 ± 5.3, respectively, with significant difference between any two groups ( F = 15.69, p < 0.05). The duration of hospital stay (days) were 47.7 ± 39.0, 31.5 ± 17.6, and 16.3 ± 9.5, repectively, with significant difference between any two groups ( F = 47.73, p < 0.05). The primary clinical success rates were 80% (12/15), 90% (9/10), and 92.3% (12/13) in OS,EI, and UGTI groups, respectively, with no significant difference between any two groups ( χ 2 = 0.34, p > 0.05). The secondary clinical success rates were 100% for all three groups. The overall complication rates of OS, EI, and UGTI groups were 20% (3/15), 10% (1/10), and 7.7% (1/13), respectively, with no significant difference between any two groups ( χ 2 = 1.00, p > 0.05). The infection rates were 13.3% (2/15), 10% (1/10), and 0% (0/13) in OS, EI, and UGTI groups respectively, with no significant difference between any two groups ( χ 2 = 1.80, p > 0.05). The reintervention rates were 6.7% (1/15), 0% (0/10), 7.7% (1/13) in OS, EI, and UGTI groups, respectively, with no significant difference between two groups ( χ 2 = 0.95, p > 0.05). Neuralgia was relieved in all patients. Conclusions OS, EI, and UGTI are efficacious and safe options for the treatment of appropriate patients with traumatic and iatrogenic PAs. UGTI would be considered as a first‐line therapy for this condotion.