Material and Methods: The study is a retrospective series of 15 patients operated by PTELD. Bladder dysfunction was classified as incomplete CES (CESI) and complete CES retention (CESR). Bladder / motor recovery rate and its timing, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analogue Score (VAS), patient satisfaction index, and sexual dysfunction were used to measure the outcome objectively. Additionally, in CESR patients, post-void residual (PVR) urine was measured by sonography. Complications and technical problems were noted.
Results: There were ten patients of CESI and five patients of CESR. The average follow-up was 20.33(12.05) months. Bladder symptoms recovery was 100%, and motor recovery was 80%. VAS for back pain recovered to 0.53(0.52) from 8(2.39). VAS for leg pain recovered to 0.13(0.35) from 9.20(1.32). ODI improved to 6.07(2.85) from 77.52(13.20). The time to the recovery of bladder function was 1.47(1.55) days. All CESR patient's abnormal PVR urine was normalised at five weeks post-operative. No complications were reported. However, five technical executional problems occurred.
Conclusion: PTELD can be considered for CES treatment due to its substantial and quick recovery advantages. However, more evidence support is needed to make it a practice recommendation.
Method: Computed tomography angiography was performed on 13 type B aortic dissection patients before and after procedure, and at 6 and 12 months follow-up. The lumens were divided into three regions: the stented area (Region 1), distal to the stent graft to the celiac artery (Region 2), and between the celiac artery and the iliac bifurcation (Region 3). Changes in aortic morphology were quantified by the increase or decrease of diametric and volumetric percentages from baseline measurements.
Results: At Region 1, the TL diameter and volume increased (pre-treatment: volume =51.4±41.9 mL, maximal axial diameter =22.4±6.8 mm, maximal orthogonal diameter =21.6±7.2 mm; follow-up: volume =130.7±69.2 mL, maximal axial diameter =40.1±8.1 mm, maximal orthogonal diameter =31.9+2.6 mm, P<0.05 for all comparisons), while FL decreased (pre-treatment: volume =129.6±150.5 mL; maximal axial diameter =43.0±15.8 mm; maximal orthogonal diameter =28.3±12.6 mm; follow-up: volume =66.6±95.0 mL, maximal axial diameter =24.5±19.9 mm, maximal orthogonal diameter =16.9±13.7, P<0.05 for all comparisons). Due to the uniformity in size throughout the vessel, high concordance was observed between diametric and volumetric measurements in the stented region with 93% and 92% between maximal axial diameter and volume for the true/false lumens, and 90% and 92% between maximal orthogonal diameter and volume for the true/false lumens. Large discrepancies were observed between the different measurement methods at regions distal to the stent graft, with up to 46% differences between maximal orthogonal diameter and volume.
Conclusions: Volume measurement was shown to be a much more sensitive indicator in identifying lumen expansion/shrinkage at the distal stented region.