1986
DOI: 10.1055/s-2007-1022175
View full text |Buy / Rent full text
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: The authors present their initial experience with the use of the intraluminal double-ring prosthesis in the surgical treatment of thoracic aorta aneurysms. To date, they have performed this procedure in a total of 7 patients. Five had dissecting aneurysms of the ascending and descending aorta, one had a false aneurysm of the aortic arch, and one was operated on for a traumatic aneurysm of the descending aorta. Five patients recovered without any severe complications. Two patients died. Of these, one underwent … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2001
2001
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
(1 reference statement)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Some surgeons have found sutureless intraluminal graft insertion to be an unsatisfactory method due to its high incidence of late complications. [14][15][16][17] Others have argued that the poor long-term results were due to faulty operative technique rather than inherent flaws in the method. 8 Most aortic surgeons agree that intraluminal sutureless grafts have definite limitations in their applicability to the vast majority of patients with aortic dissection and that they should only be used under exceptional circumstances.…”
Section: Long-term Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some surgeons have found sutureless intraluminal graft insertion to be an unsatisfactory method due to its high incidence of late complications. [14][15][16][17] Others have argued that the poor long-term results were due to faulty operative technique rather than inherent flaws in the method. 8 Most aortic surgeons agree that intraluminal sutureless grafts have definite limitations in their applicability to the vast majority of patients with aortic dissection and that they should only be used under exceptional circumstances.…”
Section: Long-term Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…24 Aortic cross-clamping time. A total of 27 cohorts 10,14,15,17,[21][22][23][24]26,27,[29][30][31][32][34][35][36]40,[47][48][49][50][51] reported results of aortic cross-clamping. Only 11 cohorts provided the variability of the mean aortic clamping time, whereas 2 cohorts (Papadimitriou et al 17 and Segers et al, 15 group A) reported zero aortic clamping time and were not included in the meta-analysis.…”
Section: Group E)mentioning
confidence: 99%