4.3 Review

The role of selective angiographic embolization of the musculo-skeletal system in haemophilia

期刊

HAEMOPHILIA
卷 15, 期 4, 页码 864-868

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2516.2009.02015.x

关键词

arterial embolization; haemophilia; joint bleeding; pseudotumour

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The incidence of haemarthrosis as a result of a spontaneous periarticular aneurysm in haemophilia is very low. In these circumstances, angiographic embolization might be considered as a promising therapeutic and coagulation factor saving option in joint bleeds not responding to replacement of coagulation factor to normal levels. Moreover, embolization should be considered as a possible treatment for postoperative pseudoaneurysms complicating total knee arthroplasty in haemophilia. However, the pathological process of aneurysmal bleeding and clotting factor replacement is entirely different. While embolization is the treatment of choice for some periarticular complications that may occur, it is by no means a panacea for all resistant periarticular bleeds in haemophilia or for postoperative bleeding which usually settles with clotting factor replacement. Another use of arterial embolization is for the treatment of haemophilic tumours of the pelvis, because they can act as a focus for infection and cause cutaneous fistulas. When they present perforations and infections of endogenous origin, their course is usually fatal. Suitable treatment has been investigated on numerous occasions, most of the literature agreeing that the only curative treatment is surgical resection. However, surgical resection after performing arterial embolization to reduce the vascularization of the pseudotumour is a good alternative, thereby reducing the size of the pseudotumour and the risk of bleeding complications during surgery. It is important to bear in mind that despite its efficacy, arterial embolization is an invasive procedure with a reported rate of complications up to 25% (16% minor, 7% serious, 2% death).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据