切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版) ›› 2026, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (03) : 292 -295. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2026.03.023

论著

腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后并发症的风险因素分析及预测模型构建
王珩, 马金曼, 王弼偲()   
  1. 610000 成都,成都市第三人民医院普外科
  • 收稿日期:2025-12-25 出版日期:2026-06-26
  • 通信作者: 王弼偲

Risk factor analysis and predictive model construction for complications after endovascular aortic repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm

Heng Wang, Jinman Ma, Bisi Wang()   

  1. Department of general surgery, The Third People's Hospital Chengdu, Chengdu Sichuan Province 610000, China
  • Received:2025-12-25 Published:2026-06-26
  • Corresponding author: Bisi Wang
  • Supported by:
    Intra-hospital research project of Chengdu Third People's Hospital(CSY-YN01-2023-034)
引用本文:

王珩, 马金曼, 王弼偲. 腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后并发症的风险因素分析及预测模型构建[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 292-295.

Heng Wang, Jinman Ma, Bisi Wang. Risk factor analysis and predictive model construction for complications after endovascular aortic repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2026, 20(03): 292-295.

目的

分析腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后并发症的风险因素,基于风险因素构建术后并发症的预测模型并评估预测效能。

方法

回顾性收集2022年8月至2024年8月行腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术的270例患者临床资料,依据术后是否发生并发症分为并发症组(n=80)和无并发症组(n=190)。符合正态分布的计量资料均以(

±s)表示,行t检验;计数资料均以[例(%)]表示,行χ2检验。以单因素及多因素Logistic回归分析影响腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后并发症的风险因素,基于风险因素构建联合预测模型,以ROC曲线分析预测模型的预测效能。

结果

并发症组合并高血压、肝脏病、术中双侧髂内动脉栓塞比例、术中平均动脉压(MAP)最大差高于无并发症组,术前血红蛋白水平低于无并发症组(P<0.05)。Logistic回归分析显示,合并高血压(OR=4.740,95% CI:1.828−12.287)、肝脏病(OR=1.357,95% CI:1.021−1.803)、术中双侧髂内动脉栓塞(OR=3.607,95% CI:1.733−7.509)、术中MAP最大差(OR=2.881,95% CI:1.572−5.278)是腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后并发症的危险因素;术前血红蛋白水平是其保护因素(OR=0.641,95% CI:0.426−0.963),均为P<0.05。联合预测模型为logitP)=−0.279+1.556×高血压+0.305×肝脏病+1.283×术中双侧髂内动脉栓塞+1.058×术中MAP最大差−0.445×术前血红蛋白。ROC曲线显示,该模型预测术后并发症的曲线下面积(AUC)为0.867,灵敏度为72.5%,特异度为89.0%,优于各指标单独预测(Z=6.865,12.302,8.200,1.976,5.742,P<0.05)。

结论

腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后并发症的发生与高血压、肝脏病、术中双侧髂内动脉栓塞、术中MAP最大差、术前血红蛋白水平密切相关。基于上述指标构建的预测模型对术后并发症发生具有显著的预测效能。

Objective

To analyze the risk factors for complications after endovascular aortic repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm, and to construct and evaluate the predictive efficiency of a prediction model for postoperative complications based on these risk factors.

Methods

Clinical data of 270 patients who underwent endovascular aortic repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm from August 2022 to August 2024 were retrospectively collected. Patients were divided into a complication group (n=80) and a non-complication group (n=190) according to the occurrence of postoperative complications. Measurement data conforming to normal distribution were expressed as (

±s) and analyzed by t test; enumeration data were expressed as [n (%)] and analyzed by χ2 test. Univariate and multivariate Logistic regression analyses were used to identify risk factors for complications after endovascular aortic repair. A combined prediction model was constructed based on the risk factors, and its predictive efficiency was analyzed by ROC curve.

Results

The proportions of hypertension, liver disease, bilateral internal iliac artery embolization during operation, and maximum difference of intraoperative mean arterial pressure (MAP) in the complication group were higher than those in the non-complication group, while the preoperative hemoglobin level was lower (P<0.05). Logistic regression analysis showed that hypertension (OR=4.740, 95%CI: 1.828-12.287), liver disease (OR=1.357, 95%CI: 1.021-1.803), bilateral internal iliac artery embolization during operation (OR=3.607, 95%CI: 1.733-7.509), and maximum difference of intraoperative MAP (OR=2.881, 95%CI: 1.572-5.278) were risk factors for postoperative complications. Preoperative hemoglobin level was a protective factor (OR=0.641, 95%CI: 0.426-0.963), all P<0.05. The combined prediction model was logit (P) = -0.279 + 1.556 × hypertension + 0.305 × liver disease + 1.283 × bilateral internal iliac artery embolization + 1.058 × maximum difference of intraoperative MAP -0.445× preoperative hemoglobin. ROC curve showed that the area under the curve (AUC) of the model for predicting postoperative complications was 0.867, with a sensitivity of 72.5% and a specificity of 89.0%, which was superior to individual index prediction (Z=6.865, 12.302, 8.200, 1.976, 5.742, P<0.05).

Conclusion

The occurrence of complications after endovascular aortic repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm is closely related to hypertension, liver disease, bilateral internal iliac artery embolization during operation, maximum difference of intraoperative MAP, and preoperative hemoglobin level. The prediction model constructed based on the above indicators shows significant predictive efficiency for postoperative complications.

表1 腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后并发症风险单因素分析
因素 并发症组(n=80) 无并发症组(n=190) χ2 P
年龄(岁,
±s
69.1±7.9 68.3±8.7 0.709 0.479
性别[例(%)]
64(80.0) 158(83.2) 0.384 0.535
16(20.0) 32(16.8)
身体质量指数(kg/m2
±s
23.9±1.3 23.7±1.4 1.094 0.275
受教育程度[例(%)]
高中以上 34(42.5) 88(46.3) 0.331 0.565
高中及以下 46(57.5) 102(53.7)
合并症[例(%)]
糖尿病 13(16.3) 20(10.5) 1.719 0.190
高血压 38(47.5) 30(15.8) 30.044 <0.001
冠心病 24(30.0) 42(22.1) 1.900 0.168
肝脏病 5(6.3) 2(1.1) 6.022 0.026
吸烟史 10(12.5) 27(14.2) 0.139 0.709
饮酒史 26(32.5) 54(28.4) 0.449 0.503
瘤体最大径(cm,
±s
5.3±1.2 5.1±1.4 1.116 0.265
近端瘤颈长度(mm,
±s
31.4±8.3 30.9±5.4 0.587 0.558
近端瘤颈成角(°,
±s
48.4±5.8 46.9±8.7 1.415 0.158
支架数量(枚,
±s
3.1±0.8 3.0±0.9 0.861 0.390
手术时间(min,
±s
162.8±24.7 159.7±26.4 0.898 0.370
术中出血量(ml,
±s
96.1±20.8 94.8±22.6 0.442 0.659
术中双侧髂内动脉栓塞[例(%)]
27(33.8) 16(8.4) 26.974 <0.001
53(66.2) 174(91.6)
术中MAP最大差(mmHg,
±s
18.9±3.2 14.8±2.9 10.283 <0.001
术前血红蛋白(g/L,
±s
129.6±18.7 136.9±17.5 3.066 0.002
术前C反应蛋白(mg/L,
±s
9.2±2.5 8.7±2.4 1.544 0.124
术前白蛋白(g/L,
±s
38.3±8.4 38.9±9.1 0.506 0.613
术前血小板计数(×109/L,
±s
184.3±20.3 186.7±24.6 0.769 0.443
术前白细胞计数(×109/L,
±s
6.7±1.5 7.1±2.1 1.545 0.124
表2 腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后并发症风险Logistic多因素回归分析
表3 风险因素联合预测腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后并发症的效能分析
图1 风险因素预测腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后并发症的ROC曲线图
[1]
Haque KBhargava P. Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm[J]. Am Fam Physician2022106(2):165-172.
[2]
De Freitas SD'Ambrosio NFatima J. Infrarenal Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm[J]. Surg Clin North Am2023103(4):595-614.
[3]
Duric BHadjihannas ISugumaran S,et al. Laparoscopy versus endovascular aneurysm repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm: A systematic review[J]. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv2024104(2):300-317.
[4]
Zuccon GD'Oria MGonçalves FB,et al. Incidence,Risk Factors,and Prognostic Impact of Type Ib Endoleak Following Endovascular Repair for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: Scoping Review[J]. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg202366(3):352-361.
[5]
刘涵,邹逸帆,乔彤.不同腔内修复术治疗腹主动脉瘤的对照研究[J/OL].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版)2024,18(2):176-179.
[6]
孙岩,王玉涛,吴学君,等.腹主动脉瘤腔内治疗术后Ⅱ型内漏的单中心处理经验[J/OL].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版)2022,16(1):67-71.
[7]
阚远晴,符伟国.欧洲血管外科学会2024版《腹主动脉-髂动脉动脉瘤管理临床实践指南》解读[J].中国普通外科杂志2024,33(6):867-875.
[8]
Al-Tawil MMuscogliati EJubouri M,et al. Correlative effect between sac regression and clinical outcomes following endovascular repair in abdominal aortic aneurysm: fact or myth?[J]. Expert Rev Med Devices2023,20(8):643-650.
[9]
Tian ZZhang YZheng Z,et al. Gut microbiome dysbiosis contributes to abdominal aortic aneurysm by promoting neutrophil extracellular trap formation[J].Cell Host Microbe,2022,30(10):1450-1463.
[10]
Gennai SAndreoli FLeone N,et al. Incidence,Long Term Clinical Outcomes,and Risk Factor Analysis of Type III Endoleaks Following Endovascular Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm[J].Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg,2023,66(1):38-48.
[11]
孙龙,郝迎学,王明启. 介入技术结合腔内修复手术治疗复杂腹主动脉瘤26例临床随访分析[J/OL].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版)2021,15(4):464-467.
[12]
谢晓亮,高占峰. 复杂解剖结构腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后主要并发症的影响因素分析[J].血管与腔内血管外科杂志,2023,9(10):1157-1161.
[13]
王贇,蔡丹,欧敬民,等. 腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后发生并发症的危险因素[J].血管与腔内血管外科杂志,2023,9(9):1058-1062.
[14]
Zettervall SLDansey KEvenson A,et al.Liver Disease is Associated with Increased Mortality and Major Morbidity After Infra-Inguinal Bypass but not After Endovascular Intervention[J].Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg,2021,61(6):964-970.
[15]
杨耀国,陈忠,寇镭,等.腹主动脉瘤腔内修复术后并发症相关危险因素研究[J].中国实用外科杂志,2021,41(6):700-705.
[16]
周丽君,李姣姣,孙燕,等.不同吻合方式对腹腔镜辅助远端胃癌根治术患者术后恢复的影响[J/OL].中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版),2025,19(6):642-645.
[17]
尹萌萌,王子路. 腹主动脉覆膜支架腔内修复术后并发症相关的术中危险因素与预警模型研究[J].血管与腔内血管外科杂志2023,9(10):1194-1198.
[18]
陈志鹏,蔡晶,苏比努尔·买买提艾力,等.腹主动脉腔内修复术栓塞单侧髂内动脉术后臀肌跛行危险因素及步行锻炼的效果分析[J].中国血管外科杂志(电子版),2024,16(3):227-231.
[19]
Antoniou GASchermerhorn MLForbes TL,et al. Risk factors,risk stratification and risk-specific surveillance strategies after endovascular aneurysm repair: study protocol for a Delphi study by the International RIsk Stratification in EVAR(IRIS-EVAR)working group[J]. BMJ Open,2022,12(4):e055803.
[1] 王茹文, 潘辰, 车颖, 佟梦萦. 甲状腺热消融术后结节破裂三例病例报道及基于文献的系统分析[J/OL]. 中华医学超声杂志(电子版), 2026, 23(04): 316-323.
[2] 卢帅, 陈建明, 李敏娟, 单祎宁, 曹仁巍, 查晔军, 蒋协远. 基于NHANES数据库分析抑郁与骨质疏松性骨折愈合不良的关联及预测模型构建与验证[J/OL]. 中华损伤与修复杂志(电子版), 2026, 21(03): 167-176.
[3] 杨永君, 王槐志. 腹腔镜胰十二指肠切除术主要并发症及处理[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 215-218.
[4] 辛林璞, 杨敏, 杜峻峰. 腹腔镜结直肠癌根治术后常见并发症防治与管理[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 248-251.
[5] 赵军抗, 张前进, 庄惠杰. 腹腔镜直肠癌根治术保留左结肠动脉的疗效及对预后的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 257-260.
[6] 石兵强, 支永发, 牛闻宇, 张义, 马明杰, 任孝德. 胃癌术后并发症对患者术后生命质量影响研究[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(03): 271-274.
[7] 李玮璇, 杜峻峰, 李世拥. 我国腹腔镜胃癌根治术主要并发症与处理[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(02): 111-114.
[8] 樊伟伟, 许怀利, 杨喜佳. 中间入路与左侧前入路在中老年进展期胃癌腹腔镜根治术中的应用对比[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(02): 117-120.
[9] 汝干, 翟春涛, 田昳程, 陈正荣. 腹腔镜下不同手术方式治疗cT1N0M0期胃癌的临床比较[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(02): 134-137.
[10] 贺智恒, 姚德炯, 孙东方. 腹腔镜下胆囊切除术后胆瘘影响因素分析及风险预测模型的构建[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(02): 175-178.
[11] 宋志岗, 刘帅, 李颖, 董华兴, 连彦军. 不同入路ISR术用于治疗低位直肠癌患者对围手术期指标及并发症的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(02): 150-153.
[12] 张迪, 王素美, 陈阳, 熊霞鹂, 梁兵, 白雁飞, 郑雪云, 李华. 老年女性盆腔器官脱垂手术患者合并症分布及多学科诊疗围手术期管理效果分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(02): 206-212.
[13] 张皓程, 陈明豪, 刘宾, 万方鑫, 李宝玉. 腹腔镜食管裂孔疝术后并发食管胸膜腔瘘一例分析[J/OL]. 中华疝和腹壁外科杂志(电子版), 2026, 20(02): 238-240.
[14] 邢颖, 王峰. 基于机器学习构建肝切除术后肝衰竭预测列线图模型及其预测价值[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2026, 15(02): 190-196.
[15] 王小振, 陈灿辉, 唐善华, 代浩嘉, 丰扬舸, 王恺, 李清平, 李川江. 基于不同机器学习技术构建肝移植术后早期严重并发症预测模型和效能比较[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2026, 15(02): 197-204.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?