Abstract：Objective To explore the clinical effect of percutaneous aortic endovascular repair in the treatment of aortic dissection.Methods 136 cases of aortic dissection in our hospital from January 2014 to January 2016 were selected and randomly divided into the observation group and the control group，68 cases in each group.The observation group was treated with the percutaneous puncture approach to aortic endovascular isolation therapy，the control group was treated with the femoral artery incision approach to aortic endovascular therapy.The clinical effect of different approaches to endovascular aortic repair was compared.Results The operation success rate of the observation group was 100.0%，the operation success rate of the control group was 98.5%，there was no significant difference（P＞0.05）.The incidence rate of local complication in the observation group was 2.94%，which was lower than 11.76%in the control group，with significant difference （P＜0.05）.The operation time and postoperative hospital stay in the observation group was shorter than that in the control group，with significant difference（P＜0.05）.Conclusion For aortic dissection patients treated with aortic endovascular repair，using different approaches，the effect has some differences，but the overall treatment effect is similar.In this study，the effect of percutaneous puncture approach is slightly better than that of the endovascular repair of femoral artery incision.
Lin YY，Shie RF，Liu KS，et al.Diameter change of common femoral arteries after percutaneous endovascular aortic repair with the use of the preclose technique［J］.J Vasc Surg，2014，60（1）：50-56.
［8］
Jaffan AA，Prince EA，Hampson CO，et al.The preclose technique in percutaneous endovascular aortic repair：a systematic literature review and meta-analysis［J］.Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol，2013，36（3）：567-577.
京公网安备 11010502046607号