Galle C, De Maertelaer V, Motte S, Zhou L, Stordeur P, Delville J P, Li R, Ferreira J, Goldman M, Capel P, Wautrecht J C, Pradier O, Dereume J P
Department of Vascular Diseases, Department of Haematology-Immunology, and IRIBHN Statistical Unit, Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Belgium.
J Vasc Surg. 2000 Aug;32(2):234-46. doi: 10.1067/mva.2000.107562.
To determine the nature of and to compare the inflammatory responses induced by (1) endovascular and (2) conventional abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair.
Twelve consecutive patients undergoing elective infrarenal AAA repair were prospectively studied. Seven patients were selected for endovascular procedures (the EAAA group); five patients underwent open surgery (the OAAA group). Three control patients undergoing carotid thromboendarterectomy were also included. Serial peripheral venous blood samples were collected preoperatively, immediately after declamping or placement of the endograft, and at hours 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72. Acute phase response expression of peripheral T lymphocyte and monocyte activation markers and adhesion molecules (flow cytometry), soluble levels of cell adhesion molecules (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay), cytokine (tumor necrosis factor alpha, interleukin-6, and interleukin-8) release (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay), and liberation of complement products (nephelometry) were measured.
Regarding acute phase response, the EAAA and OAAA groups showed significant increases in C-reactive protein (P <.001 and P =.001), body temperature (P =.035 and P =.048), and leukocyte count (P <.001 and P <.001). Similar time course patterns were observed with respect to body temperature (P =.372). Statistically significant different patterns were demonstrated for C-reactive protein (P =.032) and leukocyte count (P =.002). Regarding leukocyte activation, a significant upregulation of peripheral T lymphocyte CD38 expression was observed in the OAAA group only (P =.001). Analysis of markers such as CD69, CD40L, CD25, and CD54 revealed no perioperative fluctuations in any group. Regarding circulating cell adhesion molecules, the EAAA and OAAA groups displayed significant increases in soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (P =.003 and P =.001); there was no intergroup difference (P =.193). All groups demonstrated high soluble von Willebrand factor levels (P =.018, P =. 007, and P =.027), there being no differences in the patterns (P =. 772). Otherwise, soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule-1, soluble E-selectin, and soluble P-selectin did not appear to vary in any group. Regarding cytokine release, although a tendency toward high tumor necrosis factor alpha and interleukin-8 levels was noticed in the EAAA group, global time course effects failed to reach statistical significance (P =.543 and P =.080). In contrast, interleukin-6 showed elevations in all groups (P =.058, P <.001, and P =.004). Time course patterns did not differ between the EAAA and OAAA groups (P =.840). Regarding complement activation, the C3d/C3 ratio disclosed significant postoperative elevations in the EAAA and OAAA groups (P =.013 and P =.009). This complement product release was reduced in the EAAA group (P <.001).
The current study indicated that both endovascular and coventional AAA repair induced significant inflammatory responses. Our findings showed that there were no large differences between the procedures with respect to circulating cell adhesion molecule and cytokine release. Moreover, the endoluminal approach produced a limited response in terms of acute phase reaction, T lymphocyte activation, and complement product liberation. This might support the concept that endovascular AAA repair represents an attractive alternative to open surgery. Given the relatively small sample size, further larger studies are required for confirmation of our observations.
确定(1)血管内修复和(2)传统腹主动脉瘤(AAA)修复所诱导的炎症反应的性质并进行比较。
对连续12例行择期肾下腹主动脉瘤修复术的患者进行前瞻性研究。7例患者接受血管内手术(EAAA组);5例患者接受开放手术(OAAA组)。还纳入了3例行颈动脉血栓内膜切除术的对照患者。在术前、松开血管夹或植入血管内移植物后即刻、以及术后1、3、6、12、24、48和72小时采集系列外周静脉血样本。检测外周血T淋巴细胞和单核细胞活化标志物及黏附分子的急性期反应表达(流式细胞术)、细胞黏附分子的可溶性水平(酶联免疫吸附测定)、细胞因子(肿瘤坏死因子α、白细胞介素-6和白细胞介素-8)释放(酶联免疫吸附测定)以及补体产物的释放(比浊法)。
关于急性期反应,EAAA组和OAAA组的C反应蛋白显著升高(P<.001和P=.001)、体温升高(P=.035和P=.048)以及白细胞计数升高(P<.001和P<.001)。观察到体温的时间进程模式相似(P=.372)。C反应蛋白(P=.032)和白细胞计数(P=.002)显示出具有统计学意义的不同模式。关于白细胞活化,仅在OAAA组观察到外周血T淋巴细胞CD38表达显著上调(P=.001)。对CD69、CD40L、CD25和CD5进行分析,发现任何组在围手术期均无波动。关于循环细胞黏附分子,EAAA组和OAAA组的可溶性细胞间黏附分子-1显著升高(P=.003和P=.001);组间无差异(P=.193)。所有组的可溶性血管性血友病因子水平均较高(P=.018、P=.007和P=.027),模式上无差异(P=.772)。此外,可溶性血管细胞黏附分子-1、可溶性E选择素和可溶性P选择素在任何组中似乎均无变化。关于细胞因子释放,虽然在EAAA组中观察到肿瘤坏死因子α和白细胞介素-8水平有升高趋势,但总体时间进程效应未达到统计学意义(P=.543和P=.080)。相比之下,白细胞介素-6在所有组中均升高(P=.058、P<.001和P=.004)。EAAA组和OAAA组之间的时间进程模式无差异(P=.840)。关于补体激活,EAAA组和OAAA组术后C3d/C3比值显著升高(P=.013和P=.009)。EAAA组中这种补体产物的释放减少(P<.001)。
本研究表明,血管内修复和传统AAA修复均诱导显著的炎症反应。我们的研究结果表明,在循环细胞黏附分子和细胞因子释放方面,两种手术方法之间没有很大差异。此外,腔内修复方法在急性期反应、T淋巴细胞活化和补体产物释放方面产生的反应有限。这可能支持血管内AAA修复是开放手术的一种有吸引力的替代方法这一概念。鉴于样本量相对较小,需要进一步开展更大规模的研究来证实我们的观察结果。