Suppr超能文献

血管成形术和带脑保护装置的支架置入术与内膜切除术治疗老年患者颈内动脉狭窄的比较。

Comparison of angioplasty and stenting with cerebral protection versus endarterectomy for treatment of internal carotid artery stenosis in elderly patients.

作者信息

Kastrup Andreas, Schulz Jörg B, Raygrotzki Sabine, Gröschel Klaus, Ernemann Ulrike

机构信息

Department of Neurology, University of Tübingen.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg. 2004 Nov;40(5):945-51. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2004.08.022.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is being evaluated as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for treatment of severe carotid artery stenosis. Because CAS does not require general anesthesia and is less traumatic, it might be especially advantageous in older patients, but data comparing these 2 treatment methods in older patients are scarce.

METHODS

The periprocedural complication rates in 53 patients aged 75 years or older who had undergone protected CAS between June 2001 and April 2004 were compared with those in a group of 110 patients aged 75 years or older who had undergone CEA between January 1997 and December 2001, before widespread introduction of CAS procedures at our institution. All patients were evaluated by a neurologist both before and after surgery. According to the criteria set forth by the large trials the occurrence of minor, major, or fatal stroke, and myocardial infarction within 30 days was determined.

RESULTS

The demographic characteristics and indications for an intervention were similar in both treatment groups. Thirty patients (57%) in the CAS group had symptomatic carotid stenosis, compared with 69 patients (63%) in the CEA group. In neither group was there any fatal stroke or myocardial infarction. The 30-day stroke rate was significantly higher in the CAS group (4 minor, 2 major strokes; 11.3%) than in the CEA group (no minor, 2 major strokes; 1.8%; P < .05). Although the 30-day major stroke rate between CAS and CEA groups was comparable (3.8% vs 1.8%; P = 0.6), this effect was mainly attributable to a significantly higher rate of minor stroke in the CAS group (7.5% vs 0%; P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Despite the use of cerebral protection devices the neurologic complication rate in patients aged 75 years and older associated with CAS was significantly higher than with CEA performed by highly skilled surgeons at our academic institution. Although this finding is mainly based on a significantly higher rate of minor stroke in the CAS group, the common practice of preferentially submitting older patients to CAS is questionable, and should be abandoned until the results of further randomized trials are available.

摘要

目的

颈动脉血管成形术和支架置入术(CAS)正在被评估为治疗严重颈动脉狭窄的颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)的替代方法。由于CAS不需要全身麻醉且创伤较小,在老年患者中可能特别有利,但比较这两种治疗方法在老年患者中的数据很少。

方法

将2001年6月至2004年4月期间接受了有保护的CAS的53例75岁及以上患者的围手术期并发症发生率与1997年1月至2001年12月期间在我们机构广泛引入CAS手术之前接受CEA的110例75岁及以上患者的围手术期并发症发生率进行比较。所有患者在手术前后均由神经科医生进行评估。根据大型试验制定的标准,确定30天内轻微、严重或致命性中风以及心肌梗死的发生情况。

结果

两个治疗组的人口统计学特征和干预指征相似。CAS组中有30例(57%)患者有症状性颈动脉狭窄,而CEA组中有69例(63%)。两组均未发生致命性中风或心肌梗死。CAS组的30天中风发生率(4例轻微、2例严重中风;11.3%)显著高于CEA组(无轻微中风、2例严重中风;1.8%;P <.05)。虽然CAS组和CEA组的30天严重中风发生率相当(3.8%对1.8%;P = 0.6),但这种影响主要归因于CAS组中轻微中风发生率显著更高(7.5%对0%;P <.05)。

结论

尽管使用了脑保护装置,但在我们学术机构中,75岁及以上患者与CAS相关的神经并发症发生率显著高于由技术熟练的外科医生进行的CEA。虽然这一发现主要基于CAS组中轻微中风发生率显著更高,但优先让老年患者接受CAS的常见做法值得怀疑,在获得进一步随机试验结果之前应予以摒弃。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验