Long Graham W, Nuthakki Vijay, Bove Paul G, Brown O William, Shanley Charles J, Bendick Phillip J, Rimar Steven, Kitzmiller John, Zelenock Gerald B
Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, William Beaumont Hospital, Royal Oak, MI 48073, USA.
Ann Vasc Surg. 2007 May;21(3):321-7. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2006.08.003. Epub 2007 Mar 26.
The North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) and Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study (ACAS) demonstrated the efficacy of carotid endarterectomy (CEA), but these studies were published 15 and 11 years ago, respectively. We hypothesized that present clinical results of CEA have improved compared with those reported by NASCET/ACAS. Every patient having CEA from January 1999 through December 2003 was reviewed as part of a continuous quality-assurance program. Patient demographics and risk factors were recorded; high-risk patients were identified using inclusion criteria for high-risk carotid stent trials. Primary end points recorded were all neurologic events, deaths, and myocardial infarctions (MIs). Outcomes were reported individually or as combined neurologic events and deaths (traditional NASCET/ACAS methodology) and, similar to recent carotid stent trials, individually, combined, and as a composite that included MI. A total of 1,927 CEAs were performed, 1,140 in men (59%) and 787 in women (41%). The average age was 72 +/- 9 years; 21% of patients were age 80 or older. Symptomatic patients accounted for 717 procedures (37%). Perioperative neurologic event, death, and MI occurred in 1.0%, 0.5%, and 1.3% of patients, respectively. The combined neurologic event and death rate was 1.3% (symptomatic = 1.8%, asymptomatic = 1.1%). High-risk patients comprised 54% of the cohort; the neurologic event and death rate for this group was 1.6%. The composite end point including MI was 3.4%. Severe coronary artery disease and prior ipsilateral CEA significantly correlated with a higher incidence of primary end point complications. In contemporary practice, the perioperative neurologic event rate is significantly less than reported in NASCET/ACAS. Perioperative death and MI rates were similar to those seen in NASCET/ACAS. Neurologic events and death rates were not different between high- and low-risk groups. These data may serve as a guide for the modern vascular specialist weighing open and endovascular options for treatment of carotid artery occlusive disease in both high- and low-risk patients.
北美症状性颈动脉内膜切除术试验(NASCET)和无症状性颈动脉粥样硬化研究(ACAS)证明了颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)的疗效,但这些研究分别发表于15年前和11年前。我们推测,与NASCET/ACAS报告的结果相比,目前CEA的临床结果有所改善。作为一项持续质量保证计划的一部分,对1999年1月至2003年12月期间接受CEA治疗的每一位患者进行了回顾。记录了患者的人口统计学和风险因素;使用高危颈动脉支架试验的纳入标准确定高危患者。记录的主要终点是所有神经系统事件、死亡和心肌梗死(MI)。结果分别报告,或按照神经系统事件和死亡合并报告(传统的NASCET/ACAS方法),并且与最近的颈动脉支架试验类似,分别、合并以及作为包括MI的复合终点报告。共进行了1927例CEA手术,其中男性1140例(59%),女性787例(41%)。平均年龄为72±9岁;21%的患者年龄在80岁及以上。有症状的患者占717例手术(37%)。围手术期神经系统事件、死亡和MI的发生率分别为1.0%、0.5%和1.3%。神经系统事件和死亡率合并为1.3%(有症状者=1.8%,无症状者=1.1%)。高危患者占队列的54%;该组的神经系统事件和死亡率为1.6%。包括MI的复合终点为3.4%。严重冠状动脉疾病和既往同侧CEA与主要终点并发症的较高发生率显著相关。在当代实践中(与NASCET/ACAS相比),围手术期神经系统事件发生率显著降低。围手术期死亡率和MI发生率与NASCET/ACAS中的情况相似。高危组和低危组之间的神经系统事件和死亡率没有差异。这些数据可为现代血管专科医生在权衡开放手术和血管内治疗方案以治疗高危和低危患者的颈动脉闭塞性疾病时提供指导。