Wolff Tracy, Guirguis-Blake Janelle, Miller Therese, Gillespie Michael, Harris Russell
Center for Primary Care, Prevention, and Clinical Partnerships, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, Maryland 20850, USA.
Ann Intern Med. 2007 Dec 18;147(12):860-70. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-147-12-200712180-00006.
Cerebrovascular disease is the third leading cause of death in the United States. The proportion of all strokes attributable to previously asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (CAS) is low. In 1996, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force concluded that evidence was insufficient to recommend for or against screening of asymptomatic persons for CAS by using physical examination or carotid ultrasonography.
To examine the evidence of benefits and harms of screening asymptomatic patients with duplex ultrasonography and treatment with carotid endarterectomy for CAS.
MEDLINE and Cochrane Library (search dates January 1994 to April 2007), recent systematic reviews, reference lists of retrieved articles, and suggestions from experts.
English-language randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) of screening for CAS; RCTs of carotid endarterectomy versus medical treatment; systematic reviews of screening tests; and observational studies of harms from carotid endarterectomy were selected to answer the following questions: Is there direct evidence that screening with ultrasonography for asymptomatic CAS reduces strokes? What is the accuracy of ultrasonography to detect CAS? Does intervention with carotid endarterectomy reduce morbidity or mortality? Does screening or carotid endarterectomy result in harm?
All studies were reviewed, abstracted, and rated for quality by using predefined Task Force criteria.
No RCTs of screening for CAS have been done. According to systematic reviews, the sensitivity of ultrasonography is approximately 94% and the specificity is approximately 92%. Treatment of CAS in selected patients by selected surgeons could lead to an approximately 5-percentage point absolute reduction in strokes over 5 years. Thirty-day stroke and death rates from carotid endarterectomy vary from 2.7% to 4.7% in RCTs; higher rates have been reported in observational studies (up to 6.7%).
Evidence is inadequate to stratify people into categories of risk for clinically important CAS. The RCTs of carotid endarterectomy versus medical treatment were conducted in selected populations with selected surgeons.
The actual stroke reduction from screening asymptomatic patients and treatment with carotid endarterectomy is unknown; the benefit is limited by a low overall prevalence of treatable disease in the general asymptomatic population and harms from treatment.
在美国,脑血管疾病是第三大死因。由先前无症状的颈动脉狭窄(CAS)导致的所有中风比例较低。1996年,美国预防服务工作组得出结论,证据不足,无法建议支持或反对通过体格检查或颈动脉超声对无症状人群进行CAS筛查。
研究使用双功超声筛查无症状患者以及对CAS进行颈动脉内膜切除术治疗的益处和危害的证据。
MEDLINE和Cochrane图书馆(检索日期为1994年1月至2007年4月)、近期的系统评价、检索文章的参考文献列表以及专家建议。
选择关于CAS筛查的英文随机对照试验(RCT);颈动脉内膜切除术与药物治疗的RCT;筛查试验的系统评价;以及颈动脉内膜切除术危害的观察性研究,以回答以下问题:是否有直接证据表明超声筛查无症状CAS可减少中风?超声检测CAS的准确性如何?颈动脉内膜切除术干预是否能降低发病率或死亡率?筛查或颈动脉内膜切除术是否会造成危害?
所有研究均根据预先确定的工作组标准进行审查、摘要提取和质量评级。
尚未进行关于CAS筛查的RCT。根据系统评价,超声的敏感性约为94%,特异性约为92%。由选定的外科医生对选定患者的CAS进行治疗,在5年内可能使中风绝对减少约5个百分点。在RCT中,颈动脉内膜切除术的30天中风和死亡率在2.7%至4.7%之间;观察性研究报告的发生率更高(高达6.7%)。
证据不足以将人群分层为具有临床重要意义的CAS风险类别。颈动脉内膜切除术与药物治疗的RCT是在选定的人群中由选定的外科医生进行的。
筛查无症状患者并进行颈动脉内膜切除术治疗实际减少中风的情况尚不清楚;益处受到一般无症状人群中可治疗疾病总体患病率较低以及治疗危害的限制。