• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

颈动脉血管成形术(伴或不伴支架置入)与颈动脉内膜切除术治疗颈动脉狭窄的比较:一项荟萃分析。

Carotid angioplasty with or without stenting versus carotid endarterectomy for carotid artery stenosis: a meta-analysis.

作者信息

Jeng Jiann-Shing, Liu Hon-Man, Tu Yong-Kwang

机构信息

Stroke Center & Department of Neurology, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.

出版信息

J Neurol Sci. 2008 Jul 15;270(1-2):40-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2008.01.012. Epub 2008 Mar 4.

DOI:10.1016/j.jns.2008.01.012
PMID:18304582
Abstract

Carotid angioplasty with or without stent placement (CAS) has emerged as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for revascularization of severe carotid artery stenosis in patients with high risk for surgery. This meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of both treatments from data for previous randomized trials. We did a literature search using Medline, PubMed, Cochrane database, and relevant articles for randomized trials comparing CAS with CEA. A meta-analysis using both random-effects and fixed-effects models compared outcome events of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and cranial nerve injury at 30 days, 6 months, or 1 year after procedure. A total of nine trials involving 3138 patients (1564, CEA; 1574, CAS) with symptomatic or asymptomatic stenosis were included for analysis. By random-effects model, there was no significant difference of event rates between treatments for any stroke (odds ratio for CAS [95% confidence interval], 1.46 [0.91-2.36]), death or any stroke (1.37 [0.90-2.10]), or death, any stroke, or myocardial infarction (1.02 [0.49-2.11]) at 30-day, and death and any stroke at 6 months (1.50 [0.69-3.23]) or 1 year (1.25 [0.59-2.63]). But, there were significantly higher 30-day event rates after CAS than CEA for death or any stroke (1.37 [1.04-1.81]) by fix-effects model, accompanied with significant heterogeneity (p=0.04). Risk of cranial nerve injury was much lower in CAS than in CEA (0.12 [0.05-0.29]). Except for lower risk of cranial nerve injury, CAS is neither safer nor associated with a better short-term outcome as compared to CEA in treating carotid artery stenosis.

摘要

对于手术风险高的严重颈动脉狭窄患者,颈动脉血管成形术(无论是否置入支架,即CAS)已成为颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)用于血运重建的替代方案。本荟萃分析通过既往随机试验数据比较了两种治疗方法的疗效和安全性。我们使用Medline、PubMed、Cochrane数据库及相关随机试验文章进行文献检索,以比较CAS与CEA。采用随机效应模型和固定效应模型的荟萃分析比较了术后30天、6个月或1年时死亡、中风、心肌梗死和颅神经损伤等结局事件。共纳入9项试验,涉及3138例有症状或无症状狭窄的患者(1564例接受CEA;1574例接受CAS)进行分析。根据随机效应模型,在30天时,任何中风(CAS的优势比[95%置信区间],1.46[0.91 - 2.36])、死亡或任何中风(1.37[0.90 - 2.10])、死亡、任何中风或心肌梗死(1.02[0.49 - 2.11])的事件发生率在两种治疗方法之间无显著差异;在6个月(1.50[0.69 - 3.23])或1年(1.25[0.59 - 2.63])时,死亡和任何中风的事件发生率也无显著差异。但是,根据固定效应模型,在30天时,CAS组死亡或任何中风的事件发生率显著高于CEA组(1.37[1.04 - 1.81]),且伴有显著异质性(p = 0.04)。CAS组颅神经损伤风险远低于CEA组(0.12[0.05 - 0.29])。除颅神经损伤风险较低外,在治疗颈动脉狭窄方面,与CEA相比,CAS既不安全,短期结局也未更好。

相似文献

1
Carotid angioplasty with or without stenting versus carotid endarterectomy for carotid artery stenosis: a meta-analysis.颈动脉血管成形术(伴或不伴支架置入)与颈动脉内膜切除术治疗颈动脉狭窄的比较:一项荟萃分析。
J Neurol Sci. 2008 Jul 15;270(1-2):40-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jns.2008.01.012. Epub 2008 Mar 4.
2
Meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing carotid endarterectomy and endovascular treatment.比较颈动脉内膜切除术和血管内治疗的随机试验的荟萃分析。
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2007 Oct;34(4):470-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2007.06.001. Epub 2007 Aug 1.
3
Carotid endarterectomy versus carotid stenting: an updated review of randomized trials and subgroup analyses.颈动脉内膜切除术与颈动脉支架置入术:随机试验及亚组分析的最新综述
Acta Chir Belg. 2007 Mar-Apr;107(2):119-28.
4
Outcomes of carotid artery stenting in high-risk patients with carotid artery stenosis: a single neurovascular center retrospective review of 101 consecutive patients.颈动脉狭窄高危患者颈动脉支架置入术的结果:单神经血管中心 101 例连续患者的回顾性研究。
Neurosurgery. 2010 Mar;66(3):448-53; discussion 453-4. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000365008.17803.AD.
5
Safety of carotid artery stenting for symptomatic carotid artery disease: a meta-analysis.症状性颈动脉疾病行颈动脉支架置入术的安全性:一项荟萃分析。
Eur Heart J. 2008 Jan;29(1):113-9. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehm362. Epub 2007 Sep 18.
6
Carotid angioplasty with or without stent placement versus carotid endarterectomy for treatment of carotid stenosis: a meta-analysis.血管成形术联合或不联合支架置入术与颈动脉内膜切除术治疗颈动脉狭窄的Meta分析
Neurosurgery. 2005 Jun;56(6):1171-9; discussion 1179-81. doi: 10.1227/01.neu.0000159638.45389.c2.
7
Carotid artery stenting vs. endarterectomy.颈动脉支架置入术与颈动脉内膜切除术的比较。
Eur Heart J. 2009 Nov;30(22):2693-704. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehp471. Epub 2009 Oct 27.
8
How I interpreted the randomised trials of carotid angioplasty/stenting versus endarterectomy.我如何解读颈动脉血管成形术/支架置入术与动脉内膜切除术的随机试验。
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2008 Jul;36(1):34-40. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2008.04.001. Epub 2008 May 15.
9
Carotid artery disease in octogenarians: endarterectomy or stenting?八旬老人的颈动脉疾病:内膜切除术还是支架置入术?
Int Angiol. 2007 Dec;26(4):353-60.
10
Carotid Revascularization Using Endarterectomy or Stenting Systems (CaRESS) phase I clinical trial: 1-year results.使用颈动脉内膜切除术或支架系统的颈动脉血运重建术(CaRESS)I期临床试验:1年结果。
J Vasc Surg. 2005 Aug;42(2):213-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2005.04.023.

引用本文的文献

1
Carotid artery stenting versus endarterectomy: a systematic review.颈动脉支架置入术与动脉内膜切除术:一项系统评价
Tex Heart Inst J. 2012;39(4):474-87.
2
Indications and applications for extracranial carotid artery stent placement.颅外颈动脉支架置入术的适应证及应用。
Curr Cardiol Rep. 2010 Jan;12(1):42-50. doi: 10.1007/s11886-009-0072-2.
3
Ethics and methods in surgical trials.外科试验中的伦理和方法。
J Med Ethics. 2009 Sep;35(9):579-83. doi: 10.1136/jme.2008.028175.
4
Carotid revascularization using endarterectomy or stenting systems (CaRESS): 4-year outcomes.使用颈动脉内膜切除术或支架置入系统进行颈动脉血运重建(CaRESS):4年随访结果
J Endovasc Ther. 2009 Aug;16(4):397-409. doi: 10.1583/08-2685.1.
5
New data about stenting versus endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid artery stenosis.关于有症状颈动脉狭窄的支架置入术与动脉内膜切除术的新数据。
Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med. 2009 Jun;11(3):232-40. doi: 10.1007/s11936-009-0024-6.