Ghogawala Zoher, Westerveld Michael, Amin-Hanjani Sepideh
Wallace Clinical Trials Center, Greenwich Hospital, Greenwich, Connecticut 06830, USA.
Neurosurgery. 2008 Feb;62(2):385-95; discussion 393-5. doi: 10.1227/01.neu.0000316005.88517.60.
Carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) are currently being compared in ongoing randomized, controlled trials using postprocedural 30-day stroke rate, myocardial infarction, and mortality as primary endpoints. Recent data suggest that cognitive function may decline after CEA. Understanding the mechanisms that affect cognitive outcomes after carotid revascularization will be important in the design of future comparative studies of CAS and CEA incorporating cognitive outcome as an endpoint.
The effects of carotid revascularization procedures on cognitive outcome are unclear. Several factors contribute to the difficulty in interpreting cognitive data, including patient heterogeneity, variability of surgical techniques, and the differences in neuropsychological testing methodology. Mechanisms underlying cognitive effects during CEA have emerged, including the potential detrimental effect of procedural emboli and the beneficial effect of improved cerebral hemodynamics. The emergence of CAS as an alternative to CEA for treating carotid stenosis again raises questions about cognitive outcomes. Despite the use of distal protection devices, CAS is associated with a higher burden of microemboli. CAS does not, however, require the extent of temporary vessel occlusion associated with CEA. Quantifying microemboli and changes in cerebral hemodynamics along with standardization of neuropsychological testing may lead to meaningful comparisons of cognitive data for patients undergoing carotid revascularization procedures.
As use of CAS increases, it is important for randomized, controlled trials comparing CAS with CEA to include cognitive outcomes assessments. Furthermore, understanding the key mechanisms resulting in cognitive impairment during carotid revascularization procedures might limit injury.
目前正在进行的随机对照试验中,对颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)和颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)进行比较,将术后30天的卒中率、心肌梗死和死亡率作为主要终点。近期数据表明,CEA术后认知功能可能会下降。了解颈动脉血运重建术后影响认知结局的机制,对于未来将认知结局作为终点纳入CAS和CEA比较研究的设计至关重要。
颈动脉血运重建术对认知结局的影响尚不清楚。有几个因素导致难以解释认知数据,包括患者异质性、手术技术的变异性以及神经心理学测试方法的差异。CEA期间认知影响的潜在机制已经显现,包括手术栓子的潜在有害作用和改善脑血流动力学的有益作用。CAS作为治疗颈动脉狭窄替代CEA的方法出现,再次引发了关于认知结局的问题。尽管使用了远端保护装置,但CAS与更高的微栓子负荷相关。然而,CAS不需要与CEA相关的临时血管闭塞程度。量化微栓子和脑血流动力学变化以及神经心理学测试的标准化,可能会对接受颈动脉血运重建术的患者的认知数据进行有意义的比较。
随着CAS使用的增加,将认知结局评估纳入比较CAS与CEA的随机对照试验很重要。此外,了解颈动脉血运重建术中导致认知障碍的关键机制可能会减少损伤。