Department of Neurosurgery, Division of Endovascular Neurosurgery and Interventional Neuroradiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA.
AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2010 Feb;31(2):230-4. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A1803. Epub 2009 Sep 24.
Given the current high quality and usefulness of noninvasive cerebrovascular imaging, invasive angiographic evaluation of the cerebrovascular system is justified if the procedural risk for a neurologic complication is far below the anticipated benefit. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of diagnostic cerebral angiography provided by a dedicated neurointerventional team in a high-volume university hospital.
A consecutive cohort of 1715 patients undergoing diagnostic cerebral angiography at our institution from 2000 to 2008 was retrospectively assessed for incidence of stroke or TIA related to cerebral angiography. In the subgroup of patients (n = 40) who serendipitously underwent DWI within the first 30 days after cerebral angiography, the presence of new DWI hyperintensities found in territories explored during angiography was tabulated. Complications related to the catheter technique and sheath placement were also studied.
No stroke or permanent neurologic deficit was seen in any of the 1715 patients undergoing diagnostic neuroangiography. One patient experienced a TIA. Nonneurologic complications without long-term sequelae occurred in 9 patients. Two patients had punctate areas of restricted diffusion in territories that had been angiographically explored.
Within a high-volume neurointerventional practice, the risk for neurologic complications related to catheter-based diagnostic cerebral angiography can approach zero. As the absolute number of invasive diagnostic procedures diminishes with time, diagnostic cerebral angiography remains a useful tool while providing a foundation for neuroendovascular interventions, and should preferably be performed in institutions with high-volume operators also capable of managing unanticipated complicating adverse events.
鉴于目前无创性脑血管成像的高质量和实用性,如果神经并发症的程序风险远低于预期的益处,那么对脑血管系统进行有创血管造影评估是合理的。本研究的目的是评估在高容量大学医院中由专门的神经介入团队提供的诊断性脑血管造影的安全性。
回顾性评估了 2000 年至 2008 年在我们机构接受诊断性脑血管造影的 1715 例患者的卒中或 TIA 发生率,与脑血管造影相关。在偶然在脑血管造影后 30 天内进行 DWI 的患者亚组(n = 40)中,记录了在血管造影过程中探索的区域中新出现的 DWI 高信号的存在。还研究了与导管技术和鞘管放置相关的并发症。
在接受诊断性神经血管造影的 1715 例患者中,无卒中或永久性神经功能缺损。1 例患者发生 TIA。9 例患者出现无长期后遗症的非神经并发症。2 例患者在经血管造影探索的区域中出现点状弥散受限区。
在高容量神经介入实践中,与基于导管的诊断性脑血管造影相关的神经并发症风险可接近零。随着侵入性诊断程序的绝对数量随时间减少,诊断性脑血管造影仍然是一种有用的工具,为神经血管介入提供了基础,并且最好在能够管理意外并发症不良事件的高容量操作者的机构中进行。