Grotenhermen F
Nova-Institut, Hürth, Germany.
Vasa. 2010 Feb;39(1):43-53. doi: 10.1024/0301-1526/a000004.
To investigate the hypothesis that cases of arteritis similar to thromboangiitis obliterans (TAO) and associated with the use of cannabis were caused by cannabis or THC (dronabinol), or that cannabis use is a co-factor of TAO.
A systematic review on case reports and the literature on so-called cannabis arteritis, TAO, and cardiovascular effects of cannabinoids was conducted.
Fifteen reports with 57 cases of an arteritis associated with the use of cannabis and two additional case series of TAO, in which some patients also used cannabis, were identified. Clinical and pathological features of cannabis-associated arteritis do not differ from TAO and the major risk factor of TAO, tobacco use, was present in most, if not in all of these cases. The proposed pathophysiological mechanisms for the development of an arteritis by cannabis use are not substantiated.
The hypothesis of cannabis being a causative factor or co-factor of TAO or an arteritis similar to TAO is not supported by the available evidence. The use of the term cannabis arteritis should be avoided until or unless more convincing scientific support is forthcoming.
探讨以下假说，即与大麻使用相关的、类似于血栓闭塞性脉管炎（TAO）的动脉炎病例是由大麻或四氢大麻酚（屈大麻酚）所致，或者大麻使用是TAO的一个辅助因素。
对关于所谓的大麻动脉炎、TAO以及大麻素心血管效应的病例报告和文献进行了系统综述。
共识别出15篇报告，其中包含57例与大麻使用相关的动脉炎病例，以及另外两个TAO病例系列，部分患者也使用过大麻。大麻相关动脉炎的临床和病理特征与TAO并无差异，且在大多数（即便不是全部）此类病例中都存在TAO的主要危险因素，即吸烟。大麻使用引发动脉炎的拟议病理生理机制并无确凿证据支持。
现有证据不支持大麻是TAO或类似TAO的动脉炎的致病因素或辅助因素这一假说。在获得更具说服力的科学支持之前，应避免使用“大麻动脉炎”这一术语。
