Section of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan Cardiovascular Center, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5867, USA.
J Vasc Surg. 2013 Jul;58(1):152-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2012.12.067. Epub 2013 Mar 9.
Flow-limiting lesions or embolic phenomena can produce vertebrobasilar ischemia. This study aims to differentiate the pathophysiology of vertebral ischemia and examine contemporary outcomes after distal vertebral reconstruction.
Between February 2005 and November 2011, 41 consecutive distal vertebral artery (VA) reconstructions were performed in 34 patients, including bypass to the third portion of the VA (V3) at the C1-2 level (n = 24) or the C0-1 level (n = 7); transposition of the external carotid artery or its occipital branch onto V3 (n = 6); transposition of V3 onto the internal carotid artery (n = 3); and bypass from the ipsilateral subclavian artery to V3 (n = 1). Six patients required a concomitant carotid intervention, and nine patients required a partial resection of the C1 transverse process. Symptoms, present in 91% of patients, were attributed to a flow-limiting lesion in 16 (52%), to embolization in nine (29%), and to a mixed etiology in six (19%).
Intraoperatively, five patients required graft revision or conversion of a transposition to a bypass, and two patients required vertebral ligation. Median blood loss was 260 mL. Median hospital length of stay was 1 day. Postoperatively, one patient (2%) required re-exploration for bleeding, a stroke occurred in one patient (2%), and cranial nerve injury occurred in three patients (7%). There were no perioperative deaths. Survival analysis showed that primary patency at 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively, was 74%, 74%, and 54%. Secondary patency was 80% at 1 year and remained so through the end of follow-up at 80 months. A statistically significant difference in patency was noted favoring arterial transposition over vertebral bypass of 100%, 100%, and 83% at 1, 2, and 5 years, respectively, vs 65%, 65%, and 39% (P = .018). Considering successful redo bypass grafting for late failure, 97% of patients demonstrated preserved patency at their last follow-up. There were two late deaths of unknown etiology and no late strokes.
Distal VA reconstruction for flow-limiting or embolic lesions provides excellent stroke protection and symptomatic relief with acceptable perioperative risk in selected patients.
血流限制病变或栓塞现象可导致椎基底动脉缺血。本研究旨在区分椎动脉缺血的病理生理学,并研究当代远端椎动脉重建后的结果。
2005 年 2 月至 2011 年 11 月,34 例患者连续进行了 41 例远端椎动脉(VA)重建,包括在 C1-2 水平(n=24)或 C0-1 水平(n=7)行第三段椎动脉(V3)旁路转流;将颈外动脉或其枕支转位至 V3(n=6);将 V3 转位至颈内动脉(n=3);将同侧锁骨下动脉与 V3 旁路转流(n=1)。6 例患者需要同时进行颈动脉介入治疗,9 例患者需要进行 C1 横突部分切除术。91%的患者出现症状,其中 16 例(52%)归因于血流限制病变,9 例(29%)归因于栓塞,6 例(19%)归因于混合病因。
术中,5 例患者需要进行移植物修正或转位为旁路,2 例患者需要进行椎动脉结扎。中位失血量为 260 毫升。中位住院时间为 1 天。术后,1 例(2%)患者因出血需要再次探查,1 例(2%)患者发生卒中,3 例(7%)患者出现颅神经损伤。无围手术期死亡。生存分析显示,1、2、5 年时的原发性通畅率分别为 74%、74%和 54%。2 年时的继发性通畅率为 80%,并一直持续到 80 个月的随访结束。通畅率有显著统计学差异,动脉转位优于椎动脉旁路转流,分别为 100%、100%和 83%,而椎动脉旁路转流分别为 65%、65%和 39%(P=0.018)。考虑到晚期失败后的再次旁路移植,97%的患者在最后一次随访时保持通畅。有 2 例晚期死因不明的死亡,无晚期卒中。
对于血流限制或栓塞病变,远端 VA 重建可提供极好的卒中保护和症状缓解,并在选定患者中具有可接受的围手术期风险。