Department of Vascular Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
J Vasc Surg. 2013 Oct;58(4):926-34.e1-2. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2013.04.033. Epub 2013 Jun 2.
The safety and durability of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) require attention to certain technical details that may evolve over time. The objective of this study was to determine whether routine patch angioplasty and precautions related to the common carotid cuff could reduce the risks for perioperative stroke, internal carotid artery (ICA) thrombosis, or recurrent carotid stenosis.
The senior author (N.H.) performed 1959 consecutive isolated CEAs at the Cleveland Clinic from 1976 to 2004. This series can be divided into three distinct eras with respect to patching and management of the proximal common carotid cuff: (1) primary arteriotomy closure with selective patching in only 38 of 653 CEAs (5.8%) from 1976 to 1983 (group 1); (2) routine patching without any special precautions related to the common carotid cuff in 568 CEAs from 1983 to 1990 (group 2); and (3) routine patching with extended exposure and tacking sutures to secure the carotid cuff in 738 CEAs from 1990 to 2004 (group 3).
Although vein patching alone seemed to have less risk for perioperative stroke (1.2% vs 2.4%) or ICA thrombosis (0.6% vs 1.8%) than primary closure, these differences did not attain statistical significance. There also were no significant differences in the perioperative stroke and ICA thrombosis rates among the three eras in which changes occurred in patch use and in the management of the carotid cuff. After adjusting for the various lengths of follow-up in the study groups, however, group 3 had a significantly lower risk for recurrent 60% to 99% stenosis or ICA occlusion at >5 years after CEA (odds ratio [OR], 0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04-0.22; P < .001). On multivariable analysis, group 3 (OR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.09-0.60; P = .003) and advancing age (OR, 0.89 per year; 95% CI, 0.85-0.92 per year; P < .001) had less risk for late recurrent stenosis, whereas this risk was higher in women (OR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.23-4.06; P = .009) and in patients who had undergone previous ipsilateral CEA (OR, 6.02; 95% CI, 1.63-22.2; P = .007).
Routine patching plus extended exposure and tacking of the common carotid cuff appear to significantly reduce the long-term incidence of recurrent 60% to 99% stenosis or ICA occlusion after CEA.
颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)的安全性和耐久性需要关注某些可能随时间演变的技术细节。本研究的目的是确定常规使用补片血管成形术和与颈总动脉套有关的预防措施是否可以降低围手术期卒中、颈内动脉(ICA)血栓形成或复发性颈动脉狭窄的风险。
首席研究员(N.H.)于 1976 年至 2004 年在克利夫兰诊所进行了 1959 例连续的孤立性 CEA。根据补片和颈总动脉套近端管理方面的补丁,可以将该系列分为三个不同的时代:(1)在 1976 年至 1983 年期间,653 例 CEA 中有 38 例(5.8%)采用选择性补片进行原发性动脉切开术闭合(组 1);(2)在 1983 年至 1990 年期间,568 例 CEA 中常规使用补片,没有与颈总动脉套有关的特殊预防措施(组 2);(3)在 1990 年至 2004 年期间,738 例 CEA 中常规使用补片,并延长暴露和固定缝线以固定颈动脉套(组 3)。
尽管单独使用静脉补片似乎对围手术期卒中(1.2%比 2.4%)或 ICA 血栓形成(0.6%比 1.8%)的风险较低,但这些差异没有达到统计学意义。在补丁使用和颈总动脉套管理方面发生变化的三个时代中,围手术期卒中率和 ICA 血栓形成率之间也没有显著差异。然而,在对研究组的各种随访时间进行调整后,组 3 在 CEA 后 5 年以上发生 60%至 99%狭窄或 ICA 闭塞的复发风险明显降低(比值比[OR],0.09;95%置信区间[CI],0.04-0.22;P<0.001)。多变量分析显示,组 3(OR,0.23;95%CI,0.09-0.60;P=0.003)和年龄增长(OR,每增加 1 年 0.89;95%CI,每增加 1 年 0.85-0.92;P<0.001)的复发风险较低,而女性(OR,2.23;95%CI,1.23-4.06;P=0.009)和同侧 CEA 史(OR,6.02;95%CI,1.63-22.2;P=0.007)的风险较高。
常规使用补片加颈总动脉套的广泛暴露和固定似乎可显著降低 CEA 后 60%至 99%狭窄或 ICA 闭塞的长期发生率。