Suppr超能文献

传统颈动脉内膜切除术与外翻式颈动脉内膜切除术的对比结果。

Comparative results of conventional and eversion carotid endarterectomy.

作者信息

Lee Jae Hoon, Suh Bo Yang

机构信息

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Catholic University of Daegu School of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.

Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Daegu, Korea.

出版信息

Ann Surg Treat Res. 2014 Oct;87(4):192-6. doi: 10.4174/astr.2014.87.4.192. Epub 2014 Sep 25.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Comparative results of conventional carotid endarterectomy (cCEA) and eversion carotid endarterectomy (eCEA) have been reported in many studies. But in Korea, there have been no reports to compare the outcome of the two techniques. Thus, we investigated the results of eCEA compared to cCEA in Yeungnam University Medical Center.

METHODS

A total of 120 subjects who underwent CEA were included in this study. Of them, cCEAs were performed in 63 patients and eCEAs were performed in 57 patients. We analyzed the results divided into the early (within 30 days after surgery), midterm (from 30 days up to 1 year after surgery) and late (over 1 year after surgery).

RESULTS

Mean age of the patients was 65.9 ± 7.1 years in cCEA group and 66.8 ± 7.7 years in eCEA group (P = 0.523). Carotid shunt frequency was higher in the cCEA group (39.7% vs. 19.3%, P = 0.015). There were no statistical differences in the early complications with the exception of a significantly higher risk for new brain lesions in the cCEA group (34.9% vs. 14.0%, P = 0.008). The frequency of complication was same between cCEA group and eCEA group in the midterm. Although there was no statistical significance, the frequency of late complications was higher in the cCEA group compared to eCEA group. Mean follow-up duration was 29.4 ± 23.5 months.

CONCLUSION

These data showed that eCEA was an acceptable procedure and had some advantage compared to cCEA in the aspect of the early and late complication.

摘要

目的

许多研究报告了传统颈动脉内膜切除术(cCEA)和外翻式颈动脉内膜切除术(eCEA)的对比结果。但在韩国,尚无比较这两种技术疗效的报告。因此,我们在庆南大学医学中心研究了eCEA与cCEA相比的结果。

方法

本研究纳入了120例行颈动脉内膜切除术的受试者。其中,63例患者接受了cCEA,57例患者接受了eCEA。我们将结果分为早期(术后30天内)、中期(术后30天至1年)和晚期(术后1年以上)进行分析。

结果

cCEA组患者的平均年龄为65.9±7.1岁,eCEA组为66.8±7.7岁(P = 0.523)。cCEA组的颈动脉分流频率更高(39.7%对19.3%,P = 0.015)。除cCEA组新发脑损伤风险显著更高外(34.9%对14.0%,P = 0.008),早期并发症方面无统计学差异。中期cCEA组和eCEA组的并发症发生率相同。虽然无统计学意义,但cCEA组晚期并发症的发生率高于eCEA组。平均随访时间为29.4±23.5个月。

结论

这些数据表明,eCEA是一种可接受的手术方法,在早期和晚期并发症方面与cCEA相比具有一定优势。

相似文献

1
Comparative results of conventional and eversion carotid endarterectomy.
Ann Surg Treat Res. 2014 Oct;87(4):192-6. doi: 10.4174/astr.2014.87.4.192. Epub 2014 Sep 25.
4
Long-term outcomes of eversion and conventional carotid endarterectomy: A multicenter clinical trial.
Vascular. 2023 Aug;31(4):717-724. doi: 10.1177/17085381221084803. Epub 2022 Mar 24.
5
Literature review of primary versus patching versus eversion as carotid endarterectomy closure.
J Vasc Surg. 2021 Aug;74(2):666-675. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2021.02.051. Epub 2021 Apr 20.
7
A comparison of outcomes of eversion versus conventional carotid endarterectomy: one centre experience.
Ir J Med Sci. 2020 Feb;189(1):103-108. doi: 10.1007/s11845-019-02026-3. Epub 2019 May 17.
8
Does the eversion technique have a lower early postoperative stroke rate than the conventional technique in carotid endarterectomy?
Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2022 Aug 28;81:104505. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2022.104505. eCollection 2022 Sep.
9
Impact of routine completion angiography on outcome after carotid endarterectomy.
J Vasc Surg. 2019 Mar;69(3):824-831. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.06.210. Epub 2018 Oct 3.
10
Modified Eversion Carotid Endarterectomy (mECEA): Analysis of Clinical and Financial Outcomes.
Ann Vasc Surg. 2017 Jul;42:16-24. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2016.10.046. Epub 2017 Mar 7.

引用本文的文献

1
Does the eversion technique have a lower early postoperative stroke rate than the conventional technique in carotid endarterectomy?
Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2022 Aug 28;81:104505. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2022.104505. eCollection 2022 Sep.
2
Comparison of Results Classical and Eversion Carotid Endarterectomy.
Med Arch. 2017 Apr;71(2):89-92. doi: 10.5455/medarh.2017.71.89-92.
3
Carotid Endarterectomy in the Southern California Vascular Outcomes Improvement Collaborative.
Ann Vasc Surg. 2017 Jul;42:11-15. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2016.11.007. Epub 2017 Mar 18.

本文引用的文献

2
Eversion versus conventional carotid endarterectomy: a meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised studies.
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011 Dec;42(6):751-65. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2011.08.012. Epub 2011 Sep 8.
3
Treatment of carotid artery stenosis: medical therapy, surgery, or stenting?
Mayo Clin Proc. 2009 Apr;84(4):362-87; quiz 367-8. doi: 10.1016/S0025-6196(11)60546-6.
4
Carotid artery disease.
Circulation. 2006 Aug 15;114(7):e244-7. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.542860.
5
Restenosis after carotid endarterectomy.
Int J Clin Pract. 2006 Dec;60(12):1625-30. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2005.00775.x. Epub 2006 Mar 27.
7
The evolution of extracranial carotid artery surgery as seen by one surgeon over the past 40 years.
Surgeon. 2003 Oct;1(5):249-58. doi: 10.1016/s1479-666x(03)80040-9.
9
Surgical considerations of occlusive disease of innominate, carotid, subclavian, and vertebral arteries.
Ann Surg. 1959 May;149(5):690-710. doi: 10.1097/00000658-195905000-00010.
10
Reconstruction of internal carotid artery in a patient with intermittent attacks of hemiplegia.
Lancet. 1954 Nov 13;267(6846):994-6. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(54)90544-9.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验