Villwock Mark R, Singla Amit, Padalino David J, Ramaswamy Raghu, Deshaies Eric M
Crouse Neuroscience Institute, Neurovascular and Stroke Center, Syracuse, USA.
University of Florida, Department of Neurosurgery, Gainesville, USA.
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2014 Dec;127:128-33. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2014.10.008. Epub 2014 Oct 22.
There is debate concerning the optimum timing of revascularization for emergent admissions of carotid artery stenosis with infarction. Our intent was to stratify clinical and economic outcomes based on the timing of revascularization.
We performed a retrospective cohort study using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2002 to 2011. Patients were included if they were admitted non-electively with a primary diagnosis of carotid artery stenosis with infarction and subsequently treated with revascularization. Cases were stratified into four groups based upon the timing of revascularization: (1) within 48-h of admission, (2) between 48-h and day four of hospitalization, (3) between days five and seven, and (4) during the second week of admission.
27,839 cases met our inclusion criteria. The lowest odds of iatrogenic complications (OR=0.643, P<.001) and mortality (OR=0.631, P<.001) coincided with revascularization between days five and seven of hospitalization. Treatment with carotid artery stenting (CAS) and administration of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) increased the odds of complications and death. With regards to economic measures, administration of rtPA and utilization of CAS drove cost and length-of-stay up, while lower co-morbidity burden and earlier time to revascularization drove both measures down.
The present study suggests that the optimum timing of revascularization may be near the end of the first week of hospitalization following acute stroke. However, this study must be cautioned with limitations including its inability to control for critical disease specific variables including symptom severity and degree of stenosis. Prospective examination seems warranted.
对于因梗死而急诊入院的颈动脉狭窄患者,血管重建的最佳时机存在争议。我们的目的是根据血管重建的时机对临床和经济结果进行分层。
我们使用2002年至2011年的全国住院患者样本进行了一项回顾性队列研究。纳入标准为非选择性入院,主要诊断为因梗死导致的颈动脉狭窄,随后接受血管重建治疗的患者。根据血管重建的时机将病例分为四组:(1)入院后48小时内;(2)住院48小时至第4天之间;(3)第5天至第7天之间;(4)入院第二周内。
27839例病例符合我们的纳入标准。医源性并发症(OR = 0.643,P <.001)和死亡率(OR = 0.631,P <.001)最低的情况与住院第5天至第7天之间的血管重建相吻合。颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)治疗和重组组织型纤溶酶原激活剂(rtPA)的使用增加了并发症和死亡的几率。在经济指标方面,rtPA的使用和CAS的应用增加了成本和住院时间,而较低的合并症负担和较早的血管重建时间则降低了这两项指标。
本研究表明,血管重建的最佳时机可能在急性卒中后住院第一周接近尾声时。然而,本研究存在局限性,包括无法控制关键的疾病特异性变量,如症状严重程度和狭窄程度,必须谨慎对待。前瞻性研究似乎很有必要。