Suppr超能文献

两种类型的远端保护滤器装置用于颈动脉支架置入术的治疗结果

Treatment outcomes of carotid artery stenting with two types of distal protection filter device.

作者信息

Iko Minoru, Aikawa Hiroshi, Go Yoshinori, Nakai Kanji, Tsutsumi Masanori, Yu Iwae, Mizokami Taichiro, Sakamoto Kimiya, Inoue Ritsuro, Mitsutake Takafumi, Eto Ayumu, Hanada Hayatsura, Kazekawa Kiyoshi

机构信息

Department of Neurosurgery, Fukuoka University Chikushi Hospital, 1-1-1 Zokumyoin, Chikushino, Fukuoka, 818-8502 Japan.

出版信息

Springerplus. 2014 Mar 8;3:132. doi: 10.1186/2193-1801-3-132. eCollection 2014.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Preventing cerebral embolism from debris produced during carotid artery stenting (CAS) is important. This study compared the treatment outcomes of CAS using two types of filter-based embolic protection devices currently in use in Japan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We assessed 121 consecutive cases of CAS performed with FilterWire EZ™ between July 2010 and November 2012 and 37 consecutive cases of CAS performed with the Spider FX™ between November 2012 and June 2013. A Carotid Wallstent™ was used in all cases. The incidence of positive lesions on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI) and stroke were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Postoperative DWI-positive lesions were observed in 38 (31.4%) and 14 (37.8%) patients in the FilterWire and Spider groups, respectively. In the FilterWire group, complications were transient ischemic attacks in 3 (2.5%) patients, cerebral infarction in 2 (1.7%) patients (1 patient each with minor and major stroke), and cerebral hemorrhage due to hyperperfusion syndrome in 1 (0.8%) patient. In the Spider group, except for cerebral infarction (minor stroke) in 1 (2.7%) patient, no complications were observed. No significant differences were observed in the incidence of complications between the groups.

CONCLUSION

FilterWire EZ and Spider FX are comparable in terms of treatment outcome.

摘要

目的

预防颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)过程中产生的碎片导致的脑栓塞至关重要。本研究比较了日本目前使用的两种基于滤网的栓子保护装置在CAS治疗中的效果。

材料与方法

我们评估了2010年7月至2012年11月期间连续121例使用FilterWire EZ™进行的CAS病例,以及2012年11月至2013年6月期间连续37例使用Spider FX™进行的CAS病例。所有病例均使用Carotid Wallstent™。比较两组间弥散加权磁共振成像(DWI)上阳性病变的发生率和卒中情况。

结果

FilterWire组和Spider组分别有38例(31.4%)和14例(37.8%)患者术后出现DWI阳性病变。在FilterWire组,并发症包括3例(2.5%)患者发生短暂性脑缺血发作,2例(1.7%)患者发生脑梗死(1例轻度卒中,1例重度卒中),1例(0.8%)患者因高灌注综合征发生脑出血。在Spider组,除1例(2.7%)患者发生脑梗死(轻度卒中)外,未观察到其他并发症。两组间并发症发生率无显著差异。

结论

FilterWire EZ和Spider FX在治疗效果方面具有可比性。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验