Suppr超能文献

对于轻至中度急性缺血性卒中,溶栓后紧急进行颈动脉介入治疗是安全的。

Urgent carotid intervention is safe after thrombolysis for minor to moderate acute ischemic stroke.

作者信息

Bazan Hernan A, Zea Nicolas, Jennings Bethany, Smith Taylor A, Vidal Gabriel, Sternbergh W Charles

机构信息

Section of Vascular/Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Ochsner Clinic, New Orleans, La.

Section of Vascular/Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Ochsner Clinic, New Orleans, La.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg. 2015 Dec;62(6):1529-38. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.07.082. Epub 2015 Sep 26.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Carotid intervention shortly after an acute neurologic ischemic event is being performed more frequently in stroke centers to reduce the risk of recurrent stroke. Thrombolysis with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) is offered to select patients with ischemic stroke symptoms who present within 4.5 hours. However, there is a paucity of data as to whether tPA followed by urgent carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) has an increased risk of complications, particularly intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH). We sought to determine the periprocedural complications of urgently performed CEA or CAS following tPA.

METHODS

From January 2009 to January 2015, 762 patients underwent carotid interventions (CEA, n = 440; CAS, n = 322) at a tertiary referral center and 165 patients (21.6%) underwent an urgent CEA or CAS during the index hospitalization for an acute transient ischemic attack or stroke. We compared the effect of intravenous tPA on 30-day complications, including ICH. The χ(2) and Fisher exact tests were used to determine significance between groups.

RESULTS

During the 6-year period, 165 patients underwent urgent carotid interventions (CEA, n = 135; CAS, n = 30) for acute neurologic symptoms. Of these, 19% (31 patients [CEA, n = 25; CAS, n = 6]) had tPA for an acute stroke; the remaining (134 patients [CEA, n = 110; CAS, n = 24]) fell outside of the tPA time window. Most strokes were minor or moderate with a mean National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score of 6.6 (range, 0-19). The mean time to intervention for both groups was 2.4 days (0-15 days). The 30-day stroke, death, and myocardial infarction rates were 9.7% (3 of 31) for the tPA group compared with 4.5% (6 of 134) for the no-tPA group (P = .37). Including bleeding complications in these 30-day outcomes, there was no difference between the tPA (3 of 31) and the no-tPA cohorts (8 of 134; P = .43). In the tPA group, there were one ICH, one neck hematoma/death, and an additional death; in the no-tPA group, there were one ICH, two neck hematomas, one stroke, two myocardial infarctions, one ICH/death, and one additional death. No significant increased rates of bleeding were noted within the tPA group (2 of 31) compared with the no-tPA group (4 of 134; P = .32). Moreover, in the tPA cohort, more than half of the patients (17 of 31) underwent revascularization within 72 hours (CEA = 13; CAS = 4) with outcomes similar to those who underwent revascularization after 72 hours.

CONCLUSIONS

Thrombolysis followed by urgent CEA or CAS is not associated with an increased risk of complications in select patients who present with acute neurologic symptoms. Selection of patients is important; there was no ICH and only one death in each group for patients with minor to moderate ischemic stroke (NIHSS score <10).

摘要

目的

在卒中中心,急性神经缺血事件后不久进行颈动脉干预的操作越来越频繁,以降低复发性卒中的风险。重组组织型纤溶酶原激活剂(tPA)溶栓治疗适用于在4.5小时内出现缺血性卒中症状的特定患者。然而,关于tPA治疗后紧接着进行紧急颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)或颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)是否会增加并发症风险,尤其是脑出血(ICH),目前的数据较少。我们试图确定tPA治疗后紧急进行CEA或CAS的围手术期并发症。

方法

2009年1月至2015年1月,762例患者在一家三级转诊中心接受了颈动脉干预(CEA,n = 440;CAS,n = 322),165例患者(21.6%)在急性短暂性脑缺血发作或卒中的首次住院期间接受了紧急CEA或CAS。我们比较了静脉注射tPA对30天并发症(包括ICH)的影响。采用χ²检验和Fisher精确检验来确定组间差异的显著性。

结果

在这6年期间,165例患者因急性神经症状接受了紧急颈动脉干预(CEA,n = 135;CAS,n = 30)。其中,19%(31例患者[CEA,n = 25;CAS,n = 6])因急性卒中接受了tPA治疗;其余患者(134例[CEA,n = 110;CAS,n = 24])不在tPA时间窗内。大多数卒中为轻度或中度,美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(NIHSS)平均评分为6.6(范围为0 - 19)。两组的平均干预时间为2.4天(0 - 15天)。tPA组的30天卒中、死亡和心肌梗死发生率为9.7%(31例中的3例),而未接受tPA组为4.5%(134例中的6例)(P = 0.37)。将出血并发症纳入这些30天的结果中,tPA组(31例中的3例)和未接受tPA组(134例中的8例)之间没有差异(P = 0.43)。在tPA组中,有1例ICH、1例颈部血肿/死亡以及另外1例死亡;在未接受tPA组中,有1例ICH、2例颈部血肿、1例卒中、2例心肌梗死、1例ICH/死亡以及另外1例死亡。与未接受tPA组(134例中的4例)相比,tPA组(31例中的2例)未观察到明显更高的出血发生率(P = 0.32)。此外,在tPA队列中,超过一半的患者(31例中的17例)在72小时内接受了血运重建(CEA = 13;CAS = 4),其结果与72小时后接受血运重建的患者相似。

结论

对于出现急性神经症状的特定患者,tPA治疗后紧接着进行紧急CEA或CAS与并发症风险增加无关。患者的选择很重要;轻度至中度缺血性卒中(NIHSS评分<10)的患者每组中均未发生ICH且仅1例死亡。

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