Suppr超能文献

颈动脉狭窄治疗方法的比较综述

Comparative Review of the Treatment Methodologies of Carotid Stenosis.

作者信息

Bae Coney, Szuchmacher Mauricio, Chang John B

机构信息

Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Hofstra North Shore-Long Island Jewish School of Medicine, New York, New York.

出版信息

Int J Angiol. 2015 Sep;24(3):215-22. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1545073. Epub 2015 May 18.

Abstract

The treatment of carotid stenosis entails three methodologies, namely, medical management, carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS), as well as carotid endarterectomy (CEA). The North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) and European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST) have shown that symptomatic carotid stenosis greater than 70% is best treated with CEA. In asymptomatic patients with carotid stenosis greater than 60%, CEA was more beneficial than treatment with aspirin alone according to the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis (ACAS) and Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis Trial (ACST) trials. When CAS is compared with CEA, the CREST resulted in similar rates of ipsilateral stroke and death rates regardless of symptoms. However, CAS not only increased adverse effects in women, it also amplified stroke rates and death in elderly patients compared with CEA. CAS can maximize its utility in treating focal restenosis after CEA and patients with overwhelming cardiac risk or prior neck irradiation. When performing CEA, using a patch was equated to a more durable result than primary closure, whereas eversion technique is a new methodology deserving a spotlight. Comparing the three major treatment strategies of carotid stenosis has intrinsic drawbacks, as most trials are outdated and they vary in their premises, definitions, and study designs. With the newly codified best medical management including antiplatelet therapies with aspirin and clopidogrel, statin, antihypertensive agents, strict diabetes control, smoking cessation, and life style change, the current trials may demonstrate that asymptomatic carotid stenosis is best treated with best medical therapy. The ongoing trials will illuminate and reshape the treatment paradigm for symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

摘要

颈动脉狭窄的治疗方法有三种,即药物治疗、颈动脉血管成形术和支架置入术(CAS)以及颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)。北美症状性颈动脉内膜切除术试验(NASCET)和欧洲颈动脉外科试验(ECST)表明,症状性颈动脉狭窄大于70%时,采用CEA治疗效果最佳。根据无症状性颈动脉粥样硬化(ACAS)和无症状性颈动脉狭窄试验(ACST),对于无症状性颈动脉狭窄大于60%的患者,CEA比单独使用阿司匹林治疗更有益。当将CAS与CEA进行比较时,CREST试验结果显示,无论有无症状,同侧卒中发生率和死亡率相似。然而,与CEA相比,CAS不仅增加了女性的不良反应,还提高了老年患者的卒中和死亡率。CAS在治疗CEA术后局灶性再狭窄以及心脏风险极高或既往有颈部放疗史的患者时可发挥最大效用。在进行CEA时,使用补片修补比直接缝合的效果更持久,而外翻技术是一种值得关注的新方法。比较颈动脉狭窄的三种主要治疗策略存在内在缺陷,因为大多数试验已过时,且它们在前提、定义和研究设计方面存在差异。随着新编纂的最佳药物治疗方案的出现,包括使用阿司匹林和氯吡格雷的抗血小板治疗、他汀类药物、抗高血压药物、严格控制糖尿病、戒烟以及改变生活方式,当前的试验可能会表明,无症状性颈动脉狭窄采用最佳药物治疗效果最佳。正在进行的试验将阐明并重塑有症状和无症状性颈动脉狭窄的治疗模式。

相似文献

1
Comparative Review of the Treatment Methodologies of Carotid Stenosis.颈动脉狭窄治疗方法的比较综述
Int J Angiol. 2015 Sep;24(3):215-22. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1545073. Epub 2015 May 18.
4
Carotid artery stenting: to be or not to be?颈动脉支架置入术:做还是不做?
Surgeon. 2008 Feb;6(1):14-8. doi: 10.1016/s1479-666x(08)80089-3.

本文引用的文献

3
Carotid revascularization: risks and benefits.颈动脉血运重建:风险与益处。
Vasc Health Risk Manag. 2014 Jul 7;10:403-16. doi: 10.2147/VHRM.S48923. eCollection 2014.
4
Deaths: final data for 2010.死亡情况:2010年最终数据。
Natl Vital Stat Rep. 2013 May 8;61(4):1-117.
6
Durability of eversion carotid endarterectomy.外翻颈动脉内膜切除术的耐久性。
J Vasc Surg. 2014 May;59(5):1274-81. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2013.11.088. Epub 2014 Jan 11.
9
Flow velocities in the external carotid artery following carotid revascularization.颈动脉重建术后颈外动脉血流速度。
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2013 Oct;46(4):411-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2013.07.002. Epub 2013 Aug 15.

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