De Santis Francesco, Chaves Brait Cristina Margot, Pattaro Cristian, Cesareo Vladimiro, Di Cintio Vincenzo
Department of Vascular Surgery, Sandro Pertini Hospital, Rome, Italy.
Department of Vascular Surgery, Sandro Pertini Hospital, Rome, Italy.
J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2016 Jan;25(1):136-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2015.09.006. Epub 2015 Oct 20.
The purpose of this study was to assess our experience of carotid surgery habitually performed under general anesthesia without intraoperative intracerebral monitoring, and following a pre-established perioperative protocol, which includes extensive use of an intraoperative shunt (IOS).
This study included 311 consecutive carotid operations performed over 32 months. This patient cohort represents 14% of our total experience in carotid surgery (2219 operations, major stroke/mortality rate: 1.4%). The IOS was inserted routinely in the presence of intraoperative blood pressure instability during cross-clamping and when the predictable clamping time might have exceeded 20 minutes. A moderate and stable hypertension was maintained throughout surgery without IOS.
Overall, 120 (38.6%) endarterectomies were performed with primary closure, 73 (23.5%) with eversion technique, 113 (36.3%) with patch angioplasty, and 5 (1.6%) with other techniques. Out of 113 patch angioplasties, 111 (98.2%) were performed with an IOS. This was utilized in only 3 cases of direct carotid reconstructions or other carotid endarterectomy techniques (1.5%). Overall, the IOS placement rate was 36.7%. Postoperatively, 2 major strokes (.64%), 2 minor strokes (.64%), 4 hyperperfusion syndromes (1.3%), and no mortality were recorded. No cases of cross-clamp ischemia/shunt-related perioperative strokes were observed.
The low perioperative stroke rate reported in this prospective study proves the advantages of wide use of IOS during carotid surgery. This coupled with a large experience in carotid surgery and close monitoring and support of blood pressure, are the major determinants of these results that demonstrate the low risk of shunt-related complications for surgeons who regularly utilize an IOS.
本研究的目的是评估我们在全身麻醉下常规进行颈动脉手术且术中无颅内监测,并遵循既定围手术期方案(包括广泛使用术中分流管(IOS))的经验。
本研究纳入了在32个月内连续进行的311例颈动脉手术。该患者队列占我们颈动脉手术总经验的14%(共2219例手术,严重卒中/死亡率:1.4%)。在交叉夹闭期间术中血压不稳定以及可预测的夹闭时间可能超过20分钟时,常规插入IOS。在无IOS的整个手术过程中维持适度且稳定的高血压。
总体而言,120例(38.6%)内膜切除术采用一期缝合,73例(23.5%)采用外翻技术,113例(36.3%)采用补片血管成形术,5例(1.6%)采用其他技术。在113例补片血管成形术中,111例(98.2%)使用了IOS。仅在3例直接颈动脉重建术或其他颈动脉内膜切除术技术中使用了IOS(1.5%)。总体而言,IOS放置率为36.7%。术后记录到2例严重卒中(0.64%)、2例轻微卒中(0.64%)、4例高灌注综合征(1.3%),无死亡病例。未观察到与交叉夹闭缺血/分流相关的围手术期卒中病例。
这项前瞻性研究报告的低围手术期卒中率证明了在颈动脉手术中广泛使用IOS的优势。这与丰富的颈动脉手术经验以及对血压的密切监测和支持相结合,是这些结果的主要决定因素,表明对于经常使用IOS的外科医生而言,分流相关并发症的风险较低。