Suppr超能文献

同一患者的颈动脉支架置入术与动脉内膜切除术:“直接”比较。

Carotid stenting versus endarterectomy in the same patient: A "direct" comparison.

作者信息

Ciccone Marco M, Scicchitano Pietro, Cortese Francesca, Gesualdo Michele, Zito Annapaola, Carbonara Rosa, Dentamaro Ilaria, Pulli Raffaele, Salerno Christian, Impedovo Giovanni, Marinazzo Davide, Angiletta Domenico, Guido Davide, Regina Guido

机构信息

1 Cardiovascular Diseases Section, Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation (DETO), University of Bari, Bari, Italy.

2 Department of Cardiovascular Diseases, Hospital "Umberto I" - Ostuni (Brindisi), Italy.

出版信息

Vascular. 2017 Jun;25(3):290-298. doi: 10.1177/1708538116674375. Epub 2016 Nov 3.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes and feasibility of carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy, both procedures performed in the same patient. Forty-five subjects (33 males, 70 ± 7 years) underwent carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting, the counter procedure on the contralateral carotid performed after a variable period. We evaluated the post-procedural percentage of carotid stenosis at 30, 180 days and one-year follow-up, and the occurrence of acute myocardial infarction, New York Heart Association class progression, stroke, death, cardiovascular death, angina, transient ischemic attack and renal failure. Carotid artery stenting treatment reduced the degree of re-stenosis after 180 days equally to carotid endarterectomy procedure (difference: 0.033%, P = 0.285). No statistically significant differences were observed according to the occurrence of acute myocardial infarction and New York Heart Association class progression, revealing odds ratio (OR) equal to 0.182 ( P = 0.361) for acute myocardial infarction and 0.303 ( P = 0.434) for New York Heart Association class progression. Carotid endarterectomy confirms its efficacy in carotid revascularization, but carotid artery stenting constitutes a good alternative when the procedures are selected based on patient-specific risk factors.

摘要

本研究的目的是评估在同一患者身上进行的颈动脉支架置入术与颈动脉内膜切除术的疗效和可行性。45名受试者(33名男性,70±7岁)接受了颈动脉内膜切除术或颈动脉支架置入术,对侧颈动脉的反向手术在不同时间段后进行。我们评估了术后30天、180天和1年随访时颈动脉狭窄的百分比,以及急性心肌梗死、纽约心脏协会心功能分级进展、中风、死亡、心血管死亡、心绞痛、短暂性脑缺血发作和肾衰竭的发生情况。颈动脉支架置入术治疗180天后的再狭窄程度与颈动脉内膜切除术相同(差异:0.033%,P = 0.285)。根据急性心肌梗死和纽约心脏协会心功能分级进展的发生情况,未观察到统计学上的显著差异,急性心肌梗死的优势比(OR)为0.182(P = 0.361),纽约心脏协会心功能分级进展的优势比为0.303(P = 0.434)。颈动脉内膜切除术证实了其在颈动脉血运重建中的疗效,但根据患者特定的风险因素选择手术时,颈动脉支架置入术是一种很好的替代方法。

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