Berkefeld Joachim, Wagner Marlies, du Mesnil Richard
Institute of Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Frankfurt am Main, Schleusenweg 2-16, 60528, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Clin Neuroradiol. 2017 Dec;27(4):409-415. doi: 10.1007/s00062-017-0603-y. Epub 2017 Jun 16.
After a period of stagnation due to negative results of randomized trials for patients with symptomatic stenosis, the relevance of carotid artery stenting (CAS) is increasing again. CAS has become an important and evidence-based part of interventional stroke treatment. Our ability to manage acute recanalization of carotid occlusions and other niche indications properly led some skeptical neurologists to trust in carotid intervention for elective cases as well. The evolution of CAS from initial euphoria to more realistic views under consideration of trial results and guidelines is reviewed. Quality assurance in Germany proves that CAS complication rates within the carotid endarterectomy (CEA) quality criteria are feasible even with higher proportions of high-risk patients. Recent trial results showed that long-term efficacy of CAS or CEA are not significantly different. Other than in symptomatic stenoses, acute complication rates of both means treatment does not differ in asymptomatic patients, where medical therapy becomes increasingly competitive. Technical issues of CAS like the cell design of stents or the usefulness of embolic protection are still under discussion. We will see whether CAS results will further improve over time. Standardized techniques, proper training, and patient selection are important for acute and elective cases.
在针对有症状性狭窄患者的随机试验结果呈阴性导致一段时间的停滞之后,颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)的相关性再次增加。CAS已成为介入性卒中治疗的重要且有循证依据的一部分。我们妥善处理颈动脉闭塞急性再通及其他特殊适应症的能力,也使得一些持怀疑态度的神经科医生开始信任择期病例的颈动脉介入治疗。本文回顾了CAS从最初的狂热到在考虑试验结果和指南后形成更现实观点的演变过程。德国的质量保证证明,即使高风险患者比例更高,在颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)质量标准范围内的CAS并发症发生率也是可行的。近期试验结果表明,CAS或CEA的长期疗效并无显著差异。除了有症状性狭窄外,在无症状患者中,两种治疗方式的急性并发症发生率并无差异,而药物治疗在这方面的竞争力日益增强。CAS的技术问题,如支架的网格设计或栓子保护的有效性,仍在讨论之中。我们将拭目以待,看CAS的结果是否会随着时间的推移进一步改善。标准化技术、适当培训和患者选择对于急性和择期病例都很重要。