Jin Haiqiang, Peng Qing, Nan Ding, Lv Pu, Liu Ran, Sun Wei, Teng Yuming, Liu Yuanyuan, Fan Chenghe, Xing Haiying, Xu Ke, Huang Yining
Department of Neurology, Peking University First Hospital, No.8 Xishiku Street, Xicheng District, Beijing, 100034, People's Republic of China.
BMC Neurol. 2017 Jul 18;17(1):136. doi: 10.1186/s12883-017-0924-0.
The present study aimed to investigate the prevalence and risk factors for extracranial carotid artery stenosis (ECAS) and intracranial carotid artery stenosis (ICAS) simultaneously in asymptomatic Chinese pure rural population.
We analyzed 2589 asymptomatic subjects aged over 30 yr. by ultrasonography and transcranial Doppler simultaneously in 13 isolated villages by door-to-door investigation. Both ECAS and ICAS were defined as more than 50% stenosis. Demographics, medical history documentation, and investigation of biochemical results were performed for each subject. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were employed to assess the risk factors associated with ECAS and ICAS, respectively.
One hundred twenty-two (4.7%) residents with ICAS and 56 (2.2%) with ECAS were found in 2589 subjects. Three factors emerged as independent risk factors for ICAS: age (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01-1.04, odds ratio [OR] = 1.07), hypertension (95% CI = 1.98-4.37, OR = 2.94), and diabetes mellitus (95% CI = 1.72-4.38, OR = 2.75). As for ECAS, five factors presented as independent risk factors: age (95% CI = 1.09-1.11, OR = 1.10), male sex (95% CI = 1.01-1.02, OR = 1.01), diabetes mellitus (95% CI = 1.10-2.12, OR = 1.53), systolic blood pressure (95% CI = 1.95-2.88, OR = 2.37), and total cholesterol (95% CI = 1.00-1.13, OR = 1.06).
ICAS and ECAS were relatively common among asymptomatic rural Chinese subjects. Although they shared similar risk factors, differences still existed between them.
本研究旨在同时调查无症状中国纯农村人群颅外颈动脉狭窄(ECAS)和颅内颈动脉狭窄(ICAS)的患病率及危险因素。
我们通过逐户调查,在13个独立村庄对2589名30岁以上的无症状受试者同时进行超声检查和经颅多普勒检查。ECAS和ICAS均定义为狭窄超过50%。对每个受试者进行人口统计学、病史记录及生化结果检查。分别采用单因素和多因素逻辑回归分析评估与ECAS和ICAS相关的危险因素。
在2589名受试者中,发现122名(4.7%)患有ICAS,56名(2.2%)患有ECAS。出现了三个作为ICAS独立危险因素的因素:年龄(95%置信区间[CI]=1.01 - 1.04,比值比[OR]=1.07)、高血压(95% CI = 1.98 - 4.37,OR = 2.94)和糖尿病(95% CI = 1.72 - 4.38,OR = 2.75)。至于ECAS,有五个因素为独立危险因素:年龄(95% CI = 1.09 - 1.11,OR = 1.10)、男性(95% CI = 1.01 - 1.02,OR = 1.01)、糖尿病(95% CI = 1.10 - 2.12,OR = 1.53)、收缩压(95% CI = 1.95 - 2.88,OR = 2.37)和总胆固醇(95% CI = 1.00 - 1.13,OR = 1.06)。
ICAS和ECAS在中国无症状农村受试者中相对常见。尽管它们有相似的危险因素,但两者之间仍存在差异。