Suppr超能文献

原发性和继发性颈动脉支架置入术的结果

Outcomes of Primary and Secondary Carotid Artery Stenting.

作者信息

Arhuidese Isibor J, Rizwan Muhammad, Nejim Besma, Malas Mahmoud

机构信息

From the Division of Vascular Surgery, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD (I.J.A., M.R., B.N., M.M.); and Division of Vascular Surgery, University of South Florida, Tampa (I.J.A.).

出版信息

Stroke. 2017 Nov;48(11):3086-3092. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.016963. Epub 2017 Oct 3.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Little is known of the excess risk attributable to secondary carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS). This study evaluates outcomes of redo-CAS and CAS after prior ipsilateral carotid endarterectomy (CASAPICEA) relative to primary-CAS.

METHODS

We studied all patients in the Vascular Quality Initiative, who underwent primary-CAS, CASAPICEA, or redo-CAS (2003-2016). Kaplan-Meier, multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate outcomes within 30 days and up to 1 year and identify their predictors.

RESULTS

There were 11 742 CAS procedures performed: 8519 (72%) primary-, 2645 (23%) CASAPICEA, and 578 (5%) redo-CAS. Comparing primary-CAS versus CASAPICEA versus redo-CAS, 30-day stroke/death was 2.5% versus 2.0% versus 1.3% for asymptomatic patients (=0.23) and 5.2% versus 2.6% versus 5.0% for symptomatic patients (=0.003). CASAPICEA was associated with significantly lower 30-day stroke/death (odds ratio: 0.60; 95% confidence interval: 0.37-0.98; =0.04) compared with primary-CAS among symptomatic patients. The odds of bradycardia were lower following CASAPICEA (odds ratio: 0.32; 95% confidence interval: 0.26-0.39; <0.001) and redo-CAS (odds ratio: 0.55; 95% confidence interval: 0.39-0.78; =0.001) compared with primary-CAS. Similarly, the odds of hypotension were significantly lower in both groups compared with primary-CAS (CASAPICEA: 0.41 [0.35-0.48], <0.001; redo-CAS: 0.66 [0.50-0.86] =0.003). There were no significant differences in the hazards of stroke/death at 1 year for CASAPICEA and redo-CAS compared with primary-CAS.

CONCLUSIONS

CASAPICEA is associated with significantly lower odds of periprocedural stroke/death compared with primary-CAS among symptomatic patients. CASAPICEA and redo-CAS are associated with significantly lower odds of periprocedural hypotension and bradycardia but higher odds of hypertension compared with primary-CAS.

摘要

背景与目的

关于继发性颈动脉血管成形术和支架置入术(CAS)所致的额外风险,目前所知甚少。本研究评估了再次CAS以及同侧先前已行颈动脉内膜切除术之后的CAS(CASAPICEA)相对于初次CAS的结局。

方法

我们研究了血管质量改进计划中所有接受初次CAS、CASAPICEA或再次CAS(2003 - 2016年)的患者。采用Kaplan - Meier法、多变量逻辑回归和Cox回归分析来评估30天内及长达1年的结局,并确定其预测因素。

结果

共进行了11742例CAS手术:8519例(72%)初次CAS,2645例(23%)CASAPICEA,578例(5%)再次CAS。比较初次CAS、CASAPICEA和再次CAS,无症状患者30天内的卒中/死亡发生率分别为2.5%、2.0%和1.3%( =0.23),有症状患者分别为5.2%、2.6%和5.0%( =0.003)。在有症状患者中,与初次CAS相比,CASAPICEA的30天卒中/死亡发生率显著更低(比值比:0.60;95%置信区间:0.37 - 0.98; =0.04)。与初次CAS相比,CASAPICEA(比值比:0.32;95%置信区间:0.26 - 0.39; <0.001)和再次CAS(比值比:0.55;95%置信区间:0.39 - 0.78; =0.001)后心动过缓的发生率更低。同样,与初次CAS相比,两组中低血压的发生率均显著更低(CASAPICEA:0.41 [0.35 - 0.48], <0.001;再次CAS:0.66 [0.50 - 0.86] =0.003)。与初次CAS相比,CASAPICEA和再次CAS在1年时的卒中/死亡风险无显著差异。

结论

在有症状患者中,与初次CAS相比,CASAPICEA围手术期卒中/死亡的发生率显著更低。与初次CAS相比,CASAPICEA和再次CAS围手术期低血压和心动过缓的发生率显著更低,但高血压的发生率更高。

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