Suppr超能文献

颈动脉内膜切除术与颈动脉支架置入术治疗新发颈动脉狭窄和介入治疗后再狭窄的管理:文献复习。

Management of De Novo Carotid Stenosis and Postintervention Restenosis-Carotid Endarterectomy Versus Carotid Artery Stenting-a Review of Literature.

机构信息

Department of Neurology, Duke University Medical Center, 2400 Pratt Street, Durham, NC, 27705, USA.

Department of Neurological Surgery, University of South Florida, 2 Tampa General Circle, Tampa, FL, 33606, USA.

出版信息

Transl Stroke Res. 2019 Oct;10(5):460-474. doi: 10.1007/s12975-019-00693-z. Epub 2019 Feb 22.

Abstract

The current literature indicates carotid endarterectomy (CEA) as the preferred treatment for symptomatic, moderate to severe carotid artery stenosis. However, recommendations for the management of acute tandem stenosis and complete occlusion, as well as postintervention restenosis of the carotid artery, remain controversial. Here, we review the literature evaluating these conditions and provide suggestions for clinical decision-making. Acute tandem stenosis or occlusion of the common and internal carotid arteries may be treated with angioplasty alone, reserving carotid artery stenting (CAS) or CEA for severe and complex cases. Patients who underwent CEA and developed ipsilateral restenosis may be subjected to angioplasty followed by CAS, which carries a lower risk of cranial nerve injury and subsequent restenosis of the artery. For post-CAS restenosis, current evidence recommends angioplasty and CAS for the management of moderate stenosis and CEA for severe stenosis of the carotid artery. Given the lack of level 1 evidence for the management of these conditions, the abovementioned recommendations may assist clinical decision-making; however, each case and its unique risks and benefits need to be assessed individually. Future studies evaluating and defining the risks and benefits of specific treatment strategies, such as CEA and CAS, in patients with acute tandem stenosis, occlusion, and postintervention restenosis of the carotid artery need to be conducted.

摘要

目前的文献表明,颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)是治疗有症状的、中重度颈动脉狭窄的首选方法。然而,对于急性串联狭窄和完全闭塞以及颈动脉介入后再狭窄的处理建议仍存在争议。在这里,我们回顾了评估这些情况的文献,并为临床决策提供了建议。

颈内动脉和颈外动脉的急性串联狭窄或闭塞可单独行血管成形术治疗,对于严重和复杂的病例,保留颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)或 CEA。接受 CEA 治疗后出现同侧再狭窄的患者可先进行血管成形术,然后再进行 CAS,这可降低颅神经损伤和随后动脉再狭窄的风险。对于 CAS 后再狭窄,目前的证据建议对中度狭窄行血管成形术和 CAS 治疗,对重度狭窄行 CEA 治疗。

鉴于缺乏这些情况处理的 1 级证据,上述建议可能有助于临床决策;然而,需要单独评估每个病例及其独特的风险和获益。需要进行未来的研究,评估和定义在急性串联狭窄、闭塞和颈动脉介入后再狭窄的患者中,CEA 和 CAS 等特定治疗策略的风险和获益。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验