Suppr超能文献

高危解剖和生理患者颈动脉内膜切除术的当代结果。

Contemporary outcomes after carotid endarterectomy in high-risk anatomic and physiologic patients.

机构信息

Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, Calif; Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Mass.

Department of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Mass.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg. 2020 Jan;71(1):104-110. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.05.041. Epub 2019 Aug 20.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Current guidelines state that the acceptable 30-day postoperative stroke/death rate after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is <3% for asymptomatic patients and <6% for symptomatic patients. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has identified certain high-risk characteristics used to define patients at highest risk for CEA for whom carotid artery stenting would be reimbursed. We evaluated the impact of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services physiologic and anatomic high-risk criteria on major adverse event rates after CEA in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients undergoing CEA from 2011 to 2017 in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program vascular targeted database. Patients with high-risk anatomic or physiologic characteristics were identified by a predefined variable and were compared with normal-risk patients. The primary outcome was 30-day stroke/death, stratified by symptom status.

RESULTS

We identified 25,788 patients undergoing CEA, of whom 60% were treated for asymptomatic carotid disease. Among all patients, high-risk physiology or anatomy was associated with higher rates of 30-day stroke/death compared with normal-risk patients (physiologic risk, 4.6% vs 2.3% [P < .001]; anatomic risk, 3.6% vs 2.3% [P < .001]). Patients who met criteria for high-risk physiology or anatomy also had higher rates of cardiac events (physiologic risk, 3.1% vs 1.6% [P < .001]; anatomic risk, 2.3% vs 1.6% [P < .01]), but only patients with high-risk anatomy had higher rates of cranial nerve injury (physiologic risk, 2.4% vs 2.5% [P = .81]; anatomic risk, 4.3% vs 2.5% [P < .001]). Asymptomatic patients with high-risk physiology or anatomy had higher rates of 30-day stroke/death, especially in the physiologic high-risk group (physiologic risk, 4.7% vs 1.5% [P < .001]; anatomic risk, 2.6% vs 1.5% [P < .01]), compared with normal-risk patients. However, among symptomatic patients, differences in stroke/death were seen only with high-risk anatomic patients and not with high-risk physiologic patients (physiologic risk, 4.6% vs 3.4% [P = .12]; anatomic risk, 4.8% vs 3.4% [P = .01]).

CONCLUSIONS

As currently selected, contemporary real-world outcomes after CEA in asymptomatic carotid disease patients meeting high-risk physiologic criteria show an unacceptably high 30-day stroke/death rate, well above the 3% threshold. These results suggest the need for better selection of patients and preoperative optimization before elective CEA.

摘要

目的

目前的指南规定,颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)后 30 天内可接受的无症状患者卒中/死亡率<3%,症状性患者<6%。医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心确定了某些高危特征,用于定义接受颈动脉支架置入术报销的最高风险 CEA 患者。我们评估了医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心生理和解剖学高危标准对无症状和症状性患者 CEA 后主要不良事件发生率的影响。

方法

我们回顾性分析了 2011 年至 2017 年在美国外科医师学会国家手术质量改进计划血管靶向数据库中接受 CEA 的所有患者。通过预定义变量识别具有高风险解剖结构或生理特征的患者,并与低风险患者进行比较。主要结局是 30 天内的卒中/死亡,按症状状态分层。

结果

我们确定了 25788 名接受 CEA 的患者,其中 60%的患者因无症状颈动脉疾病接受治疗。在所有患者中,与低风险患者相比,高风险生理或解剖结构与更高的 30 天卒中/死亡率相关(生理风险,4.6%比 2.3%[P<0.001];解剖风险,3.6%比 2.3%[P<0.001])。符合高风险生理或解剖标准的患者也有更高的心脏事件发生率(生理风险,3.1%比 1.6%[P<0.001];解剖风险,2.3%比 1.6%[P<0.01]),但只有高风险解剖结构的患者有更高的颅神经损伤发生率(生理风险,2.4%比 2.5%[P=0.81];解剖风险,4.3%比 2.5%[P<0.001])。无症状高风险生理或解剖结构的患者有更高的 30 天卒中/死亡率,尤其是高风险生理组(生理风险,4.7%比 1.5%[P<0.001];解剖风险,2.6%比 1.5%[P<0.01]),与低风险患者相比。然而,在症状性患者中,仅在高风险解剖结构患者中观察到卒中/死亡的差异,而在高风险生理结构患者中未观察到差异(生理风险,4.6%比 3.4%[P=0.12];解剖风险,4.8%比 3.4%[P=0.01])。

结论

目前选择的、当代真实世界无症状颈动脉疾病患者接受高风险生理标准后 CEA 的结果显示,30 天内卒中/死亡率非常高,超过 3%的阈值,无法接受。这些结果表明,在选择性 CEA 之前,需要更好地选择患者和术前优化。

相似文献

1
Contemporary outcomes after carotid endarterectomy in high-risk anatomic and physiologic patients.
J Vasc Surg. 2020 Jan;71(1):104-110. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.05.041. Epub 2019 Aug 20.
3
Addition of proximal intervention to carotid endarterectomy increases risk of stroke and death.
J Vasc Surg. 2019 Apr;69(4):1102-1110. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.07.042. Epub 2018 Dec 13.
4
Outcomes after carotid endarterectomy: is there a high-risk population? A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program report.
J Vasc Surg. 2009 Feb;49(2):331-8, 339.e1; discussion 338-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2008.09.018.
5
Long-term stroke risk with carotid endarterectomy in patients with severe carotid stenosis.
J Vasc Surg. 2021 Mar;73(3):983-991. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.06.124. Epub 2020 Jul 21.
7
Defining the threshold surgeon volume associated with improved patient outcomes for carotid endarterectomy.
J Vasc Surg. 2020 Jul;72(1):209-218.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.10.057. Epub 2020 Feb 19.
8
Physiologic risk factors increase risk of myocardial infarction with transcarotid artery revascularization in prospective trials.
J Vasc Surg. 2023 Apr;77(4):1192-1198. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2022.12.013. Epub 2022 Dec 20.
9
Stenting versus endarterectomy after prior ipsilateral carotid endarterectomy.
J Vasc Surg. 2017 Jan;65(1):1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2016.07.115. Epub 2016 Oct 1.
10
Transfemoral Carotid Artery Stents Should Be Used with Caution in Patients with Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis.
Ann Vasc Surg. 2019 Jan;54:1-11. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2018.10.001. Epub 2018 Oct 17.

引用本文的文献

1
Evaluation of Perioperative Major Adverse Cardiac Events in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Carotid Endarterectomy.
Ann Card Anaesth. 2025 Jul 1;28(3):280-286. doi: 10.4103/aca.aca_210_24. Epub 2025 Jul 8.
2
Transcervical approach for carotid artery stenting without flow reversal: A case report.
Radiol Case Rep. 2022 Aug 28;17(11):4115-4119. doi: 10.1016/j.radcr.2022.08.004. eCollection 2022 Nov.
3
Analysis of Medicare Payments and Patient Outcomes With Pre-Operative Imaging for Carotid Endarterectomy.
Ann Vasc Surg. 2021 Oct;76:179-184. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2021.06.001. Epub 2021 Jun 19.

本文引用的文献

3
Overtreatment or Undertreatment of Carotid Disease: A Transatlantic Comparison of Carotid Endarterectomy Patient Cohorts.
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2018 Apr;11(4):e004607. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.118.004607.
4
Association between Medicare high-risk criteria and outcomes after carotid revascularization procedures.
J Vasc Surg. 2018 Jun;67(6):1752-1761.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2017.10.066. Epub 2018 Feb 1.
5
Carotid Stenting Versus Endarterectomy for Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Stroke. 2017 Aug;48(8):2150-2157. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.016824. Epub 2017 Jul 5.
6
Carotid revascularization and medical management for asymptomatic carotid stenosis: Protocol of the CREST-2 clinical trials.
Int J Stroke. 2017 Oct;12(7):770-778. doi: 10.1177/1747493017706238. Epub 2017 May 2.
7
Editor's Choice - Carotid Stenosis Treatment: Variation in International Practice Patterns.
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2017 Apr;53(4):511-519. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.01.012. Epub 2017 Mar 6.
8
Predictors of perioperative outcomes after carotid revascularization.
J Surg Res. 2016 Aug;204(2):267-273. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.04.074. Epub 2016 May 7.
9
Issues to Be Addressed and Hopefully Resolved in the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial 2.
Angiology. 2016 May;67(5):408-10. doi: 10.1177/0003319715611281. Epub 2015 Oct 11.
10
Patients at elevated risk of major adverse events following endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid stenosis.
Am J Surg. 2015 Jun;209(6):1069-73. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.07.011. Epub 2014 Oct 22.

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