Suppr超能文献

颈动脉血运重建术治疗对侧颈动脉闭塞患者的结局。

Outcomes of Carotid Revascularization in Patients with Contralateral Carotid Artery Occlusion.

机构信息

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA.

Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA.

出版信息

J Am Coll Surg. 2021 May;232(5):699-708.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2020.12.063. Epub 2021 Feb 15.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the best revascularization procedure for patients with contralateral carotid artery occlusion (CCO). We aim to compare the outcomes of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR), carotid endarterectomy (CEA), and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) in patients with CCO.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients in the Vascular Quality Initiative dataset who underwent CEA, TFCAS, or TCAR, and had CCO between September 2016 and April 2020, were included. Multivariable logistic analysis was used to evaluate in-hospital outcomes.

RESULTS

The final cohort included 1,144 TCARs, 1,182 TFCAS, and 2,527 CEA procedures performed in patients with CCO. Compared with TFCAS, TCAR was associated with a significant reduction in the odds of in-hospital stroke or death (odds ratio [OR] 0.26; 95% CI: 0.12-0.59; p < 0.01). However, no significant difference in stroke was noted (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.34-1.51; p = 0.38). These results persisted after stratifying with respect to symptomatic status (p values of interaction = 0.92 and 0.74, respectively). There was no significant difference between TCAR and CEA in odds of in-hospital stroke or death on multivariable adjustment (OR 0.57; 95% CI: 0.29-1.10, p = 0.10). The interaction between procedure type and symptomatic status in predicting in-hospital stroke was statistically significant (p = 0.04). In asymptomatic patients, TCAR was associated with a 50% to 60% reduction in the odds of stroke (p = 0.04). Yet, no significant differences were observed in symptomatic patients.

CONCLUSIONS

TCAR has lower odds of in-hospital stroke or death compared to TFCAS, independent of symptomatic status. Compared to CEA, TCAR seems to be a better option in asymptomatic patients, with lower odds of in-hospital stroke. Yet, no significant difference is observed in symptomatic patients.

摘要

背景

对于伴有对侧颈动脉闭塞(CCO)的患者,哪种血运重建术式最佳尚不清楚。本研究旨在比较颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)、经股动脉颈动脉支架置入术(TFCAS)和经颈动脉内膜切除术(TCAR)治疗 CCO 患者的结局。

研究设计

纳入 2016 年 9 月至 2020 年 4 月期间在血管质量倡议(Vascular Quality Initiative)数据库中接受 CEA、TFCAS 或 TCAR 治疗且存在 CCO 的患者。采用多变量逻辑回归分析评估住院期间的结局。

结果

最终纳入了 1144 例 TCAR、1182 例 TFCAS 和 2527 例 CEA 手术治疗 CCO 的患者。与 TFCAS 相比,TCAR 降低了住院期间卒中或死亡的风险(比值比 [OR] 0.26;95%置信区间:0.12-0.59;p < 0.01)。然而,卒中发生率无显著差异(OR 0.71;95%置信区间:0.34-1.51;p = 0.38)。这些结果在分层考虑症状状态后仍然存在(交互 p 值分别为 0.92 和 0.74)。多变量调整后,TCAR 与 CEA 在住院期间卒中或死亡的风险方面无显著差异(OR 0.57;95%置信区间:0.29-1.10,p = 0.10)。手术类型与症状状态对预测住院期间卒中的交互作用具有统计学意义(p = 0.04)。在无症状患者中,TCAR 降低卒中风险的幅度为 50%至 60%(p = 0.04)。然而,在有症状的患者中未观察到显著差异。

结论

与 TFCAS 相比,TCAR 降低了住院期间卒中或死亡的风险,与症状状态无关。与 CEA 相比,TCAR 似乎是无症状患者的更好选择,降低了住院期间卒中的风险。然而,在有症状的患者中没有观察到显著差异。

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