• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

外翻式与传统颈动脉内膜切除术的长期疗效比较:一项多中心临床试验。

Long-term outcomes of eversion and conventional carotid endarterectomy: A multicenter clinical trial.

机构信息

Petrovsky National Research Centre of Surgery, Moscow, Russia.

Alexander Clinic, St. Petersburg, Russia.

出版信息

Vascular. 2023 Aug;31(4):717-724. doi: 10.1177/17085381221084803. Epub 2022 Mar 24.

DOI:10.1177/17085381221084803
PMID:35321600
Abstract

AIM

To compare the long-term results of eversion (ECEA) and conventional carotid endarterectomy (CCEA).

METHODS

We designed a retrospective, multicenter study which included 25,106 patients who underwent ECEA ( = 18,362) or CCEA ( = 6744). The duration of follow-up was 124.7 ± 53.8 months.

RESULTS

In the postoperative period, none of the interventions showed clear benefits reducing the frequency of complications: fatal outcome (ECEA: 0.19%, = 36; CCEA: 0.17%, = 12; OR = 1.1, 95% CI = 0.57-2.11, = 0.89), myocardial infarction (ECEA: 0.15%, = 28; CCEA: 0.13%, = 9; = 0.87; OR = 1.14; 95% CI = 0.53-2.42); acute cerebrovascular accident (CVA) (Group I: 0.33%, = 62; Group II: 0.4%, = 27; = 0.53; OR = 0.84; 95% CI = 0, 53-1.32); bleeding with acute haematoma appearance in the area of intervention (Group I: 0.39%, = 73; Group II: 0.41%, = 28; = 0.93; OR = 0.95; 95% CI = 0, 61-1.48); internal carotid artery (ICA) thrombosis (Group I: 0.05%, = 11; Group II: 0.07%, = 5; OR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.28-2.32, = 0.90). During the long-term follow-up, ECEA was associated with lower frequency of fatal outcome (ECEA: 2.7%, = 492; CCEA: 9.1%, = 616; OR = 0.27; 95% CI = 0.24-0.3, < 0.0001), cerebrovascular death (ECEA: 1.0%, = 180; CCEA: 5.5%, = 371; OR = 0.17, 95% CI = 0.14-0.21, < 0.0001), non-fatal ischaemic stroke (ECEA: 0.62%, = 114; CCEA: 7.0%, = 472; OR = 0.08; 95% CI = 0.06-0.1, < 0.0001); repeated revascularization because of >60% restenosis (ECEA: 1.6%, = 296; CCEA: 12.6%, = 851; OR = 0.11, 95% CI = 0.09-0.12, < 0.0001), and combined endpoint (ECEA: 2.2%, = 397; CCEA: 13.2%, = 888; OR = 0.14; 95% CI = 0.12-1.16, < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

ECEA is beneficial over CCEA in a long term.

摘要

目的

比较外翻(ECEA)和传统颈动脉内膜切除术(CCEA)的长期结果。

方法

我们设计了一项回顾性、多中心研究,纳入了 25106 名接受 ECEA( = 18362)或 CCEA( = 6744)的患者。随访时间为 124.7 ± 53.8 个月。

结果

在术后期间,两种干预措施均未显示出明显降低并发症发生率的优势:致命结局(ECEA:0.19%, = 36;CCEA:0.17%, = 12;OR = 1.1,95%CI = 0.57-2.11, = 0.89)、心肌梗死(ECEA:0.15%, = 28;CCEA:0.13%, = 9; = 0.87;OR = 1.14;95%CI = 0.53-2.42);急性脑血管意外(CVA)(I 组:0.33%, = 62;II 组:0.4%, = 27; = 0.53;OR = 0.84;95%CI = 0,53-1.32);在干预区域出现急性血肿外观的出血(I 组:0.39%, = 73;II 组:0.41%, = 28; = 0.93;OR = 0.95;95%CI = 0,61-1.48);颈内动脉(ICA)血栓形成(I 组:0.05%, = 11;II 组:0.07%, = 5;OR = 0.80,95%CI = 0.28-2.32, = 0.90)。在长期随访中,ECEA 与较低的致命结局发生率相关(ECEA:2.7%, = 492;CCEA:9.1%, = 616;OR = 0.27;95%CI = 0.24-0.3, < 0.0001)、脑血管死亡(ECEA:1.0%, = 180;CCEA:5.5%, = 371;OR = 0.17,95%CI = 0.14-0.21, < 0.0001)、非致命性缺血性中风(ECEA:0.62%, = 114;CCEA:7.0%, = 472;OR = 0.08;95%CI = 0.06-0.1, < 0.0001);由于 >60%的再狭窄而再次血运重建(ECEA:1.6%, = 296;CCEA:12.6%, = 851;OR = 0.11,95%CI = 0.09-0.12, < 0.0001)和复合终点(ECEA:2.2%, = 397;CCEA:13.2%, = 888;OR = 0.14;95%CI = 0.12-1.16, < 0.0001)。

结论

ECEA 在长期随访中优于 CCEA。

相似文献

1
Long-term outcomes of eversion and conventional carotid endarterectomy: A multicenter clinical trial.外翻式与传统颈动脉内膜切除术的长期疗效比较:一项多中心临床试验。
Vascular. 2023 Aug;31(4):717-724. doi: 10.1177/17085381221084803. Epub 2022 Mar 24.
2
Editor's Choice - An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Outcomes Following Eversion vs. Conventional Carotid Endarterectomy in Randomised Controlled Trials and Observational Studies.编辑精选 - 外翻式与传统颈动脉内膜切除术治疗随机对照试验和观察性研究结果的更新系统评价和荟萃分析。
Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2018 Apr;55(4):465-473. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.12.025. Epub 2018 Feb 14.
3
[A comparative study on medium-long term results of conventional and eversion endarterectomy in management of carotid artery stenosis: a meta-analysis].[传统与外翻式动脉内膜切除术治疗颈动脉狭窄的中长期疗效比较研究:一项荟萃分析]
Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2014 Feb 25;94(7):510-6.
4
A comparison of results with eversion versus conventional carotid endarterectomy from the Vascular Quality Initiative and the Mid-America Vascular Study Group.血管质量倡议组织和美国中北部血管研究小组对外翻式与传统颈动脉内膜切除术的结果比较。
J Vasc Surg. 2015 May;61(5):1216-22. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.01.049.
5
Bypass and other modified reconstruction techniques for 'challenging' carotid cases: A comparison with conventional endarterectomy.旁路和其他改良重建技术治疗“挑战性”颈动脉病例:与传统颈动脉内膜切除术的比较。
Vascular. 2024 Oct;32(5):1044-1054. doi: 10.1177/17085381231174946. Epub 2023 May 12.
6
Modified Eversion Carotid Endarterectomy (mECEA): Analysis of Clinical and Financial Outcomes.改良外翻式颈动脉内膜切除术(mECEA):临床与财务结果分析
Ann Vasc Surg. 2017 Jul;42:16-24. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2016.10.046. Epub 2017 Mar 7.
7
A comparison of outcomes of eversion versus conventional carotid endarterectomy: one centre experience.外翻式与传统颈动脉内膜切除术治疗效果的比较:单中心经验。
Ir J Med Sci. 2020 Feb;189(1):103-108. doi: 10.1007/s11845-019-02026-3. Epub 2019 May 17.
8
Impact of routine completion angiography on outcome after carotid endarterectomy.颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)后常规完成血管造影对结果的影响。
J Vasc Surg. 2019 Mar;69(3):824-831. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.06.210. Epub 2018 Oct 3.
9
Comparative results of conventional and eversion carotid endarterectomy.传统颈动脉内膜切除术与外翻式颈动脉内膜切除术的对比结果。
Ann Surg Treat Res. 2014 Oct;87(4):192-6. doi: 10.4174/astr.2014.87.4.192. Epub 2014 Sep 25.
10
Literature review of primary versus patching versus eversion as carotid endarterectomy closure.颈动脉内膜切除术闭合术的原发性与补丁与外翻的文献复习。
J Vasc Surg. 2021 Aug;74(2):666-675. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2021.02.051. Epub 2021 Apr 20.

引用本文的文献

1
Eversion versus conventional carotid endarterectomy: A retrospective cohort study.外翻式与传统颈动脉内膜切除术:一项回顾性队列研究。
Medicine (Baltimore). 2025 Aug 15;104(33):e43908. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000043908.
2
Prospective multicenter online testing of the carotid endarterectomy risk stratification calculator carotidscore.ru.颈动脉内膜切除术风险分层计算器carotidscore.ru的前瞻性多中心在线测试。
Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2023 Nov;39(6):608-614. doi: 10.1007/s12055-023-01538-z. Epub 2023 Jun 14.
3
Vertebral triangle of doctor A.N. Kazantsev - double vertebral artery in V3 segment.
A.N. 卡赞采夫医生的椎动脉三角——V3段双椎动脉。
Radiol Case Rep. 2023 Apr 29;18(7):2370-2375. doi: 10.1016/j.radcr.2023.03.057. eCollection 2023 Jul.