Suppr超能文献

同期颈动脉和冠状动脉血运重建的长期结果。

Long-term results after simultaneous carotid and coronary revascularisation.

机构信息

Department of Cardiac Surgery, 606093Dedinje Cardiovascular Institute, Belgrade, Serbia.

Cardiology Department, Mother and Child Health Institute of Serbia, Belgrade, Serbia.

出版信息

Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann. 2022 Nov;30(9):977-984. doi: 10.1177/02184923221124881. Epub 2022 Sep 6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

The revascularisation strategy for concomitant carotid and coronary disease is unknown. Simultaneous or stage coronary artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy are the most common revascularisation approach in the CABG population. This study aimed to evaluate long-term results after simultaneous carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy in patients who underwent coronary artery bypass surgery.

METHODS

This is a prospective cohort non-randomised single-institution study. During the period from 2012 to 2015, sixty consecutive patients (65.9 ± 7.41 mean) underwent simultaneous carotid artery stenting and coronary artery bypass surgery ( = 30) or simultaneous carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass surgery ( = 30). The primary endpoints were short- and long-term rates of adverse events (transient ischemic attack, stroke, myocardial infarction, and death). The mean follow-up was 62.05 ± 11.12 months.

RESULTS

In-hospital mortality was insignificantly higher in the carotid endarterectomy, and coronary artery bypass surgery group (6.6% vs. 0%), the rate of stroke and myocardial infarction was similar (13.3% and 0% in the carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass surgery group vs. 6.6% and 3.3% in the carotid artery stenting and coronary artery bypass surgery group, respectively). The intensive care unit readmission was significantly higher in the surgical revascularisation approach; it was an independent predictor of hospital mortality. The overall mortality during the follow-up period was 14.28% in both groups. Freedom of the composite adverse outcomes (stroke, myocardial infarction, and death) was 78.55%.

CONCLUSION

Comparing two revascularisation strategies is not straightforward due to different anatomical indications for carotid artery stenting and endarterectomy. We consider that each technique has an essential role in carotid revascularisation. Good selection of patients, according to indications, contributes to satisfactory short- and long-term results.

摘要

背景

同时患有颈动脉和冠状动脉疾病的血运重建策略尚不清楚。同期或分期冠状动脉支架置入术和颈动脉内膜切除术是冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)人群中最常见的血运重建方法。本研究旨在评估同时行颈动脉支架置入术或颈动脉内膜切除术的患者在接受冠状动脉旁路手术后的长期结果。

方法

这是一项前瞻性队列非随机单中心研究。在 2012 年至 2015 年期间,连续 60 例患者(平均年龄 65.9±7.41)接受同期颈动脉支架置入术和冠状动脉旁路手术( = 30)或同期颈动脉内膜切除术和冠状动脉旁路手术( = 30)。主要终点是短期和长期不良事件(短暂性脑缺血发作、中风、心肌梗死和死亡)的发生率。平均随访时间为 62.05±11.12 个月。

结果

颈动脉内膜切除术和冠状动脉旁路手术组的院内死亡率显著较高(6.6% vs. 0%),中风和心肌梗死的发生率相似(颈动脉内膜切除术和冠状动脉旁路手术组分别为 13.3%和 0%,颈动脉支架置入术和冠状动脉旁路手术组分别为 6.6%和 3.3%)。手术血运重建组的重症监护病房再入院率显著较高,是医院死亡率的独立预测因素。两组在随访期间的总死亡率均为 14.28%。复合不良结局(中风、心肌梗死和死亡)的无事件生存率为 78.55%。

结论

由于颈动脉支架置入术和内膜切除术的解剖学适应证不同,比较两种血运重建策略并不简单。我们认为,每种技术在颈动脉血运重建中都有重要作用。根据适应证选择合适的患者有助于获得满意的短期和长期结果。

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