Kazantsev Anton, Korotkikh Alexander, Lider Roman, Lebedev Oleg, Sirotkin Alexey, Palagin Petr, Mukhtorov Otabek, Shmatov Dmitriy, Artyukhov Sergey, Ageev Ivan, Rogova Alexandra, Kalichkin Ivan, Beglaryan Jasmine, Snigur Alla, Belov Yuri
Kostroma Regional Clinical Hospital Named After E.I. Korolev, Kostroma, Russian Federation.
Clinic of Cardiac Surgery of the Amur State Medical Academy of the Ministry of Health of Russia, Blagoveshchensk, Russia.
Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2023 May;39(3):244-250. doi: 10.1007/s12055-023-01487-7. Epub 2023 Feb 21.
The aim of the study was to assess the role of a temporary carotid shunt in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy.
This was a retrospective, multicentric ( = 159) study carried out between January 2005 and October 2020. The study included 3114 patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy who had a reduced retrograde internal carotid artery pressure (<60% of systolic blood pressure). A temporary carotid shunt was used in 1328 patients and 1786 patients underwent carotid endarterectomy without a shunt.
The in-hospital outcomes were comparable in terms of the incidence of deaths, myocardial infarctions, and stroke between the two groups. However, asymptomatic strokes (confirmed on computed tomography) occurred more frequently in the group where the temporary shunt was used (34 (2.5%) vs. 10 (0.55%), < 0.0001). The composite endpoints of adverse events were also higher in the group where a temporary shunt was used (44 (3.3%) vs. 28 (1.5%), = 0.002). The risk of symptomatic stroke (both fatal and non-fatal) was higher in the group where a temporary shunt was not used, though this was statistically not significant. Logistic regression analysis identified diabetes mellitus and stenosis (81-90%) of the contralateral internal carotid artery to be important predictors for stroke.
Temporary carotid shunts during carotid endarterectomy were associated with increased rates of asymptomatic stroke. There were no statistically significant differences in the incidence of non-fatal or fatal stroke, myocardial infarction, and mortality.
本研究的目的是评估临时颈动脉分流器在接受颈动脉内膜切除术患者中的作用。
这是一项回顾性、多中心(n = 159)研究,于2005年1月至2020年10月进行。该研究纳入了3114例接受颈动脉内膜切除术且颈内动脉逆行压力降低(收缩压的<60%)的患者。1328例患者使用了临时颈动脉分流器,1786例患者未使用分流器进行了颈动脉内膜切除术。
两组在死亡、心肌梗死和卒中发生率方面的院内结局具有可比性。然而,使用临时分流器的组中无症状性卒中(计算机断层扫描证实)发生得更频繁(34例(2.5%)对10例(0.55%),P < 0.0001)。使用临时分流器的组中不良事件的复合终点也更高(44例(3.3%)对28例(1.5%),P = 0.002)。未使用临时分流器的组中症状性卒中(致命和非致命)的风险更高,尽管在统计学上不显著。逻辑回归分析确定糖尿病和对侧颈内动脉狭窄(81 - 90%)是卒中的重要预测因素。
颈动脉内膜切除术中使用临时颈动脉分流器与无症状性卒中发生率增加相关。在非致命或致命性卒中、心肌梗死和死亡率方面没有统计学上的显著差异。