Suppr超能文献

手术技术的选择是否会影响颈动脉再狭窄的发生率?颈动脉内膜切除术与大隐静脉旁路移植术的比较。

Is the incidence of recurrent carotid artery stenosis influenced by the choice of the surgical technique? Carotid endarterectomy versus saphenous vein bypass.

作者信息

Fabiani J N, Julia P, Chemla E, Birnbaum P L, Chardigny C, D'Attellis N, Renaudin J M

机构信息

Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Broussais Hospital, Paris, France.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg. 1994 Nov;20(5):821-5. doi: 10.1016/s0741-5214(94)70170-9.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to compare the incidence of recurrent carotid artery stenosis (RCS) after carotid endartarectomy (CEA) and saphenous vein grafting (SVG) in patients with bilateral carotid artery stenosis.

METHODS

Between 1978 and 1990, 1483 patients underwent carotid artery surgery at our institution. Fifty-one patients were diagnosed with bilateral carotid artery stenosis and were included in a prospective study that consisted of performance of CEA on one side and SVG on the other. The patients consisted of 34 men and 17 women. Forty patients had symptoms, and 11 were symptom free with severe (> or = 90%) bilateral carotid artery stenosis. All patients underwent a two-stage procedure with an operative interval that ranged from 5 days to 6 months.

RESULTS

All patients survived, and no permanent postoperative neurologic deficit was observed. Follow-up was available for all patients and ranged from 6 to 150 months (mean 52 months). Serial Doppler studies were performed in all patients at 6- to 9-month intervals. Unilateral RCS (> or = 80%) occurred in two cases (two of 102); one in a CEA (one of 51) and one in the distal anastomosis of a SVG (one of 51) at 6 and 8 months, respectively, after operation. The reoperative surgical technique performed in both cases was a SVG.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of RCS requiring repeat operation after carotid artery surgery is not influenced by the choice of the surgical technique, namely CEA or saphenous vein bypass.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在比较双侧颈动脉狭窄患者行颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)和大隐静脉移植术(SVG)后复发性颈动脉狭窄(RCS)的发生率。

方法

1978年至1990年间,1483例患者在我院接受了颈动脉手术。51例患者被诊断为双侧颈动脉狭窄,并纳入一项前瞻性研究,该研究包括一侧行CEA,另一侧行SVG。患者包括34名男性和17名女性。40例有症状,11例无症状但有严重(≥90%)双侧颈动脉狭窄。所有患者均接受两阶段手术,手术间隔时间为5天至6个月。

结果

所有患者均存活,术后未观察到永久性神经功能缺损。所有患者均获得随访,随访时间为6至150个月(平均52个月)。所有患者每隔6至9个月进行一次连续多普勒检查。单侧RCS(≥80%)发生在2例患者中(102例中的2例);1例发生在CEA术后(51例中的1例),1例发生在SVG远端吻合口处(51例中的1例),分别在术后6个月和8个月。两例患者再次手术的技术均为SVG。

结论

颈动脉手术后需要再次手术的RCS发生率不受手术技术选择(即CEA或大隐静脉旁路术)的影响。

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