Suppr超能文献

同期颈动脉内膜切除术与冠状动脉搭桥术:围手术期风险及长期生存情况

Simultaneous carotid endarterectomy and coronary bypass: perioperative risk and long-term survival.

作者信息

Mackey W C, Khabbaz K, Bojar R, O'Donnell T F

机构信息

Department of Surgery, New England Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA 02111, USA.

出版信息

J Vasc Surg. 1996 Jul;24(1):58-64. doi: 10.1016/s0741-5214(96)70145-3.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to examine the outcome of simultaneous coronary bypass-carotid endarterectomy (CABG-CEA) and to compare it with the outcome of endarterectomy alone (CEA alone) in patients at high cardiac risk.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the records and follow-up data for 100 consecutive patients who had undergone CABG-CEA and were at high risk and 114 patients who had undergone CEA, had overt coronary artery disease (angina, previous infarct, or ischemic electrocardiographic abnormalities), but had not undergone CABG was carried out.

RESULTS

Our CABG-CEA group had a high incidence of symptomatic carotid disease (57%) and contralateral occlusion (28%) when compared with patients in other reports. Patients in the CABG-CEA group were older (67.9 +/- 8.3 years vs 63.6 +/- 15.7 years, p = 0.01) and more often smokers (81% vs 52.6%, p = 0.01) than patients in the CEA alone group. Perioperative mortality was 8% for the CEA-CABG group and for 1.8% for the CEA alone group (p = 0.035). Perioperative stroke morbidity was 9% for the CEA-CABG group and 2.6% for the CEA alone group (p = 0.05). Life table survival at 1,3, and 5 years was 90%, 82%, and 73% versus 96%, 84%, and 76% for the CABG-CEA and CEA alone groups, respectively (p = 0.30).

CONCLUSIONS

Selection criteria for CABG-CEA greatly influence perioperative risk. Despite the greater age and more advanced coronary artery disease in the CABG-CEA group, long-term outcome differences are accounted for entirely by differences in perioperative morbidity and mortality. Prospective trials of strategies such as staged CEA and CABG to reduce perioperative risk are needed.

摘要

目的

本文旨在研究同期冠状动脉搭桥术-颈动脉内膜切除术(CABG-CEA)的结果,并将其与单纯接受内膜切除术(单纯CEA)的高危患者的结果进行比较。

方法

对100例连续接受CABG-CEA且高危的患者以及114例接受CEA、有明显冠状动脉疾病(心绞痛、既往梗死或缺血性心电图异常)但未接受CABG的患者的记录和随访数据进行回顾性分析。

结果

与其他报告中的患者相比,我们的CABG-CEA组有症状的颈动脉疾病发生率较高(57%),对侧闭塞发生率较高(28%)。CABG-CEA组患者比单纯CEA组患者年龄更大(67.9±8.3岁对63.6±15.7岁,p=0.01),吸烟的比例更高(81%对52.6%,p=0.01)。CEA-CABG组围手术期死亡率为8%,单纯CEA组为1.8%(p=0.035)。CEA-CABG组围手术期卒中发病率为9%,单纯CEA组为2.6%(p=0.05)。CABG-CEA组和单纯CEA组1年、3年和5年的生命表生存率分别为90%、82%和73%以及96%、84%和76%(p=0.30)。

结论

CABG-CEA的选择标准对围手术期风险有很大影响。尽管CABG-CEA组患者年龄更大、冠状动脉疾病更严重,但长期结果差异完全由围手术期发病率和死亡率的差异所致。需要对分期CEA和CABG等降低围手术期风险的策略进行前瞻性试验。

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