颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗缺血性脑血管病临床分析

目的探讨颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗缺血性脑血管病的临床疗效及安全性。方法回顾性总结2009年1月至2013年12月期间33例颈动脉硬化狭窄或闭塞而行颈动脉内膜剥脱术患者的临床资料。结果 33例手术均顺利完成。围手术期内发生声音嘶哑1例,伤口血肿2例,喉头水肿1例,均经对症治疗后症状缓解,围手术期无死亡病例。随访6~48个月,31例患者术后恢复良好,脑缺血症状有不同程度改善,并且在术后随访中均未出现脑卒中。4例颈动脉完全闭塞患者,手术后2例颈动脉血流再通。术后均行颈动脉CT动脉造影检查,31例证实颈总动脉和颈内动脉血流量明显增加。结论颈动脉内膜剥脱术是治疗颅外颈动脉狭窄或闭塞,预防脑梗死,改善脑供血安全有效的方法。     

颈动脉内膜剥脱术后并发脑性盐耗综合征的处理

我们自2001-04实施颈动脉内膜剥脱术(CEA)中,遇到术后发生脑性盐耗综合征3例,对其发生原因和处理探讨如下. 1对象和方法 1.1对象例1:男,72岁,因反复出现左侧肢体功能障碍1个月入院.14 a前曾患脑梗塞,有高血压病史14 a,无糖尿病、冠心病史.术前DSA右侧颈内动脉起始段严重狭窄,约95%,长约3cm,左大脑前动脉闭塞.彩超示右颈内动脉内径1.7 mm,流速129 cm/s.例2:男,81岁,因坐起后头晕3个月为主诉入院,伴右侧肢体功能障碍l a,有高血压病史5 a,术前DSA左侧颈内动脉闭塞,右侧颈内动脉起始段狭窄约70%,彩超示右颈内动脉内径1.7 mm,流速129 cm/s.右大脑中动脉闭塞,Wills循环良好.例3:女,70岁.因反复左侧上肢震颤伴无力3个月为主诉入院,有高血压、糖尿病病史,术前DSA左侧颈内动脉狭窄40%,右侧颈内动脉起始段狭窄约80%.     

颈动脉狭窄引起短暂性脑缺血的外科治疗

目的 探讨颈动脉内膜剥脱术的适应证及围手术期处理。方法 回顾性总结11例因短暂性脑缺血(TIA)伴有颈动脉硬化狭窄患而行颈动脉内膜剥脱术(CEA)的临床资料。结果 除1例术后第二天发生脑梗塞死亡外，其余患TIA表现消失，4例慢性脑缺血症状也得到明显的改善。术后未出现偏瘫或脑出血等严重的并发症。结论 对于TIA病人，经多普勒超声或动脉血管造影(DSA)或磁共振血管造影(MRA)检查发现一侧或双侧颈总动脉或颈内动脉狭窄大于50％，可以考虑行颈动脉内膜剥脱术。对于双侧颈动脉狭窄，分期手术治疗较为安全。做好围手术期处理。有助于减少手术并发症。     

颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗脑缺血19例分析

目的 总结颈动脉内膜剥脱术的治疗经验，进一步提高颅外段颈动脉狭窄病变尤其是双侧重度颈动脉狭窄病变的治疗水平。方法 1996年6月至2004年4月对19例重度颈动脉硬化狭窄所致的脑缺血性患者实施了颈动脉内膜剥脱术。结果 19例中有3例术中发生一过性脑缺血，另外死亡1例，其余恢复顺利。平均25个月的随访发现1例剥脱术后再狭窄。结论 颈动脉内膜剥脱术至今仍是颈动脉狭窄病变治疗的金标准，对双侧重度的狭窄病变，应用颈动脉转流是预防术中脑缺血的重要措施。     

冠状动脉旁路移植同期行颈动脉内膜剥脱术12例

目的:探讨冠心病合并颈动脉狭窄患者同期行冠状动脉旁路移植和颈动脉内膜剥脱术的临床效果.方法:选择冠心病并颈动脉狭窄的12例,在全麻下先行颈动脉内膜剥脱,颈动脉内膜剥脱结束后同期行非体外循环下冠状动脉旁路移植术.结果:本组均行单侧颈动脉内膜剥脱及冠状动脉旁路移植术,每例平均冠状动脉移植3.3支.全组围术期无死亡,无脑梗死发生.1例术后出现颈部切口血肿,1例术后出现谵妄.术后3个月～1年复查未发现脑梗死和短暂性脑缺血发作,4例有慢性脑缺氧症状者均不同程度好转,全组无心绞痛和心肌梗死发生,颈动脉超声再血管化部位血流通畅.结论:冠状动脉旁路移植同期行颈动脉内膜剥脱术安全、有效,严格把握手术适应证和科学规范的外科操作是取得良好手术效果的关键.     

1例高龄颈动脉内膜剥脱术后脑部并发症的预防护理

颈动脉严重狭窄极易引起脑卒中，而脑卒中一直是威胁巾老年人生命的常见病。在脑血管功能不全病人中，有的病变在颅外血管。动脉粥样硬化导致颅外动脉阻塞性病变是最常见的原因，常累及颈总动脉分叉部及颈内动脉。当颈动脉狭窄率达60％～100％时行颈动脉内膜剥脱术，能降低脑卒中的发生率和病死率。我科于2002年8月为1例高龄病人行颈动脉内膜剥脱术。现将护理体会报告如下。     

1例高龄颈动脉内膜剥脱术后脑部并发症的预防护理

颈动脉严重狭窄极易引起脑卒中,而脑卒中一直是威胁中老年人生命的常见病。在脑血管功能不全病人中,有的病变在颅外血管。动脉粥样硬化导致颅外动脉阻塞性病变是最常见的原因,常累及颈总动脉分叉部及颈内动脉。当颈动脉狭窄率达60%～100%时行颈动脉内膜剥脱术,能降低脑卒中的发生率和病死率[1]。我科于2002年8月为1例高龄病人行颈动脉内膜剥脱术。现将护理体会报告如下。1病例介绍病人,男,76岁,因反复头晕10年,1月前出现清晨无明显诱因的右手抖动,经颈动脉彩超证实为左侧颈总动脉、颈内动脉、颈外动脉交汇处有长约2.3cm、宽约0.6cm的斑块,狭…     

颈动脉内膜剥脱术后急性颈内动脉闭塞融通一例报告

我院脑血管病防治中心自 2 0 0 2年 4月开展颈动脉内膜剥脱术以来 ,已收治缺血性脑卒中患者近2 0例 ,选择手术 70例 ,其中有 3例发生术后合并症 ,一例为术后再梗 ,另两例为急性颈内动脉闭塞 ,未发生死亡病例 ,本文报道了其中一例典型病例。1　临床资料患者男 ,5 6岁。以右侧肢体活动不灵 9年主诉入院。 9年前无明显诱因出现右侧肢体活动不灵 ,无意识丧失及大小便失禁。头颅CT示 :“多发性腔隙性脑梗塞” ,在当地医院对症治疗后效果不佳。 9年来上述症状反复发作 3次 ,性质同前。两年前无明显诱因出现言语不清 ,右侧肢体活动不灵较前加重 ,…     

颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗颈动脉狭窄的临床研究

[目的]探讨颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗颈动脉狭窄的指证与手术技巧.[方法]回顾分析在2007年6月至2009年5月期间20例颈动脉狭窄患者行颈动脉内膜剥脱术并随访的相关资料.[结果]手术均成功,颈动脉内膜剥脱术1例术后第2天出现脑梗死,3例出现局部淤血,其余未出现明显神经功能障碍.术后平均随访15个月,未有一过性脑卒中或脑梗死发生.[结论]颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗颈动脉狭窄是安全可靠的,但需要严格掌握手术指证并由技术娴熟的专科医师操作,手术的疗效才能得到保证.     

常温行CABG合并CEA治疗冠心病合并颈内动脉重度狭窄的临床分析

目的探讨同期常温行冠脉旁路移植及颈内动脉剥脱术治疗冠心病合并颈内动脉重度狭窄的安全性和可行性。方法回顾分析某院2014-01—2016-05收治冠心病合并颈内动脉重度狭窄患者18例,行常温下冠脉旁路移植加颈内动脉内膜剥脱术,未使用血管转流管,观察治疗效果。结果 18例患者均在术后12 h内清醒拔管,除1例因术后胸骨愈合不良死亡,其余17例均痊愈出院。无患者出现术后脑部缺血或梗死症状,术前颈动脉狭窄症状都有所改善,血管超声检查颈动脉血流量术前峰值(210.15±85.14)cm/s,术后10 d峰值(100.01±16.21)cm/s,颈动脉血流峰值有明显降低(P0.05);心脏超声评估心功能,术后EF值(59.6±6.2)%,高于术前EF值(49.1±5.8)%(P0.05)。结论常温不停跳冠脉旁路移植合并颈动脉内膜剥脱术,未使用血管分流环,手术操作精细,是安全有效的。     

Carotid stenting vs endarterectomy: new results in perspective

Carotid artery stenosis is a major risk factor for stroke, and treatments for this condition to decrease the risk of stroke include medical therapy, carotid endarterectomy (CEA), and, more recently, carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS). Randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of CEA vs medical therapy showed a clear benefit for CEA in patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis of greater than 70% and a lesser benefit in patients with 50% to 69% stenosis. Treatments have evolved in the ensuing 20 years, and a new method, CAS, has emerged as a possible alternative to CEA. In early results, CAS proved feasible but did not compare favorably with CEA. Later and larger-scale studies comparing CAS to CEA failed to reach conclusions regarding a clear neurologic outcome advantage of one method over the other. This subject was of sufficient interest that 2 larger-scale randomized controlled trials comparing CAS and CEA, the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial and the International Carotid Stenting Study, were undertaken to further explore this issue. This brief review places the new data arising from these studies in the context of prior efforts to address the problem of carotid artery stenosis and explores further opportunities for improvement and patient recommendations in light of these new findings.     

Carotid artery stenting will replace carotid endarterectomy

Stroke is the third leading cause of death in the United States. Carotid artery stenosis represents one of the most common etiologies of stroke. The current treatment modalities available for the treatment of carotid artery stenosis are carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS). Several clinical trials comparing CEA with medical management showed superiority of the surgical arm; however, the applicability of these results to the general population is limited by the fact that the patients and surgeons enrolled in these trials were carefully selected, and the optimal medical therapy used does not meet the current treatment standards. Carotid artery stenting has emerged as a treatment alternative to CEA, as shown in randomized trials comparing the 2 treatment modalities. Recent data from large-volume CAS registries indicate that percutaneous treatment of carotid artery stenosis compares favorably to CEA. Furthermore, the CAS trial designs make these results more applicable to the community standards. These data suggest that CAS will become the treatment of choice in patients with carotid artery stenosis.     

Duplex criteria for determination of 50% or greater carotid stenosis.

Recently the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial investigators reported a benefit of carotid endarterectomy compared with medical therapy for symptomatic patients with 50% or greater carotid stenosis. This has necessitated the development of screening parameters for diagnosis of 50% or greater carotid stenosis on the basis of the reference standards used in the study by the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial. The duplex scans and arteriograms of 110 patients (210 carotid arteries) were reviewed by blinded readers. Duplex measurements of peak systolic velocity and end diastolic velocity were recorded, and the ratio of these velocities in the internal and common carotid arteries was calculated. The criteria determined for detection of 50% or greater stenosis were as follows: peak systolic velocity of the internal carotid artery greater than 170 cm/s (sensitivity, 92%; specificity, 90%; positive predictive value, 92%; negative predictive value, 90%; and accuracy, 91 %); end diastolic velocity of the internal carotid artery greater than 60 cm/s (sensitivity, 92%; specificity, 86%; positive predictive value, 95%; negative predictive value, 79%; and accuracy, 91 %); ratio of peak systolic velocity of the internal carotid artery to peak systolic velocity of the common carotid artery greater than 2 (sensitivity, 93%; specificity, 75%; positive predictive value, 83%; negative predictive value, 89%; and accuracy, 85%); and ratio of end diastolic velocity of the internal carotid artery to end diastolic velocity of the common carotid artery greater than 2.4 (sensitivity, 96%; specificity, 79%; positive predictive value, 88%; negative predictive value, 92%; and accuracy, 89%). It is concluded that 50% or greater carotid artery stenosis can be reliably determined by duplex criteria. The use of receiver operating characteristic curves allows the individualization of duplex criteria to the clinical situation.     

Carotid revascularization for prevention of stroke: carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been used for the past several decades in patients with carotid occlusive disease. Large randomized controlled trials have documented that CEA is a highly effective stroke preventive among patients with carotid stenosis and recent transient ischemic attack or cerebral infarction. In asymptomatic patients with carotid stenosis, clinical trial data suggest that the degree of stroke prevention from CEA is less than among symptomatic patients. However, otherwise healthy men and women with an asymptomatic carotid stenosis of 60% or greater have a lower risk of future cerebral infarction, including disabling cerebral infarction, if treated with CEA compared with those treated with medical management alone. More recently, carotid artery stenting has been performed Increasingly for patients with carotid occlusive disease. As technology has improved, procedural risks have declined and are approaching those reported for CEA. The benefits and durability of CEA compared with carotid artery stenting are still unclear and are being studied in ongoing randomized controlled trials.     

Contemporary management of carotid stenosis: carotid endarterectomy is here to stay

Thromboembolic complications from atherosclerotic disease of the carotid bifurcation are a common etiology of ischemic stroke, which has a significant morbidity and mortality. Carotid artery angioplasty and stenting (CAS) has been proposed as an alternative therapy for patients requiring treatment of carotid artery stenosis as opposed to the "gold standard" surgical intervention, carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Intense debate regarding these 2 therapeutic approaches has centered on their respective safety profiles. To date, despite multiple studies, no convincing evidence demonstrates the superiority or even equality of CAS to the proven safety, efficacy, and durability of CEA. This chapter reviews in detail the available evidence for CAS and CEA and provides a rationale that, given the available data, CEA remains the preferred therapy for the majority of patients who require treatment of carotid artery stenosis.     

Vascular surgery for peripheral arterial disease

The North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) confirmed that carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can significantly cut the risk of stroke in patients with moderate and severe blockage. The standard today is that patients who have internal carotid artery stenosis > 70% with associated symptoms and who are appropriate surgical candidates should be offered CEA. Aneurysmal disease, a growing public health concern, poses the threat of death from rupture, and lower extremity arterial occlusive disease poses a significant risk of critical leg ischemia and limb loss. Both conditions involve surgical options. In treating their patients, primary care physicians should become familiar with the benefits and risks of vascular surgery to manage the various aspects of peripheral arterial disease.     

血管超声评估颈内动脉闭塞血运重建复合手术的成功性

目的应用颈动脉彩色多普勒血流成像（CDFI）和经颅彩色多普勒超声（TCCS）评估颈内动脉闭塞患者行颈动脉内膜切除术（CEA）并取栓和（或）支架植入复合术的血运重建再通的成功性。 方法回顾性连续纳入2007年1月至2018年1月在首都医科大学宣武医院经（DSA）确诊为颈内动脉闭塞,并接受复合手术治疗的患者78例。术前1周和术后1周内行CDFI和TCCS检查。分析比较术前颈内动脉近段及远段内径、闭塞管腔内病变回声、责任斑块长度、交通支开放（眼动脉血流方向逆转）与否等因素对复合手术血运重建再通成功性的影响。 结果78例患者复合手术再通成功率为78.2%（61/78）。围手术期并发症的发生率为6.4%。多因素Logistic回归分析结果显示,闭塞管腔内均质回声、眼动脉血流方向逆转均是颈内动脉闭塞再通成功性的独立影响因素（OR=0.069,95%CI：0.045~0.604,P=0.007;OR=0.164,95%CI：0.009~0.501,P=0.008）。 结论闭塞管腔内的回声性质、眼动脉方向的逆转与颈内动脉闭塞后血运重建的再通率密切相关。CDFI与TCCS联合评估颈内动脉闭塞复合手术的成功性具有重要的价值。     

Carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy in the treatment of symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose: To evaluate the short-term and intermediate- to long-term efficacy and safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) compared with carotid endarterectomy (CEA).Materials and Methods: The published literature was electronically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) between CAS and CEA for the treatment of carotid stenosis performed from January 2000 to January 2017. The short-term and intermediate- to long-term outcomes were evaluated.Results: We identified 10 RCTs including 7,183 participants with symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Our meta-analysis found different results between the patients with and those without symptoms. In patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis, the total stroke incidence in the CAS group was significantly higher than that in the CEA group within the 30-day periprocedural period (p<0.001); however, the myocardial infarction incidence in the CAS group was significantly lower than that in the CEA group (p<0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the mortality within 30 days post-procedure, but the intermediate- to long-term incidence of stroke or death in the CAS group was higher than that of the CEA group (p<0.05). In contrast, for asymptomatic patients, there were no significant differences between the CAS and CEA groups in the short- and intermediate- to long-term outcomes.Conclusion: For patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis, CEA is associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, whereas CAS is correlated with an increased risk of procedurally related strokes. However, for patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis, no significant difference was found in the efficacy or safety between CAS and CEA.     

Lumen reduction measurements of the internal carotid artery before and after Levovist enhancement: reproducibility and agreement with angiography.

Our aim was to assess reproducibility of three different lumen reduction measuring methods--North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial, European Carotid Surgery Trial, and common carotid--using power Doppler and color Doppler sonography before and after Levovist enhancement. We included 20 symptomatic patients with mild or severe carotid disease. North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial, European Carotid Surgery Trial, and common carotid measurements on longitudinal views and European Carotid Surgery Trial measurements on transverse views were performed. Examinations were repeated and the results compared to assess reproducibility of measurements. Correlation with angiography was obtained by calculating Pearson correlation coefficients. Reproducibility was significantly better (P < 0.05) for European Carotid Surgery Trial and common carotid measurements (95% limits of agreement between -10% to 10% and -19% to 17%) as compared to North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial measurements (95% limits of agreement between -11% to 21% and -21% to 23%). Variability of measurements after enhancement increased slightly (not significant) for both power and color Doppler sonography. Additionally, European Carotid Surgery Trial measurements, using nonenhanced power Doppler or color Doppler sonography, did not correlate significantly with angiography, whereas North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial and common carotid measurements correlated well with angiography, particularly in power Doppler mode after enhancement (r = 0.88 and r = 0.82, respectively). We conclude that for lumen reduction measurements of the internal carotid artery with power and color Doppler sonography, the common carotid method is the only method that is reproducible and has good correlation with angiography, which slightly improves after Levovist enhancement.     

Patient outcomes beyond hospitalization: carotid endarterectomy surgical patient outcomes after a rapid recovery program

Improved surgical techniques for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) surgical patients have resulted in improved postoperative hemodynamic stability of patients and reduced lengths of hospitalization. The purpose of this pilot project was to determine CEA patient outcomes after a rapid recovery hospitalization program. Thirty-nine patients were enrolled in the study and contacted at 1 month after CEA surgery to examine carotid occlusive disease clinical symptoms, functional status, atherosclerotic disease risk-factor reduction, and patient satisfaction. Findings of the pilot study demonstrated that CEA surgical patients were able to resume physical and psychosocial functioning by 1 month after surgery at levels comparable to preoperative functioning. Subjects reported relief of carotid artery occlusive disease symptoms and reported high levels of independent functioning and satisfaction with CEA surgery. Men in the study had significantly higher levels of reported independence in functioning compared with the women, using a "0" to "10" scale to rate level of functioning independence. Findings from the pilot study will be used to develop an early recovery and atherosclerotic disease risk-factor modification program for CEA surgical patients.