颈动脉内膜斑块剥脱术后缺血型脑卒中的防治

目的 探讨颈动脉内膜斑块剥脱术后缺血性脑卒中的防治方法。方法 回顾性分析2016年5月至2019年11月颈动脉内膜斑块剥脱术治疗的70例颈动脉狭窄的临床资料。术前行颈动脉彩色多普勒超声、头颈部血管CTA或DSA检查，术中严格落实各项卒中预防措施，包括平稳控制血压，轻柔精细操作，顺序解剖、阻断、开放各血管，仔细清理斑块、内膜远端固定、严密缝合，返流压、体感诱发电位联合监测等。结果 2例（2.86%）术后出现脑缺血事件。无心肌梗死、手术死亡病例。术后随访3~30个月，所有病人血管通畅、无狭窄，恢复良好。结论 轻柔精准操作、平稳控制血压、多项目监测等对防治颈动脉内膜斑块剥脱术后缺血性脑卒中有重要意义。     

TCD监测对颈动脉内膜切除术中选择应用转流管的意义

目的探讨经颅多普勒(TCD)监测在颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)中对判断何时使用转流管的意义。方法11例颈动脉严重狭窄患者接受CEA,均采用全麻,术中全程TCD监测术侧大脑中动脉平均血流速度(mvMCA)结合阻断颈动脉测残端返流压(SP)选择是否使用转流管(shunt)。结果5例SP≥50mmHg,TCD监测术侧mvMCA血流无明显变化,阻断颈动脉前后mvMCA分别下降10%、4%、29%、18%、12%均未使用shunt。2例SP40～50mmHg,其中1例无血流信号,使用shunt,另1例mvMCA下降仅17%,未用shunt。3例SP25～39mmHg,其中2例mvMCA下降49%、53%,使用shunt,1例mvMCA下降7%,未用shunt。1例SP<25mmHg,mvMCA下降53%使用shunt。全部11例患者术后恢复良好,未发生任何与手术相关的神经系统并发症。结论在CEA手术中应用TCD与SP结合可以较为科学和理想地判定shunt的选择性使用。     

复合监测下颈内动脉内膜剥脱术治疗重度颈内动脉狭窄的临床研究

目的 探讨复合监测下颈内动脉内膜剥脱术治疗重度颈内动脉狭窄的应用价值。方法 对63例颈内动脉重度狭窄患者行颈动脉内膜剥脱术(Carotid endarterectomy, CEA)治疗,术中联合经颅多普勒(Transcranial dopple, TCD)和体感诱发电位(Somatosensory evoked potential, SEP)、运动诱发电位(Motor evoked potential, MEP)监测,用TCD监测并记录手术侧大脑中动脉(Middle cerebral artery, MCA)血流动力学的变化及栓子脱落情况,通过电生理监测记录术中SEP,MEP波幅的变化;神经外科医生进行术后脑缺血事件评估：(1)术后第1、3、5 d美国国立卫生研究院卒中量表(National institutes of health stroke scale, NIHSS)评分较术前≥4分,认为发生神经功能缺损;(2)颅脑磁共振成像(Magnetic resonance imaging, MRI)或计算机断层扫描(Computed tomography, CT)显示同侧大脑新发梗死灶。...     

体感诱发电位监测颈动脉内膜剥脱术(附237例分析)

目的 总结颈动脉内膜剥脱术中使用体感诱发电位(SEP)监测颈动脉阻断后脑灌注状态的经验,探讨术中转流指征.方法 对237例颈动脉内膜剥脱术病人行术中SEP监测,采用胫后神经刺激,记录双侧皮质SEP.将P40波幅下降50%作为脑缺血的预警信号,潜伏期延长3 ms作为参考.结果 P40分为Ⅰ型(波形无变化)142例,Ⅱ型(波形变化但逐渐恢复)81例,Ⅲ型(波形变化且无恢复)11例,Ⅳ型(波形扁平且无恢复)3例,Ⅴ型(波形消失)0例.对9例波幅下降>50%且升高血压后无恢复的Ⅱ型病人及14例Ⅲ、Ⅳ型病人行转流.本组术后均未出现脑缺血性并发症.结论 SEP监测十分敏感,可提示颈动脉阻断后的脑灌注状态,了解是否需行转流,是颈动脉内膜剥脱术中监测的理想手段.     

躯体感觉诱发电位监测在颈动脉内膜切除术中的应用

目的 探讨躯体感觉诱发电位（somatosensory evoked potential,SEP）监测在颈动脉内膜切除术中的应用价值。 方法 回顾性分析2010年1月～2012年1月广州市第一人民医院住院的10例颈动脉硬化性狭窄患者,行颈动脉内膜切除术,术中测量颈动脉残端压（stump pressure,SP）和监测SEP中N20的波幅及潜伏期变化情况后,决定是否放置转流管。比较患者术前和术后6个月改良Rankin评分（modified Rankin Scale,mRS）﹑、美国国立卫生院卒中评分（National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale,NIHSS）和管腔狭窄变化情况。 结果 10例患者中,5例患者同时出现SP低于50 mmHg和SEP波幅下降超过50％,予以放置转流管;3例患者SP超过50 mmHg,但SEP波幅下降超过50％,予以放置转流管;2例患者SP超过50 mmHg,但SEP波幅及潜伏期改变不明显,未放置转流管。所有患者手术均获得成功。患者术后6个月mRS评分较术前下降［1（四分位数范围0.5～1.5） vs 2（四分位数范围1～2.5）,P=0.03］;术后6个月NIHSS评分和术前比较差异无显著性（P=0.06）;术后6个月管腔狭窄程度较术前改善,差异有显著性［（6.8±2.5）％ vs （87.5±8.6）％,P<0.001］。 结论 SEP监测可能有助于避免颈动脉内膜切除术后神经功能缺损的发生,SEP监测下行颈动脉内膜切除术可能相对安全有效。     

诱发电位监测在脑血管病阻断陛介人治疗中的应用

目的探讨诱发电位监测在脑血管病阻断性介入治疗中的应用价值。方法13例行阻断性介入治疗（包括球囊辅助栓塞、主干动脉闭塞）的脑血管病患者行术中全程诱发电位监测,观察是否出现脑缺血并调整策略。结果7例颅内动脉瘤及1例颈内动脉海绵窦瘘行球囊闭塞试验后永久闭塞主干动脉。1例颈内动脉海绵窦段动脉瘤合并烟雾病者,球囊充盈95S内出现体感诱发电位异常改变,抽瘪球囊后波形恢复,据此调整球囊充盈时间并完成治疗,未发生缺血。5例颅内动脉瘤行球囊辅助弹簧圈栓塞成功。术后3d及出院时诱发电位监测均无缺血性波形改变。所有病例随访6个月,均无新发缺血事件;MRI检查示,除原发疾病外,未发现缺血性改变。结论作为反映脑组织缺血的灵敏指标,诱发电位监测可成为脑血管病阻断性介入治疗的常规辅助技术,以减少并发症,提高疗效。     

诱发电位监测技术在脑干及其附近肿瘤手术中的应用

目的探讨诱发电位技术在脑干及其附近肿瘤手术中的应用价值。方法选择静脉麻醉下脑干及其附近病变手术病人18例,术中监测脑干听觉诱发电位(BAEP)7例,体感诱发电位(SEP)18例,运动诱发电位(MEP)5例。当术中波形发生明显异常时,即通知术者调整或停止操作。结果本组术中诱发电位监测均顺利完成。BAEPⅤ波变化6例,其中波形逐渐恢复5例,术后均未出现新的神经功能障碍;未恢复1例,术后轻度意识障碍,3d后清醒。SEP波形变化4例,其中手术结束时恢复至基线水平3例,术后未发现异常;未恢复1例,术后病人昏迷。MEP出现变化1例,调整刺激后恢复。结论在脑干及其附近病变手术中应用多种诱发电位技术,可及时、有效地监测并保护脑干功能。     

颈动脉内膜斑块剥脱术在基层医院开展的经验

目的 总结基层医院开展颈动脉内膜斑块剥脱术（CEA）治疗颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄的经验。方法 回顾性分析2017年10月至2018年11月CEA治疗的21例颈动脉狭窄的临床资料。均取胸锁乳突肌前斜切口,行标准式或外翻式CEA,其中1例双侧狭窄病人分次手术。结果 21例共进行22次CEA,其中20次标准式CEA,2次外翻式;21次术后狭窄血管即刻通畅,颅内供血明显改善;1次因存在同侧颈内动脉远端发育不良致术后血流改善不明显。术后出现脑高灌注综合征2例、颈部小血肿1例、声音嘶哑1例,对症处理好转。术后随访3~15个月,未发现脑卒中、动脉再狭窄。结论 基层医院开展CEA需详备预案、稳妥实施,成熟的多学科合作团队及娴熟的手术技巧是关键。     

经颅多普勒超声联合体感诱发电位监测在颈动脉内膜剥脱术中的应用价值

目的探讨经颅多普勒超声(TCD)联合体感诱发电位(SEP)监测在颈动脉内膜剥脱(CEA)术中的应用价值。方法对29例颈动脉狭窄患者在CEA术中采用TCD和SEP联合监测,用TCD监测术侧大脑中动脉(MCA)平均血流速度(Vm)的变化,并记录同时段SEP波幅的变化。根据术中TCD和SEP的变化综合判断是否实施转流术,并判断开放颈动脉后有无出现脑血流高灌注。结果本组患者经术中应用TCD和SEP联合监测均顺利完成手术;3例TCD监测MCA Vm及SEP波幅下降均达到转流标准的患者,术中行转流术。SEP(10.3%,3/29)和TCD(44.8%,13/29)监测达到转流标准比率的差异有统计学意义(χ2=4.118,P=0.002)。5例患者TCD监测示术中出现脑血流过度灌注,但此时SEP并无阳性表现,通过适当降血压及压迫颈动脉处理,其中仅1例患者术后出现脑过度灌注综合征。本组患者术后1周内复查CTA或DSA显示颈动脉狭窄均消失。术后随访3~18个月,仅1例患者在术后第10 d出现术侧手功能区小片状脑梗死,其他患者均无出现并发症。结论TCD与SEP联合监测在CEA术中具有较高的临床应用价值;SEP在判断术中是否使用转流方面更有优势,TCD在判断CEA术中高灌注方面有优势。     

颈动脉内膜切除术和支架植入术治疗颈动脉狭窄临床分析

目的通过应用动脉内膜切除术(CEA)和颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)治疗颈动脉狭窄,探讨并评估两种治疗方法的有效性和安全性。方法回顾性分析2006-01—2010-10我院62例颈内动脉狭窄患者,12例行CEA,50例行CAS,其中应用脑保护装置(EPD)24例。结果颈内动脉内膜切除术11例成功再通,1例近全闭塞者再通失败,术后18d内死亡1例,轻微症状性缺血性脑卒中2例,轻微出血性脑卒中1例。支架植入术50例中2例出现轻度脑卒中,颈动脉窦反应14例,高灌注综合征2例,延迟性脑出血1例,半球梗死死亡1例。应用脑保护装置24例,未发生神经系统并发症。结论 CEA和CAS皆为治疗颈内动脉狭窄的有效手段,在应用EPD下,CAS必将成为治疗颈动脉狭窄更加安全有效的手段。     

Hemodynamic cerebral ischemia during carotid endarterectomy evaluated by intraoperative monitoring and post-operative diffusion-weighted imaging

OBJECTIVE: We used the result of monitoring to evaluate patients with post-operative neurological deficits attributable to hemodynamic cerebral ischemia owing to cross-clamping of the carotid artery. METHODS: We evaluated 131 carotid endarterectomy (CEA) procedures performed on 118 patients, 96 men and 22 women ranging in age from 38 to 82 years (mean: 67.1 years). For monitoring, we used a combination of somatosensory evoked potential (SEP), functional dynamic electroencephalography (EEG), near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) and transcranial Doppler (TCD). Patients who awoke with neurological deficits after CEA immediately underwent diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). RESULTS: In 30 of the 131 procedures (22.9%), intraoperative monitoring disclosed abnormalities after cross-clamping of the internal carotid artery (ICA). In two of these 30 patients, shunt was not introduced, because of full recovery of monitoring after blood pressure increasing, however, one patient demonstrated transient ischemic attack (TIA). In six of remaining 28 patients who need shunt, transient hemodynamic cerebral ischemia occurred, however, all patients recovered gradually within 18 hours after CEA. No new lesions were detected on post-operative DWI of the seven patients and MRA demonstrated good patency of the carotid artery. The other 101 patients whose intraoperative monitoring after cross-clamping of the ICA did not disclose abnormalities demonstrated no hemodynamic TIA. CONCLUSION: Hemodynamic ischemia owing to cross-clamping of the ICA is rare in patients treated by CEA. However, in patients manifesting neurological deficits upon awakening from CEA, DWI and MRA should be performed immediately to facilitate their prompt treatment.     

高龄颈动脉狭窄患者颈动脉内膜切除术和颈动脉支架成形术的安全性比较简

目的回顾接受颈动脉内膜切除术和颈动脉支架成形术的高龄（≥70岁）颈动脉狭窄患者的临床资料,分析手术安全性。方法共691例颈动脉狭窄患者,121例行颈动脉内膜切除术、570例行颈动脉支架成形术,分析两组患者危险因素、临床特征和术后并发症发生率,评价两种手术方法之安全性。结果术后30d时,两组患者病死率（0．83％对1．05％,P=1．000）、脑卒中（4．13％对1．93％,P=0．258）和心肌梗死（0．83％对0,P=0．175）发生率差异均无统计学意义;但颈动脉内膜切除术组患者术后心脏不良事件（8．26％对1．05％,P=0．000）和脑神经损伤（4．96％对0,P=0．000）发生率高于颈动脉支架成形术组,而窦性心动过缓或低血压发生率低于颈动脉支架成形术组（0对7．54％,P=0．002）。结论高龄患者接受颈动脉内膜切除术或颈动脉支架成形术均有较高的安全性,术前应全面评价患者基础情况,以减少术后并发症发生率。     

Effects of carotid endarterectomy on motor evoked potentials elicited by transcranial magnetic stimulation

Purpose To investigate the within 3 days effects of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) on functional status of the central motor system in patients with carotid stenosis by means of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Patients and method We studied 30 consecutive patients, 20 males and 10 females with a mean age of 69.2 ± 7.1 years, who underwent CEA for symptomatic carotid stenosis. All patients had suffered an ischemic attack 6 months prior to the operation. Two TMS studies, one before and one shortly after CEA were performed on both sides in each of the patients. Resting motor threshold, motor evoked potentials (MEP) amplitude at rest, MEP latency at rest and during contraction and silent period duration (SPD) were recorded and analyzed. Two groups of data were collected. Group 1 consisted of data from the operated side in all 30 patients. Group 2 consisted of data from the contralateral side and served as a control. Results Motor resting thresholds were similar in the two groups. Intragroup pre and post CEA comparisons showed no difference in the operated group and significant increased threshold after CEA on the non-operated side. There was no significant difference of TMS intensity for maximal MEP in either side before or after CEA. Latency at rest and during voluntary contraction and amplitude at rest showed no significant differences between or within groups’ comparisons. In group 1 SPD showed a statistically significant increase after CEA as opposed to baseline. In group 2 SPD showed a non significant increase after CEA. Conclusion In the absence of other MEP changes, our finding of prolonged SPD post–operatively suggests preferential influence of the inhibitory cortical circuits. The potential favorable effect of CEA in patients with hyperexcitability such as disabling spasticity after stroke should be further studied.     

Diagnostic accuracy of somatosensory evoked potential and electroencephalography during carotid endarterectomy

Background and Purpose: Perioperative stroke risk following carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is reported to be approximately 2–3%. The diagnostic accuracies of intraoperative EEG and SSEP monitoring during CEA have been studied separately. However, to date, the effectiveness of simultaneous EEG and SSEP monitoring during CEA has only been evaluated in small study populations. This study examined the diagnostic accuracy of combined EEG and SSEP monitoring in a large (N = 1165) patient population.

Methods: This study included 1165 patients who underwent CEA from 2000 to 2012 at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center. The sensitivities, specificities, and diagnostic odds ratio of EEG and SSEP monitoring methods were examined separately and together. Receiver operating characteristic curves were plotted to assess sensitivity and specificity of single and combined Intraoperative monitoring (IONM) methods.

Results: Maximum sensitivity was obtained with multimodality monitoring with an IONM change in either EEG or SSEP of 50.00 (95% CI, 30.66–69.34). The specificity of simultaneous EEG and SSEP changes was 93.95 (95% CI, 92.28–95.35%). Maximum area under ROC curve obtained for IONM change in either EEG or SSEP was 0.660 (95% CI, 0.547–0.773, p-value 0.004).

Conclusion: The diagnostic accuracy of multimodality IONM during CEA is higher than an approach using single modality IONM. Simultaneous EEG and SSEP monitoring improves the likelihood of detecting periprocedural strokes after CEA. Neuro protective therapies to prevent periprocedural strokes can be based on changes in SSEP and EEG during CEA.     

血管成形术治疗症状性重度颈动脉狭窄的临床研究

目的探讨颈动脉内膜剥脱术(carotid endarterectomy,CEA)和颈动脉支架成形术(carotid artery stenting,CAS)治疗症状性重度颈动脉狭窄的近期和中期临床效果。方法回顾性地分析了2016年1月至2018年12月在我院接受CEA或CAS治疗的203例症状性重度颈动脉狭窄患者的临床资料,分析两种术式的围手术期及中期并发症情况。结果共纳入症状性重度颈动脉狭窄患者203人,分为CAS组(n=132)与CEA组(n=71),术后随访时间为1 y。统计学分析患者在年龄、性别、危险因素、血压等方面均无统计学差异(P>0.05)。围术期并发症分析中显示,CEA组颈部肿胀3例(P=0.017);CAS组30 d内卒中比例明显高于CEA组(P=0.034)。1 y随访结果分析显示,CAS组再狭窄比例明显高于CEA组(P=0.047);在心肌梗死、死亡、脑卒中方面两组间无明显统计学差异。结论CAS与CEA均可安全有效的治疗症状性重度颈动脉狭窄,围术期并发症方面CEA组颈部肿胀明显高于CAS组,CAS组30 d内卒中及1 y再狭窄比例明显高于CEA组。     

Somatosensory evoked potentials in carotid artery stenting: Effectiveness in ascertaining cerebral ischemic events

Somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) have been used in various endovascular procedures and carotid endarterectomy, but to our knowledge no literature deals exclusively with the utility of SSEP in carotid artery stenting (CAS). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of SSEP in detecting cerebral ischemic events during CAS. We conducted a prospective study in 35 CAS procedures in 31 patients during an 18 month period. Thirty-three patients without near occlusion underwent stenting using dual protection (simultaneous flow reversal and distal filter) combined with blood aspiration, while two patients with near occlusion underwent stenting without dual protection. All 35 patients underwent SSEP monitoring. SSEP were generated by stimulating median and/or tibial nerves and recorded by scalp electrodes. During the aspiration phase post-dilation, seven patients (20%) exhibited SSEP changes with a mean duration of 11.3 ± 8.5 minutes (range: 3–25 minutes), three of whom later developed minor stroke/transient ischemic attack. Diffusion-weighted imaging showed new lesions in 10 patients (28.6%). Change in SSEP exhibited mean sensitivity of 100% (95% confidence interval, 0.29–1.0) and specificity of 88% (95% confidence interval, 0.71–0.96) in predicting clinical stroke post-CAS. Intra-procedural SSEP change was predictive of post-procedural complications (p = 0.005, Fisher’s exact test). Longer span of SSEP change was positively correlated with complications (p = 0.032, Mann–Whitney test). Intra-procedural SSEP changes are highly sensitive in predicting neurological outcome following CAS. Chances of complications are increased with prolongation of such changes. SSEP allows for prompt intra-procedural ischemia prevention measures and stratification to pursue an aggressive peri-procedural protocol for high risk patients to mitigate neurological deficits.     

Neurological complications of carotid revascularisation

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is an effective treatment for patients with recently symptomatic severe carotid stenosis and in selected patients with symptomatic moderate carotid stenosis. Carotid artery angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is emerging as an alternative to CEA, and randomised controlled trials suggest comparable efficacy to CEA in prevention of non-perioperative stroke. Neurovascular complications can result from both procedures, usually from thromboembolism from the operated vessel, cerebral hypoperfusion causing ischaemia and, rarely, intracerebral haemorrhage. The overall incidence of perioperative strokes complicating CEA and CAS is approximately 4% and 6%, respectively, and represents a devastating outcome that the procedure was designed to prevent. Other neurological sequelae complicating carotid revascularisation include cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome, cranial and peripheral nerve injuries, and contrast encephalopathy in patients undergoing CAS. In this review, we analyse the incidence, mechanisms and perioperative management of neurological complications for patients undergoing carotid revascularisation.     

Indicators of carotid endarterectomy: AHA guidelines

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is surgical therapy used in treating patients with a stenosis of the extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA). Guidelines for CEA have been published by the American Heart Association. We discuss these guidelines and the important clinical trials used to generate the guidelines. For patients with symptoms referable to an ipsilateral stenosis, CEA has been proven to be more beneficial than standard medical therapy in preventing subsequent strokes, especially in patients with a severe ICA stenosis. The benefits of CEA in asymptomatic patients are more controversial, and the guidelines are less clear. We conclude with a discussion of our typical use of CEA in several clinical scenarios.