颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗无症状性颈动脉狭窄7例临床经验

目的总结颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗无症状性颈动脉狭窄患者的临床经验。方法收集在我院神经外科行翻转式颈动脉内膜剥脱术的7份病例,术前均经过颈动脉超声、颈部CTA、头颅磁共振检查明确提示颈内动脉狭窄,根据北美颈动脉内膜剥落试验(NASCET)计算出狭窄率均大于85%。术后1周复查颈动脉超声、颈部CTA;术后1个月、3个月进行临床功能评分(mRS)评估和随访。结果术后患者影像学检查提示颈动脉通畅,围手术期内没有脑卒中和并发症的发生,随访1个月、3个月,无1例发生缺血性脑卒中。结论颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗无症状性颈动脉狭窄安全、有效。     

彩色多普勒超声在颈动脉内膜剥脱手术治疗前后的应用价值

目的:研究彩色多普勒超声在颈动脉内膜剥脱手术治疗前后的应用价值。方法:回顾性分析115例因颈动脉狭窄而行颈动脉内膜剥脱术患者的资料和彩色多普勒超声结果。结果:颈动脉内膜剥脱术后,狭窄处颈动脉的内径、血流速度较术前明显改善(P0.001);术后随访疗效满意。结论:颈动脉内膜剥脱术是颈动脉狭窄有效的治疗方法。彩色多普勒超声能够为手术提供可靠的客观依据,并可作为评价手术效果、随访的有效方式。     

颈动脉内膜剥脱术对缺血性脑卒中的防治效果分析

目的总结颈动脉内膜剥脱术对防治缺血性脑卒中的经验。方法对196例患者进行颈动脉内膜剥脱术,均为单侧。术中应用颈动脉转流管47例,阻断血流149例。术前均经颈动脉造影检查,选择颈内动脉狭窄〉70％者133例,〉95％者63例。71例患者并存冠状动脉病变,17例同台行冠状动脉搭桥。结果术后临床症状改善满意191例,术后1周内出现脑出血3例,经开颅止血引流,痊愈1例,死亡2例。出现颈部切口内血肿12例,再手术清创止血获愈。随访6～60个月,获得随访166例,失访28例,死于其他疾病或灾祸38例,元脑缺血症状再发作128例。结论颈动脉内膜剥脱术是治疗颈动脉重度狭窄的一种有效、安全术式。     

外翻式颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗颈动脉狭窄

目的 探讨外翻式颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗颈动脉狭窄的可行性、手术适应证、手术时机、手术技巧及疗效.方法 回顾性分析我院2009年2月～2012年1月采用外翻式颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗的36例颈动脉狭窄患者的临床资料.36例患者术前均有临床症状,33例采用经气管插管静吸复合麻醉,3例采用颈丛神经阻滞麻醉,术中应用药物诱导血压升高,应用显微外科技术切除颈动脉斑块,所有患者未用转流管及人工补片.结果 手术完整切除斑块36例,术区局部血肿5例(未影响呼吸未做任何处理),术后脑出血0例、死亡0例,术后随访未见血管管腔明显狭窄,未再次发生斑块性狭窄.结论 外翻式颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗颈动脉狭窄的效果较好,远期症状性再狭窄未见发生,适合狭窄程度超过50％有症状的患者及狭窄程度在70％～99％的近6个月有短暂脑缺血发作或缺血发作的颈动脉狭窄患者.     

颈动脉内膜切除术预防和治疗缺血性卒中的疗效分析

目的:评估颅外段颈内动脉重度狭窄患者颈动脉内膜切除术预防和治疗缺血性卒中的临床价值。方法:22例患者均由经颅多普勒(TCD)筛选、数字减影血管造影(DSA)或CT血管造影(CTA)检查证实为颈内动脉重度狭窄,其中21例为有症状颈动脉狭窄。22例患者住院期间接受24侧次颈动脉内膜切除术,术后随访并行TCD检查。结果:21例(23侧次)手术过程顺利,随访2~30个月,未再发TIA或脑梗死,19例症状减轻或缓解。1例术后死于脑栓塞和肺部感染。随访期复查TCD 1～2次,20例未发现明显再狭窄。结论:颈动脉内膜切除术对治疗重度颈内动脉狭窄,预防TIA和缺血性卒中有效。TCD可作为对重度颈内动脉狭窄的筛选、术中监测和术后随访的重要手段。     

颈动脉狭窄患者颈动脉内膜剥脱术后认知功能的改变

目的探讨颈动脉内膜剥脱术对颈动脉狭窄患者认知功能的影响。方法选择颈动脉重度狭窄的患者38例,均行脑血管造影检查,其中18例行颈动脉内膜剥脱术为病例组,其余为对照组,所有患者均于入院时和出院6个月后行蒙特利尔量表、日常生活能力量表测定。结果 1病例组和对照组蒙特利尔量表前后均无明显差异(P0.05);2病例组视空间执行能力和日常生活能力评分前后有明显差异(P0.05),对照组无差异(P0.05)。结论颈动脉内膜剥脱术可以改善患者的视空间执行能力和日常生活能力,提高其生活质量。     

颈动脉内膜切除术预防老年缺血性脑卒中

目的 探讨颈动脉内膜切除术预防老年人缺血性脑卒中的应用价值。方法 根据狭窄的部位和程度对152例颅外颈动脉狭窄患者采取不同的手术方法,其中包括传统术式46例,外翻术式97例,增加补片9例。结果 手术均获成功,术后脑缺血症状均有改善。颈动脉内膜切除术后的并发症以局部血肿及声音嘶哑为主,术后血压不稳定多见于采用外翻术式后。结论 颈动脉内膜切除术治疗颅外颈动脉狭窄是安全有效的,在预防缺血性脑卒中中有重要价值。     

美国心脏协会指南与欧洲指南中关于颈动脉内膜剥脱术的应用建议及在一级预防中的差异

<正> 1 AHA 2006年脑卒中预防指南中关于颅外颈动脉病变干预方法的建议对于6个月内有过短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)或缺血性脑卒中,且同侧颈动脉高度狭窄(70%～99%)的患者,建议由围手术期致残率和病死率<6%的外科医师对其施行颈动脉内膜剥脱术(CEA,Ⅰ级推荐,A级证据)。近期发作过TIA或缺血性脑卒中,且同侧颈动脉中度狭窄(50%～69%)     

颈动脉内膜剥脱术相关临床问题的探讨

目的:探讨颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗颈动脉硬化狭窄的临床疗效并讨论与之相关的几个有争议的问题。方法:回顾性分析2000年10月至2007年10月间,72例因颈动脉狭窄而行颈动脉内膜剥脱术的患者资料。结果:全组无手术死亡。72例患者手术后均恢复良好,无严重并发症发生。随访的63例中,61例患者术前临床症状均有不同程度改善,观察期内无短暂性脑缺血发作。5例在颈动脉内膜剥脱术同期行冠状动脉搭桥术,疗效满意;4例颈动脉完全闭塞患者,手术后2例颈动脉血流再通。部分患者选择性应用术中转流技术,效果良好。结论:颈动脉内膜剥脱术是治疗颈动脉硬化安全、有效的手术方式,术中可选择性应用转流技术;对合并冠心病的颈动脉狭窄,主张同期联合手术;部分颈动脉完全闭塞者仍有手术重建血流的可能。     

颈动脉内膜切除术预防和治疗缺血性卒中的疗效分析

目的：评估颅外段颈内动脉重度狭窄患者颈动脉内膜切除术预防和治疗缺血性卒中的临床价值。方法：22例患者均由经颅多普勒(TCD)筛选、数字减影血管造影(DSA)或CT血管造影(CTA)检查证实为颈内动脉重度狭窄，其中21例为有症状颈动脉狭窄。22例患者住院期间接受24侧次颈动脉内膜切除术，术后随访并行TCD检查。结果：21例(23侧次)手术过程顺利，随访2～30个月，未再发TIA或脑梗死，19例症状减轻或缓解。1例术后死于脑栓塞和肺部感染。随访期复查TCD1～2次，20例未发现明显再狭窄。结论：颈动脉内膜切除术对治疗重度颈内动脉狭窄，预防TIA和缺血性卒中有效。TCD可作为对重度颈内动脉狭窄的筛选、术中监测和术后随访的重要手段。     

不符合NASCET纳入标准的高危有症状颈动脉狭窄患者的颈动脉成形支架置入术治疗

目的 探讨支架置入术治疗不符合NASCET纳入标准的高危有症状颈动脉狭窄患者的有效性和安全性.方法 对20例不符合NASCET纳入标准的高危有症状颈动脉狭窄患者进行颈动脉支架置入术治疗,其中男性12例,女性8例,年龄62～76岁(平均69岁),短暂性脑缺血发作11例,脑梗死9例.所有患者数字减影血管造影显示颈动脉狭窄程度＞70%(NA-SCET标准),其中-侧颈动脉重度狭窄9例(2例为内膜切除术后再狭窄),双侧颈动脉重度狭窄6例,一侧颈动脉闭塞伴对侧重度狭窄5例(1例为鼻咽癌放疗术后).所有患者均使用栓子保护装置,均采用预扩张和自膨式支架.结果 手术成功率100%,残余狭窄率均＜30%.所有患者术中均出现不同程度的一过性心率和血压下降,1例患者并发微栓子栓塞.其余患者围手术期内无缺血性卒中发作.术后复查颈动脉超声见狭窄显著改善.术后1个月和3个月随访均未发现同侧缺血性卒中和冠状动脉缺血事件.结论 颈动脉支架置入术创伤小、围手术期并发症少,治疗外科手术高危的有症状颈动脉狭窄是安全和有效的.     

外翻式颈动脉内膜切除术治疗颈动脉颅外段狭窄的疗效观察

目的观察外翻式颈动脉内膜切除术（eCEA）治疗颈动脉颅外段狭窄的临床疗效。方法选择狭窄率≥50％的有症状性颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄患者23例,采用eCEA术式行颈动脉内膜切除术,其中4例颈内动脉合并颈总动脉狭窄患者采用内膜切除器,行eCEA＋逆行性颈总动脉内膜切除术。所有患者均获得6个月临床及颈动脉超声、CT血管成像随访。结果23例患者斑块均被成功切除,术中无严重并发症。2例患者术后出现明显气管移位,7例术后出现声音嘶哑,均在术后3个月内恢复。4例患者术后72h内有短暂性脑缺血（TIA）发作,头部CT检查无梗死灶出现,经小剂量尿激酶治疗后恢复正常。无严重脑水肿、脑出血患者。术后随访6个月,13例因TIA发作入院的患者未再出现症状,其他原有临床症状均有不同程度的好转。复查颈动脉超声和CT血管成像,显示无一例患者出现颈动脉再次狭窄。结论eCEA治疗颈动脉颅外段狭窄安全、有效,短期疗效较好。     

颈动脉内膜切除术中转流管的应用及侧支代偿对其的影响

目的探讨颈动脉内膜切除术（CEA）中转流管应用的优缺点,以及对侧颈动脉闭塞及前、后交通动脉开放对其的影响。方法回顾性分析2000年1月—2011年9月共308例CEA病例,根据是否应用转流管分为两组,转流组63例,未转流组245例。比较两组术中微栓子数量,术后卒中及死亡率。比较两组中对侧颈动脉狭窄程度以及前、后交通动脉开放的比例,分析其对转流管应用的影响。结果①转流组患者微栓子的中位数为25个,未转流组为10个,两组差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。②术后1个月内缺血事件的发生率,转流组患者卒中1例（1.6%）,无一例死亡;未转流患者卒中6例（2.4%）,死亡4例（1.6%）。两组的卒中及病死率差异均无统计学意义（P〉0.05）。③术前对侧颈动脉狭窄的程度,转流组患者中有8例闭塞,8例重度狭窄,47例轻中度狭窄或无狭窄。未转流组患者中,分别为9、36、200例。两组闭塞率（12.7%比3.7%）比较,差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。术前前交通动脉及后交通动脉均未开放的患者,转流组有35例（55.6%）,未转流组有81例（33.1%）,两组比较差异有统计学意义（P〈0.01）。结论 CEA中使用转流管虽增加微栓子的数量,但并未增加围手术期卒中及死亡率。术前伴有对侧颈动脉闭塞的患者或前、后交通动脉均未开放的患者,使用转流管的比例明显高于其他患者。     

多模态监测下颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗颈内动脉重度狭窄

目的探讨多模态监测下颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗颈内动脉重度狭窄的临床疗效。 方法回顾性分析常德市第一人民医院神经外科自2018年1月至2021年9月实施颈动脉内膜斑块剥脱术治疗的15例颈内动脉重度狭窄患者的基本资料、术后并发症和复查情况。 结果1例患者在预阻断时，多普勒提示血流下降50%，但电生理未提示异常，提高血压，未予以术中转流；3例患者电生理及多普勒同时提示低灌注，予以术中转流后均好转。术后所有患者无明显并发症，术后复查未见再狭窄。 结论多模态监测下颈动脉内膜剥脱术治疗颈内动脉重度狭窄安全有效。     

高血压伴与不伴缺血性脑卒中患者颈动脉内中膜厚度的研究

目的 :用彩色多普勒超声观察高血压伴与不伴缺血性脑卒中患者颈动脉内中膜厚度 ,探讨颈动脉粥样硬化与缺血性脑卒中的关系。方法 :用HDI 30 0 0彩色多普勒超声观察了 36例无缺血性脑卒中的高血压病患者和 36例伴有缺血性脑卒中的高血压病患者双侧颈动脉内中膜厚度 ,并与 2 8名健康对照进行了比较。结果 :1 3组间空腹血糖、血脂和体重指数及平均年龄无显著性差异 (P >0 0 5 ) ;2 单纯高血压病患者和高血压病伴缺血性脑卒中患者颈动脉内中膜厚度明显高于健康对照者 (P <0 0 1) ,且高血压伴缺血性脑卒中患者颈动脉内中膜厚度明显高于无缺血性脑卒中的高血压患者 (P <0 0 1)。结论 :高血压病患者存在有颈动脉粥样硬化 ,且伴有缺血性脑卒中患者颈动脉粥样硬化程度明显加重 ,提示颈动脉粥样硬化程度可作为预测缺血性脑卒中发生的参考指标。     

MANAGEMENT OF PATIENTS WITH SYMPTOMATIC CAROTID ARTERY OCCLUSION

The annual risk of stroke in patients with symptomatic carotid artery occlusion (CAO) and impaired cerebral blood flow (CBF) is approximately 10%. Increased oxygen extraction fraction measured by positron emission tomography (PET) and low cerebrovascular reactivity assessed by transcranial Doppler is associated with an increased risk of recurrent ischemic stroke in these patients. Recently, other risk factors have been identified: (1) symptoms of purported hemodynamic origin; (2) ongoing symptoms in the presence of documented symptomatic CAO; (3) leptomeningeal collaterals visible on angiography; and (4) low NAA/choline ratio on magnetic resonance (MR) spectroscopy.

Evidence is growing that a second extracranial–intracranial (EC–IC) bypass trial might be worthwhile in patients with symptomatic CAO. Probably, only patients with ongoing symptoms and compromised CBF should be included in such a trial. Current evidence based therapeutic options for patients with symptomatic CAO include antithrombotic medication and control of vascular risk factors. For stenosis of the contralateral internal or ipsilateral external carotid artery endarterectomy may be considered.

Ongoing symptoms may cease after tapering of antihypertensive medication.     

颈动脉内膜剥脱术与支架成形术对颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄治疗的初步研究

Objective To compare carotid endarterectomy to carotid artery stenting for the treatment of severe symptomatic or asymptomatic atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis. Methods We conducted a multicenter randomized controlled trial for comparing carotid-artery stenting to endarterectomy in 166 patients with severe symptomatic or asymptomatic atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis. The primary end point of the study was the cumulative incidence of death, stroke, or myocardial infarction within 30 days after the surgical intervention, or death or ipsilateral stroke between 31 days and 6 months. The secondary end point was the related complications of either intervention, or severe restenosis at 6 months after operation. Results The primary end point occurred in 8 patients randomly assigned to undergo carotid artery stenting （cumulative incidence, 9.8 percent） and in 10 patients randomly assigned to undergo endarterectomy （cumulative incidence, 11.9 percent） . The secondary end point occurred in 18 patients randomly assigned to undergo carotid artery stenting （cumulative incidence, 22. 0 percent） and in 16 patients randomly assigned to undergo endarterectomy （cumulative incidence, 19. 1 percent） . Conclusion Among patients with severe carotid-artery stenosis and coexisting conditions, the therapeutic result of carotid stenting is not inferior to that of carotid endarterectomy.     

Safety of carotid artery stenting for symptomatic carotid artery disease: a meta-analysis.

AIMS: Clinical trials comparing carotid artery stenting (CAS) with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for patients with symptomatic carotid artery disease have produced conflicting results. We performed a meta-analysis to systematically evaluate currently available data by comparing CAS with CEA in patients with symptomatic carotid artery disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, ISI Web of Knowledge, Current Contents, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts databases, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and scientific meeting abstracts up to 31 October 2006 and then calculated summary risk ratios (RRs) for mortality, stroke, disabling stroke, and death using random- and fixed-effect models. Data from five trials with 2122 patients were pooled. There was no difference in risk of 30-day mortality (summary RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.22-1.47, P = 0.25), stroke (summary RR 1.64, 95% CI 0.67-4.00, P = 0.34), disabling stroke (summary RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.50-5.62, P = 0.50), death and stroke (summary RR 1.54, 95% CI 0.81-2.92, P = 0.19), or death and disabling stroke (summary RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.57-2.51, P = 0.64) among patients randomized to CAS, compared with CEA. CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences could be identified between CAS and CEA in the treatment of patients with symptomatic carotid artery disease. Larger randomized controlled trials are warranted to compare the two strategies.     

Carotid endarterectomy during the acute period of ischemic stroke

Objective/backgroundHigh risk of recurrent ischemic stroke within the first 14 days after index event in patients with atherosclerotic stenosis of the carotid arteries gave the impetus for the revision of the term of performing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in symptomatic patients. Nowadays the advisability of performing urgent CEA within 72 h after stroke onset in neurologically unstable patients is discussed frequently. The paper presents the evaluation of carotid endarterectomy during the acute period of ischemic stroke.MethodsThe results of CEA in 462 patients with symptomatic ICA stenosis performed in two independent Vascular Centers were analyzed. Indication for CEA was stenosis of ICA 50%. In Group I 28.5% of patients underwent CEA within 14 days after stroke onset, and in 71.5% of patients was performed 6 weeks after stroke onset. In Group II 39.5% of patients with unstable neurological symptoms underwent within 3–6 h after stroke onset, and in 60.5% of patients with unstable atherosclerotic plaque, CEA was performed within 24–48 h after stroke onset.ResultsIn Group I (239 people) 7 (2.9%) patients developed stroke. Three (1.3%) patients died. In Group II (223 people) 5 (2.2%) patients developed stroke. One (0.4%) patient died. When comparing complications in the early postoperative period no statistical significance was found.ConclusionsUrgent CEA is indicated in patients with unstable neurological symptoms as well as for those with unstable atherosclerotic plaques. Considering a high risk of stroke recurrence within the first 14 days urgent CEA is effective in the prevention of recurrent stroke. Only 2.2% patients developed postoperatively stroke.