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.     

颈动脉不同程度狭窄患者支架成形术后并发症的分析

目的比较颈动脉重度狭窄和颈动脉中度狭窄的患者接受支架成形术后并发症的情况。方法回顾性分析46例症状性颈动脉狭窄患者的临床资料,其中颈动脉重度狭窄（狭窄率≥90％）患者16例,颈动脉中度狭窄（50％≤狭窄率〈90％）患者30例。均在局部麻醉下行支架成形术,术中均采用保护装置和自膨式支架。观察支架成形术围手术期和术后3个月内并发症的情况。结果颈动脉中度狭窄患者围手术期出现短暂性心率减慢和血压下降13例,持续低血压5例,颈动脉痉挛6例,共24例次;颈动脉重度狭窄患者出现短暂性心率减慢和血压下降6例,持续低血压7例,颈动脉痉挛8例,高灌注综合钲1例,脑出血1例,共23例次。其中颈动脉重度狭窄患者持续低血压和颈动脉痉挛的发生率高于颈动脉中度狭窄患者,差异有统计学意义,P〈0．05。颈动脉中度狭窄患者术后3个月出现同侧缺血性卒中1例,冠状动脉缺衄事件5例,共6例次;颈动脉重度狭窄患者出现冠状动脉缺血事件3例次,并发症的发生率两组差异无统计学意义,P〉0．05。结论颈动脉重度狭窄患者在支架成形术围手术期的持续低血压和颈动脉痉挛发生率高于颈动脉中度狭窄患者,术后3个月并发症差异无统计学意义。     

颈动脉狭窄支架成形术疗效及并发症分析

目的探讨血管内支架成形术治疗颈动脉狭窄的临床疗效、安全性及并发症。方法选择经脑血管造影证实的颈动脉狭窄患者100例行血管内支架成形术,术中应用抗栓塞远端保护装置,球囊预扩张狭窄部位,释放颈动脉自膨支架。结果所有支架释放定位准确,残余狭窄〈30%,围手术期出现1例脑出血,1例急性血管形成。临床随访1例再发短暂性脑缺血发作,超声示支架远端再狭窄。结论应用脑保护装置进行血管内支架成形术是治疗颈动脉狭窄安全可行的方法 。     

颈动脉支架成形术治疗老年重度颈内动脉狭窄患者的疗效观察

目的评价脑保护装置下老年重度颈动脉狭窄患者颈动脉支架成形术的有效性及安全性。方法选择年龄≥70岁的重度症状性颈动脉狭窄患者43例,均行颈动脉支架成形术,术中均应用脑保护装置,观察术后狭窄改善情况,围术期并发症的发生情况以及回收的脑保护装置内脱落栓子情况,对患者随访1年。结果在43例患者中,脑保护装置及颈动脉支架均放置到位,术后残余狭窄率均<30%,患者颈动脉平均狭窄程度从(82.8±6.5)%降低至(12.4±5.9)%,支架置入手术前后比较,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。回收的脑保护装置中,发现27个有脱落的组织碎片,患者术后缺血相关症状均有明显改善,围术期所有患者均未出现症状性脑卒中,无手术相关死亡事件发生,1年随访无缺血性脑血管事件发生,颈动脉超声复查未见支架内发生再狭窄。结论脑保护装置下,对老年重度颈内动脉狭窄患者行颈动脉支架成形术安全、有效。     

脑保护装置下高龄重度颈动脉狭窄患者颈动脉支架成形术的有效性和安全性评价

目的评价脑保护装置下高龄重度颈动脉狭窄患者颈动脉支架成形术(CAS)的有效性及安全性。方法选择2009年1月—2012年1月在青岛大学医学院附属医院行CAS的高龄重度颈动脉狭窄患者37例,术中均应用脑保护装置,观察患者狭窄改善情况、围术期并发症发生情况、回收脑保护装置内脱落栓子情况,随访1年观察患者缺血性脑血管事件发生情况。结果 36例患者脑保护伞均一次性顺利通过狭窄段放置到位成功释放;术后残余狭窄率均30%,平均狭窄程度从(83.0±6.7)%降至(13.0±6.1)%;回收的脑保护装置中有26个发现脱落的组织碎片;围术期均未出现脑出血、症状性脑梗死、支架内血栓形成等严重并发症;37例患者随访1年,无短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)、卒中、死亡发生。结论脑保护装置下对高龄重度颈动脉狭窄患者行CAS成功率和安全性较高。     

高危复杂颈动脉狭窄患者的支架置入治疗

目的 探讨高危复杂颈动脉狭窄患者的介入治疗方法.方法 25例高危复杂颈动脉狭窄患者采用支架置入治疗,术中分别采用了安置临时起搏器、应用ev3脑保护伞、狭窄血管预扩张与后扩张结合、导引导管同轴导入技术、分期支架成形技术以及多支架同时置入技术等个体化治疗方案.结果 25例患者技术成功率100%,21例(84%)症状消失或减轻,1例出现术中栓子脱落,1例出现短暂性脑缺血发作,无死亡病例.结论 高危复杂颈动脉狭窄患者的支架置入治疗安全,术前评价风险、术中采用个体化治疗方案和术后规范化管理是保证疗效的前提.     

支架成形术治疗不同Mori分型椎-基底动脉重度狭窄的研究

目的评价对不同Mori分型的椎-基底动脉重度狭窄患者行支架成形术的疗效及早期预后。方法回顾性分析18例症状性椎-基底动脉重度狭窄患者的资料,按照Mori分型采用球囊扩张支架和自膨式支架行支架成形术,比较不同Mori分型的椎-基底动脉重度狭窄患者在支架选择、同手术期并发症及早期预后的情况。结果①按Mori分型,18例患者中MoriA型8例,MoriB犁4例,MoriC型6例。②对MoilA型和MoriB型患者均选用球囊扩张支架,MoriC型1例患者选用球囊扩张支架,5例选用Wingspan自膨式支架。支架成形术的技术成功率均为100％。③术后第2天和术后第30天复查TCD,显示支架内血流通畅,均未出现再狭窄。④除1例MoriC型患者于术后24h脑桥有少量出InL之外,其余患者围手术期均未出现手术相关并发症,也未出现神经系统新发症状。⑤17例出现眩晕症状的患者中,14例术后症状消失,其中MoriA型6例,MoriB型3例,MoriC型5例。结论在支架成形术中,对MoriA型、MoriB型椎-基底动脉重度狭窄患者可选用球囊扩张支架,MoriC型患者可选用Wingspan支架。支架成形术治疗椎-基底动脉重度狭窄是安全有效的,早期预后良好,长期疗效仍需进一步观察。     

血管内支架成形术治疗短暂性脑缺血发作27例临床分析

目的探讨血管内支架成形术（PTAS）治疗血管狭窄导致顽固性短暂性脑缺血发作（TIA）的疗效与安全性。方法对27例血管狭窄导致的顽固性T／A患者行PTAS术,其中14例使用脑保护装置,16例采取预扩张,3例采取后扩张;20例颈内动脉颅外段狭窄和1例基底动脉狭窄采用自膨式支架,椎动脉起始段狭窄5例使用球囊扩张支架,1例头臂干狭窄使用球囊扩张支架。结果27例患者狭窄血管都得到明显改善,血管狭窄程度从术前平均83％下降到术后15％以下,术后短期随访（3—6个月）没有TIA或中风发作。结论PTAS是治疗血管狭窄导致顽固性T／A相对更安全、有效的选择。     

远端保护装置用于重度颈动脉狭窄的介入治疗

目的分析远端保护装置应用于颈动脉狭窄支架成形术的安全性和有效性。方法对26例症状性颈动脉狭窄患者行血管内支架成形术时应用远端保护装置，首先将远端保护装置通过狭窄部位并在狭窄远端展开，然后行保护性颈动脉支架成形术，观察围手术期缺血性脑卒中的发生情况，并观察保护装置滤网内捕获的斑块组织碎片。结果26例患者行远端滤网保护下的颈动脉支架成形术均获成功，回收的保护装置中有14个（54％）发现滤网中有斑块碎片组织和血栓颗粒，无死亡及急性栓塞事件发生，但有3例患者在手术后1～6d经磁共振检查发现了新的无症状性脑梗死病灶，26例患者在出院后临床随访期内未发生严重脑缺血事件。结论颈动脉支架成形术是重度症状性颈动脉狭窄的微创治疗方法，术中常规使用远端保护装置可提高颈动脉支架成形术的安全性和有效性。     

小球囊预扩张后远端滤器保护下颈动脉支架植入术治疗老年颈动脉次全闭塞32例

目的探讨远端保护颈动脉支架成形术治疗老年颈动脉次全闭塞的可行性及安全性。方法回顾性分析采用小球囊预扩张后远端滤器保护下、自膨式颈动脉支架植入治疗老年症状性颈动脉次全闭塞32例资料。结果 31例小球囊预扩张后成功植入支架,1例失败。无死亡及心肌梗死发生。术后血压、心率改变10例,多在48 h内恢复正常。全部病例随访6个月至6年,随访期间仅1例半年内再次出现短暂性脑缺血发作(TIA)发作,复查数字减影血管造影(DSA)为支架内再狭窄,予支架内球囊扩张治疗后2年无症状复发。结论小球囊预扩张后远端滤器保护下颈动脉支架成形术治疗老年颈动脉次全闭塞是一种安全、有效的方法,广泛的临床运用尚需更大规模的临床研究。     

Carotid artery stenting with distal filter protection: single-center experience in high-surgical-risk patients

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is an efficient alternative procedure for the treatment of high-surgical-risk patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis. The use of cerebral protection systems might decrease procedural risk of stroke and death. We report our initial experience with protected carotid stenting in high-risk patients with severe carotid artery disease. From January 2006 until July 2008 we routinely performed CAS using a distal filter protection device in 65 consecutive high-surgical-risk patients with 72 high-grade carotid stenoses. Technical success rate was 97.2%. Neurologic periprocedural complications included two transient ischemic attacks and one major stroke. Three filter-related complications were managed without negative results to the patients. The overall in-hospital and 30-days MACE rate was 1.5%, 3.6% in symptomatic patients and 0% in asymptomatic patients. In our series of high-risk patients, CAS with the use of a distal filter protection system was safe and effective with a low incidence of periprocedural complications.     

颈动脉支架置入术对无症状重度颈动脉狭窄患者认知功能的影响

目的探讨颈动脉支架置入术（carotid artery stenosis,CAS）对无症状重度颈动脉狭窄患者认知功能的影响。方法纳入行CAS的无症状重度颈动脉狭窄（狭窄程度≥70％）患者,分别于CAS术前、术后1个月和3个月采用简易智能状态检测量表（Mini-Mental Status Examination,MMSE）、数字广度测验（Digital Span,DS）、中文听觉词汇学习测验（Chinese Auditory Learning Test,CALT）、线段方向判定测验（Judgment of Line Orientation Test,JLOT）和语言流畅性测验（Verbal Fluency Test,vFT）进行认知功能评价,包括注意、记忆、视空间以及额叶流畅性功能。结果共纳入26例行CAS的无症状重度颈动脉狭窄患者患者,男性18例,女性8例,年龄52～79岁,平均（64．19±6．76）岁,受教育年限（9．84±3．29）年;左侧颈动脉狭窄18例,右侧颈动脉狭窄8例;均成功行CAS,未发生并发症。与CAS术前比较,术后1个月和3个月时各项认知功能均显著性改善（P均〈0．01）,但术后1个月与3个月时无显著性差异（P均〉0．05）。结论CAS能改变无症状重度颈动脉狭窄患者的认知功能,术后早期较为明显。     

Bilateral carotid angioplasty and stenting.

Bilateral carotid stenosis is generally treated by staged stenting procedure and rarely simultaneously due to concerns about hemodynamic impairment from stimulation of the carotid sinus baroreflex (severe bradycardia, hypotension) and the risk of cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome. Most of the accounts of bilateral carotid stenting are of small series. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of simultaneous bilateral carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) in comparison with staged procedure. We retrospectively analyzed the procedural outcome and complications of bilateral CAS done between February 1995 and June 2004 in a consecutive series of 57 high-risk patients. Mean age was 64 +/- 9 years (male, 43; female 14). One hundred fifteen arteries were treated (one patient had bilateral internal carotid artery stenosis associated to an ostial common carotid artery stenosis). Thirty-nine patients were symptomatic (70%). Thirty-six patients had severe coronary artery disease. Seventeen patients underwent a simultaneous bilateral CAS (group 1), 40 in a staged manner (group 2). Among these 40 patients 10 were treated with a time interval of 24 hr, while the 30 other ones were treated with a time interval of 2 days to 2 months. A neuroprotection device was used in the last 42 patients. There was technical success in all patients and transient bradycardia and/or hypotension in 25 patients (44%). There was no prolonged bradycardia or hypotension. At 30 days, we observed in group 1 (simultaneous bilateral CAS) no transient ischemic attack (TIA), no minor stroke, one (5.8%) major stroke (hyperperfusion syndrome with brain hemorrhage leading to death in a patient under IIb/IIIa inhibitors), one myocardial infarction leading to death, and two (11.7%) death/stroke/myocardial infarction; in group 2 (staged procedure), two (5%) TIAs, no minor stroke, no major stroke, and one (2.5%) hyperperfusion syndrome with rapid recovery. Among the 10 patients treated with a time interval of 24 hr, we observed one TIA. Among carefully selected patients, bilateral CAS is feasible simultaneously or the day after, with a safety and complication rate comparable to that of large published series of CAS or endarterectomies in high-risk patients. Nevertheless, careful monitoring of the patient, blood pressure, and heart rate is mandatory to avoid complications related to hyperperfusion syndrome. Routine use of neuroprotection device and meticulous technique should improve the outcomes of bilateral CAS.     

糖尿病对颈内动脉狭窄介入治疗患者脑血管储备功能的影响

目的 探讨糖尿病对颈内动脉狭窄患者颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)前后脑血管储备功能的影响.方法 颈动脉狭窄≥70％的无症状性或狭窄≥50％的症状性颈动脉狭窄患者55例,分为糖尿病组(16例)和无糖尿病组(39例). 患者吸入5％CO2和95％O2混合气体诱发高碳酸血症,通过经颅多普勒超声检查,计算大脑中动脉(MCA...     

Carotid artery stenting with filter protection in high-risk patients showing severe electroencephalographic alterations during carotid endarterectomy.

PURPOSE: To describe the results and efficacy of stent treatment in patients with carotid stenosis who had aborted carotid endarterectomy procedures due to the appearance of severe electroencephalographic (EEG) alterations. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted of 18 patients (11 men; mean age 72 years, range 62-84) with symptomatic high-grade carotid artery stenoses (> or = 70%) who experienced severe EEG alterations during carotid endarterectomy, causing the procedure to be aborted. Twelve patients had shown no hemodynamic alterations during preoperative transcranial Doppler evaluation after external compression of the common carotid artery; the remaining 6 could not be evaluated. The patients were referred for carotid artery stenting (CAS); 7 had contralateral internal carotid artery stenosis and 5 had contralateral occlusion. Endovascular intervention was carried out using standard techniques under filter protection. Follow-up was scheduled at 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: All patients were successfully treated without immediate complications. The EEG did not display any significant alterations during the endovascular procedure. Mean follow-up was 43 months. Magnetic resonance imaging at 6 months showed no signs of cerebral ischemia. Color Doppler ultrasound imaging documented normal stent patency in all patients. CONCLUSION: Patients with symptomatic severe carotid stenosis (> or = 70%) who are considered at risk due to the appearance of severe EEG alterations during surgical treatment may benefit from CAS with respect to both major and minor complications. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings.     

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。     

单中心颈动脉狭窄患者支架植入术的远期疗效

目的 探讨颈动脉狭窄患者行支架植入术的安全性及近、远期疗效.方法 回顾性分析2005年1月至2010年12月在沈阳军区总医院住院的48例颈动脉狭窄患者资料,在远端脑保护装置下植入颈动脉支架,观察其围术期并发症及临床疗效.结果 48例颈动脉狭窄患者,男41例（85.4％）,年龄（66±6.8）岁,靶病变1处/例,病变长度（22.5±10.3）mm,狭窄程度88.5％±9.9％.手术成功率100％,植入颈动脉自膨式支架1枚/例,使用远端滤网保护装置1个/例,支架直径（7.3±2.4）mm,长度（36.0±5.5） mm.术后即刻残余狭窄程度5.6％±4.5％.术中11例（22.9％）出现心率减慢,于术中给予1 mg阿托品静脉注射,心率恢复至正常范围.2例（4.2％）出现一侧肢体活动障碍,经治疗24 h内好转,术后无严重并发症发生.随访（36.2±15.5）个月,随访率93.8％（45/48）,2例（4.4％）患者死亡,其中1例死于肺癌,1例死于缺血性脑卒中,4例（8.9％）患者仍有头晕发作,3例（6.7％）偶有肢体麻木,无严重脑缺血发作,无脑梗死、脑出血发生.术后6～12个月复查增强计算机断层扫描成像示无颈动脉、椎动脉及肾动脉支架内再狭窄.结论 在远端脑保护装置下行颈动脉支架植入术,是治疗颈动脉狭窄安全、有效的手段,手术成功率高,长期临床随访患者仍能从中获益.