The changing landscape of cerebral revascularization surgery: A United Kingdom experience.

Mathew J Gallagher, Joseph Frantzias, Ahilan Kailaya-Vasan, Thomas C Booth, Christos M Tolias
{"title":"The changing landscape of cerebral revascularization surgery: A United Kingdom experience.","authors":"Mathew J Gallagher, Joseph Frantzias, Ahilan Kailaya-Vasan, Thomas C Booth, Christos M Tolias","doi":"10.3389/fradi.2022.981501","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective We describe the chronological trends in cerebral revascularization surgery through a single-surgeon experience; and we review whether in the context of giant and fusiform cerebral aneurysms, flow-diverting stents have impacted on the use of cerebral revascularization surgery. Methods We review our single institution prospectively collected database of cerebral revascularization procedures between 2006 and 2018. Comparing this to our database of flow-diverting endovascular stent procedures, we compare the treatment of fusiform and giant aneurysms. We describe patient demographics, procedural incidence, complications, and outcomes. Results Between 2006 and 2018, 50 cerebral revascularization procedures were performed. The incidence of cerebral revascularization surgery is declining. In the context of giant/fusiform aneurysm treatment, the decline in cerebral revascularization is accompanied by a rise in the use of flow-diverting endovascular stents. Thirty cerebral revascularizations were performed for moyamoya disease and 11 for giant/fusiform aneurysm. Four (14%) direct bypass grafts occluded without neurological sequela. Other morbidity included hydrocephalus (2%), transient ischemic attacks (2%), and ischemic stroke (2%). There was one procedure-related mortality (2%). Flow-diverting stents were inserted for seven fusiform and seven giant aneurysms. Comparing the treatment of giant/fusiform aneurysms, there was no significant difference in morbidity and mortality between cerebral revascularization and flow-diverting endovascular stents. Conclusion We conclude that with the decline in the incidence of cerebral revascularization surgery, there is a need for centralization of services to allow high standards and outcomes to be maintained.","PeriodicalId":73101,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in radiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10365020/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in radiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fradi.2022.981501","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective We describe the chronological trends in cerebral revascularization surgery through a single-surgeon experience; and we review whether in the context of giant and fusiform cerebral aneurysms, flow-diverting stents have impacted on the use of cerebral revascularization surgery. Methods We review our single institution prospectively collected database of cerebral revascularization procedures between 2006 and 2018. Comparing this to our database of flow-diverting endovascular stent procedures, we compare the treatment of fusiform and giant aneurysms. We describe patient demographics, procedural incidence, complications, and outcomes. Results Between 2006 and 2018, 50 cerebral revascularization procedures were performed. The incidence of cerebral revascularization surgery is declining. In the context of giant/fusiform aneurysm treatment, the decline in cerebral revascularization is accompanied by a rise in the use of flow-diverting endovascular stents. Thirty cerebral revascularizations were performed for moyamoya disease and 11 for giant/fusiform aneurysm. Four (14%) direct bypass grafts occluded without neurological sequela. Other morbidity included hydrocephalus (2%), transient ischemic attacks (2%), and ischemic stroke (2%). There was one procedure-related mortality (2%). Flow-diverting stents were inserted for seven fusiform and seven giant aneurysms. Comparing the treatment of giant/fusiform aneurysms, there was no significant difference in morbidity and mortality between cerebral revascularization and flow-diverting endovascular stents. Conclusion We conclude that with the decline in the incidence of cerebral revascularization surgery, there is a need for centralization of services to allow high standards and outcomes to be maintained.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
脑血运重建术的变化:英国经验。
目的:我们通过单个外科医生的经验描述脑血运重建术的时间趋势;我们回顾了在巨大和梭状脑动脉瘤的背景下,血流转移支架是否影响了脑血运重建术的使用。方法:我们回顾了2006年至2018年间单一机构前瞻性收集的脑血运重建术数据库。将此与我们的血流转移血管内支架手术数据库进行比较,我们比较了梭状动脉瘤和巨动脉瘤的治疗。我们描述了患者的人口统计学特征、手术发生率、并发症和结果。结果:2006年至2018年间,进行了50例脑血运重建术。脑血运重建术的发生率正在下降。在巨大/梭状动脉瘤治疗的背景下,脑血运重建术的下降伴随着血流转移血管内支架的使用的增加。烟雾病30例,巨大/梭状动脉瘤11例。4例(14%)直接旁路移植物闭塞,无神经系统后遗症。其他发病率包括脑积水(2%)、短暂性脑缺血发作(2%)和缺血性脑卒中(2%)。手术相关死亡1例(2%)。7个梭状动脉瘤和7个巨动脉瘤置入分流支架。对比巨/梭状动脉瘤的治疗,脑血运重建术和分流血管内支架的发病率和死亡率无显著差异。结论:随着脑血运重建术发生率的下降,有必要将服务集中起来,以保持高标准和高疗效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
CT perfusion imaging in aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. State of the art. Seven-tesla magnetic resonance imaging of the nervus terminalis, olfactory tracts, and olfactory bulbs in COVID-19 patients with anosmia and hypogeusia. Intranodal lymphangiography combined with foam sclerotherapy embolization of thoracic duct in the treatment of postoperative chylous leakage for thyroid carcinoma: a case report and review. Photon-counting CT for forensic death investigations-a glance into the future of virtual autopsy. Artificial intelligence and machine learning applications for the imaging of bone and soft tissue tumors.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1