有症状的慢性颈内动脉闭塞治疗策略比较

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE Journal of Vascular Surgery Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-18 DOI:10.1016/j.jvs.2024.05.062
Fei Mei, Wuming Zhang, Peng Jiang, Chengpeng Tan, Yongpan Cui, Jiawei Fan, Wayne W Zhang
{"title":"有症状的慢性颈内动脉闭塞治疗策略比较","authors":"Fei Mei, Wuming Zhang, Peng Jiang, Chengpeng Tan, Yongpan Cui, Jiawei Fan, Wayne W Zhang","doi":"10.1016/j.jvs.2024.05.062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The best management of symptomatic chronic internal carotid artery occlusion (CICAO) has been controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis were to compare the outcomes of different treatment strategies for symptomatic CICAO.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two independent researchers conducted a search of articles on the treatment of CICAO published between January 2000 and October 2023 in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and The Cochrane Library. Twenty-two articles were eligible for meta-analysis using a random effects model to combine and analyze the data for the pooled rates of stroke and death, and the rates of procedural success and significant restenosis/occlusion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1193 patients from 22 publications were included in this study. Six of them had bilateral internal carotid artery occlusion. The 30-day stroke and death rates were 1.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%-4.4%) in the best medical treatment (BMT) group, 4.1% (95% CI, 0.7%-9.3%; I<sup>2</sup> = 71.4%) in the extracranial-intracranial (EC-IC) bypass group, 4.4% (95% CI, 2.4%-6.8%; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) in the carotid artery stenting (CAS) group, and 1.2% (95% CI, 0%-3.4%; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) in the combined carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and stenting (CEA + CAS) group. During follow-up of 16.5 (±16.3) months, the stroke and death rates were 19.5%, 1.2%, 6.6%, and 2.4% in the BMT, EC-IC, CAS, and CEA + CAS groups respectively. The surgical success rate was 99.7% (95% CI, 98.5%-100%; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) in the EC-IC group, 70.1% (95% CI, 62.3%-77.5%; I<sup>2</sup> = 64%) in the CAS group, and 86.4% (95% CI, 78.8%-92.7%; I<sup>2</sup> = 60%) in the CEA + CAS group. The rate of post-procedural significant restenosis or occlusion was 3.6% in the EC-IC group, 18.7% in the CAS group, and 5.7% in the CEA + CSA group. The surgical success rate was negatively associated by the length of internal carotid artery (ICA) occlusion. Surgical success rate was significantly higher in the patients with occlusive lesion within C1 to C4 segments, compared with those with occlusion distal to C4 segment (odds ratio, 11.3; 95% CI, 5.0-25.53; P < .001). A proximal stump of ICA is a favorable sign for CAS. The success rate of CAS was significantly higher in the patients with an ICA stump than that in the patients without (odds ratio, 11.36; 95% CI, 4.84-26.64; P < .01). However, the success rate of CEA + CAS was not affected by the proximal ICA stump.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For the management of symptomatic CICAO, BMT alone is associated with the highest risk of mid- and long-term stroke and death. EC-IC bypass surgery and CEA + CAS should be considered as the choice of treatment based on operator's expertise and patient's anatomy. CAS may be employed as an alternative option in high surgical risk patients, especially when proximal ICA stump exists.</p>","PeriodicalId":17475,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Vascular Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"494-504.e2"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of the treatment strategies for symptomatic chronic internal carotid artery occlusion.\",\"authors\":\"Fei Mei, Wuming Zhang, Peng Jiang, Chengpeng Tan, Yongpan Cui, Jiawei Fan, Wayne W Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jvs.2024.05.062\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The best management of symptomatic chronic internal carotid artery occlusion (CICAO) has been controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis were to compare the outcomes of different treatment strategies for symptomatic CICAO.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two independent researchers conducted a search of articles on the treatment of CICAO published between January 2000 and October 2023 in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and The Cochrane Library. Twenty-two articles were eligible for meta-analysis using a random effects model to combine and analyze the data for the pooled rates of stroke and death, and the rates of procedural success and significant restenosis/occlusion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1193 patients from 22 publications were included in this study. Six of them had bilateral internal carotid artery occlusion. The 30-day stroke and death rates were 1.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%-4.4%) in the best medical treatment (BMT) group, 4.1% (95% CI, 0.7%-9.3%; I<sup>2</sup> = 71.4%) in the extracranial-intracranial (EC-IC) bypass group, 4.4% (95% CI, 2.4%-6.8%; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) in the carotid artery stenting (CAS) group, and 1.2% (95% CI, 0%-3.4%; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) in the combined carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and stenting (CEA + CAS) group. During follow-up of 16.5 (±16.3) months, the stroke and death rates were 19.5%, 1.2%, 6.6%, and 2.4% in the BMT, EC-IC, CAS, and CEA + CAS groups respectively. The surgical success rate was 99.7% (95% CI, 98.5%-100%; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%) in the EC-IC group, 70.1% (95% CI, 62.3%-77.5%; I<sup>2</sup> = 64%) in the CAS group, and 86.4% (95% CI, 78.8%-92.7%; I<sup>2</sup> = 60%) in the CEA + CAS group. The rate of post-procedural significant restenosis or occlusion was 3.6% in the EC-IC group, 18.7% in the CAS group, and 5.7% in the CEA + CSA group. The surgical success rate was negatively associated by the length of internal carotid artery (ICA) occlusion. Surgical success rate was significantly higher in the patients with occlusive lesion within C1 to C4 segments, compared with those with occlusion distal to C4 segment (odds ratio, 11.3; 95% CI, 5.0-25.53; P < .001). A proximal stump of ICA is a favorable sign for CAS. The success rate of CAS was significantly higher in the patients with an ICA stump than that in the patients without (odds ratio, 11.36; 95% CI, 4.84-26.64; P < .01). However, the success rate of CEA + CAS was not affected by the proximal ICA stump.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For the management of symptomatic CICAO, BMT alone is associated with the highest risk of mid- and long-term stroke and death. EC-IC bypass surgery and CEA + CAS should be considered as the choice of treatment based on operator's expertise and patient's anatomy. CAS may be employed as an alternative option in high surgical risk patients, especially when proximal ICA stump exists.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":17475,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Vascular Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"494-504.e2\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Vascular Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2024.05.062\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/7/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Vascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2024.05.062","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:症状性慢性颈内动脉闭塞症(CICAO)的最佳治疗方法一直存在争议。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在比较无症状 CICAO 不同治疗策略的疗效:两名独立研究人员检索了 2000 年 1 月至 2023 年 10 月期间在 PubMed、Web of Science、Embase 和 Cochrane 图书馆发表的有关 CICAO 治疗的文章。22篇文章符合荟萃分析的条件,采用随机效应模型对中风和死亡的汇总率以及手术成功率和明显的再狭窄/闭塞率进行了合并和数据分析:本研究共纳入了22篇文献中的1193名患者。结果:本研究共纳入了 22 篇文献中的 1193 例患者,其中 6 例为双侧颈内动脉闭塞。最佳内科治疗(BMT)组的 30 天卒中率和死亡率为 1.1%(95%CI:0%-4.4%),颅外-颅内(EC-IC)搭桥组为 4.1%(95%CI:0.7%-9.3%,I2=71.4%),颅内-颅外(EC-IC)搭桥组为 4.4%(95%CI:2.4% - 6.8%,I2=0%),颈动脉支架植入术(CAS)组为1.2%(95%CI:0% - 3.4%,I2=0%),颈动脉内膜剥脱术和支架植入术联合术(CEA+CAS)组为1.2%(95%CI:0% - 3.4%,I2=0%)。在16.5(±16.3)个月的随访期间,BMT组、EC-IC组、CAS组和CEA+CAS组的卒中率和死亡率分别为19.5%、1.2%、6.6%和2.4%。EC-IC组的手术成功率为99.7%(95%CI:98.5%-100%,I2=0%),CAS组为70.1%(95%CI:62.3%-77.5%,I2=64%),CEA+CAS组为86.4%(95%CI:78.8%-92.7%,I2=60%)。EC-IC组的术后明显再狭窄或闭塞率为3.6%,CAS组为18.7%,CEA+CSA组为5.7%。手术成功率与颈内动脉(ICA)闭塞长度呈负相关。与 C4 段远端闭塞的患者相比,C1 至 C4 段闭塞患者的手术成功率明显更高(OR:11.3,95%CI:5.0-25.53,PConclusions:对于有症状的 CICAO 的治疗,单纯 BMT 与中长期卒中和死亡的最高风险相关。应根据操作者的专业知识和患者的解剖结构选择 EC-IC 搭桥手术和 CEA+CAS 作为治疗方案。对于手术风险较高的患者,尤其是存在近端 ICA 残端时,可选择 CAS。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Comparison of the treatment strategies for symptomatic chronic internal carotid artery occlusion.

Objective: The best management of symptomatic chronic internal carotid artery occlusion (CICAO) has been controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis were to compare the outcomes of different treatment strategies for symptomatic CICAO.

Methods: Two independent researchers conducted a search of articles on the treatment of CICAO published between January 2000 and October 2023 in PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and The Cochrane Library. Twenty-two articles were eligible for meta-analysis using a random effects model to combine and analyze the data for the pooled rates of stroke and death, and the rates of procedural success and significant restenosis/occlusion.

Results: A total of 1193 patients from 22 publications were included in this study. Six of them had bilateral internal carotid artery occlusion. The 30-day stroke and death rates were 1.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0%-4.4%) in the best medical treatment (BMT) group, 4.1% (95% CI, 0.7%-9.3%; I2 = 71.4%) in the extracranial-intracranial (EC-IC) bypass group, 4.4% (95% CI, 2.4%-6.8%; I2 = 0%) in the carotid artery stenting (CAS) group, and 1.2% (95% CI, 0%-3.4%; I2 = 0%) in the combined carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and stenting (CEA + CAS) group. During follow-up of 16.5 (±16.3) months, the stroke and death rates were 19.5%, 1.2%, 6.6%, and 2.4% in the BMT, EC-IC, CAS, and CEA + CAS groups respectively. The surgical success rate was 99.7% (95% CI, 98.5%-100%; I2 = 0%) in the EC-IC group, 70.1% (95% CI, 62.3%-77.5%; I2 = 64%) in the CAS group, and 86.4% (95% CI, 78.8%-92.7%; I2 = 60%) in the CEA + CAS group. The rate of post-procedural significant restenosis or occlusion was 3.6% in the EC-IC group, 18.7% in the CAS group, and 5.7% in the CEA + CSA group. The surgical success rate was negatively associated by the length of internal carotid artery (ICA) occlusion. Surgical success rate was significantly higher in the patients with occlusive lesion within C1 to C4 segments, compared with those with occlusion distal to C4 segment (odds ratio, 11.3; 95% CI, 5.0-25.53; P < .001). A proximal stump of ICA is a favorable sign for CAS. The success rate of CAS was significantly higher in the patients with an ICA stump than that in the patients without (odds ratio, 11.36; 95% CI, 4.84-26.64; P < .01). However, the success rate of CEA + CAS was not affected by the proximal ICA stump.

Conclusions: For the management of symptomatic CICAO, BMT alone is associated with the highest risk of mid- and long-term stroke and death. EC-IC bypass surgery and CEA + CAS should be considered as the choice of treatment based on operator's expertise and patient's anatomy. CAS may be employed as an alternative option in high surgical risk patients, especially when proximal ICA stump exists.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
18.60%
发文量
1469
审稿时长
54 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Vascular Surgery ® aims to be the premier international journal of medical, endovascular and surgical care of vascular diseases. It is dedicated to the science and art of vascular surgery and aims to improve the management of patients with vascular diseases by publishing relevant papers that report important medical advances, test new hypotheses, and address current controversies. To acheive this goal, the Journal will publish original clinical and laboratory studies, and reports and papers that comment on the social, economic, ethical, legal, and political factors, which relate to these aims. As the official publication of The Society for Vascular Surgery, the Journal will publish, after peer review, selected papers presented at the annual meeting of this organization and affiliated vascular societies, as well as original articles from members and non-members.
期刊最新文献
The great gender dilemma in complex aortic repair: Why do women fare worse with FEVAR? Controversies in the management strategy for symptomatic chronic internal carotid artery occlusion. Endovascular strategies for the short distance between the lowest renal artery and aortic bifurcation. How do we afford the BEST care for females with chronic limb-threatening ischemia? How should failed infrarenal endovascular aortic repair with a short renal artery to bifurcation distance be managed?
×
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