在血管内卒中治疗中使用(非)球囊导引导管,实际使用情况登记和全国性问卷调查。

R.R. M.M. Knapen MD , M. Celen MD , F. Benali MD, PhD , R.J. van Oostenbrugge MD, PhD , W.H. van Zwam MD, PhD , C. van der Leij MD, PhD
{"title":"在血管内卒中治疗中使用(非)球囊导引导管,实际使用情况登记和全国性问卷调查。","authors":"R.R. M.M. Knapen MD ,&nbsp;M. Celen MD ,&nbsp;F. Benali MD, PhD ,&nbsp;R.J. van Oostenbrugge MD, PhD ,&nbsp;W.H. van Zwam MD, PhD ,&nbsp;C. van der Leij MD, PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2024.108033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Despite literature suggesting benefits of a balloon guide catheter (BGC) in stroke thrombectomy, BGCs are not routinely used. This study aimed to get insights in the use of a BGC and the reasons (not) to inflate the balloon.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Data were used of the Maastricht Stroke Quality Registry (MaSQ-Registry), a prospective registry for quality purposes of stroke patients treated between September 2020-February 2023. Additionally, a Dutch nationwide questionnaire was sent among all stroke treating physicians of the Dutch Society of Interventional Radiology (NVIR). Information on the use and reasons for selecting a (non-)BGC and using the BGC was collected.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Out of 511 patients registered in the MaSQ-Registry, 458 were included. In 69% (n=317) of the patients a BGC was used; in 68% (n=214) the balloon was not inflated. In 95% of the posterior circulation occlusions a non-BGC was used.</div><div>In total 47 treating physicians from sixteen stroke centers responded to the questionnaire. 51% (n=24) preferred a non-BGC and 30% (n=14) never used a BGC. 52% and 18% of the BGC-users estimated they inflate the balloon in 80-100% and 0-20% of the times, respectively. The main reasons reported for not inflating the balloon were when the BGC was occlusive (47%) or not placeable (34%) in the carotid artery.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This study shows variation in the use of (non-)BGC use with and without inflated balloon among treating physicians in the Netherlands, highlighting current limited consensus regarding the use of (non-)BGCs among stroke treating physicians.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":54368,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Stroke & Cerebrovascular Diseases","volume":"33 12","pages":"Article 108033"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The use of a (non-) balloon guide catheter in endovascular stroke treatment, a registry of real-life use and nationwide questionnaire\",\"authors\":\"R.R. M.M. Knapen MD ,&nbsp;M. Celen MD ,&nbsp;F. Benali MD, PhD ,&nbsp;R.J. van Oostenbrugge MD, PhD ,&nbsp;W.H. van Zwam MD, PhD ,&nbsp;C. van der Leij MD, PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2024.108033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Despite literature suggesting benefits of a balloon guide catheter (BGC) in stroke thrombectomy, BGCs are not routinely used. This study aimed to get insights in the use of a BGC and the reasons (not) to inflate the balloon.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Data were used of the Maastricht Stroke Quality Registry (MaSQ-Registry), a prospective registry for quality purposes of stroke patients treated between September 2020-February 2023. Additionally, a Dutch nationwide questionnaire was sent among all stroke treating physicians of the Dutch Society of Interventional Radiology (NVIR). Information on the use and reasons for selecting a (non-)BGC and using the BGC was collected.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Out of 511 patients registered in the MaSQ-Registry, 458 were included. In 69% (n=317) of the patients a BGC was used; in 68% (n=214) the balloon was not inflated. In 95% of the posterior circulation occlusions a non-BGC was used.</div><div>In total 47 treating physicians from sixteen stroke centers responded to the questionnaire. 51% (n=24) preferred a non-BGC and 30% (n=14) never used a BGC. 52% and 18% of the BGC-users estimated they inflate the balloon in 80-100% and 0-20% of the times, respectively. The main reasons reported for not inflating the balloon were when the BGC was occlusive (47%) or not placeable (34%) in the carotid artery.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This study shows variation in the use of (non-)BGC use with and without inflated balloon among treating physicians in the Netherlands, highlighting current limited consensus regarding the use of (non-)BGCs among stroke treating physicians.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54368,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Stroke & Cerebrovascular Diseases\",\"volume\":\"33 12\",\"pages\":\"Article 108033\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Stroke & Cerebrovascular Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1052305724004774\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NEUROSCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Stroke & Cerebrovascular Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1052305724004774","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介:尽管有文献表明球囊导引导管(BGC)在中风血栓切除术中的益处,但 BGC 并未被常规使用。本研究旨在深入了解 BGC 的使用情况以及为球囊充气(不充气)的原因:研究使用了马斯特里赫特卒中质量登记处(MaSQ-Registry)的数据,该登记处是一个前瞻性登记处,旨在对 2020 年 9 月至 2023 年 2 月期间接受治疗的卒中患者进行质量登记。此外,还向荷兰介入放射学会(NVIR)的所有中风治疗医生发出了一份全国性问卷。调查收集了有关选择(非)BGC和使用球囊的使用情况和原因的信息:结果:在MaSQ-Registry登记的511名患者中,有458人被纳入其中。69%的患者(n=317)使用了BGC;68%的患者(n=214)未使用球囊充气。95%的后循环闭塞患者使用了非 BGC。共有来自 16 个卒中中心的 47 名主治医生回答了问卷。51%(24 人)倾向于使用非 BGC,30%(14 人)从未使用过 BGC。52%和 18% 的 BGC 使用者估计他们为球囊充气的次数分别为 80%-100% 和 0-20%。据报告,不给球囊充气的主要原因是 BGC 闭塞(47%)或无法放入颈动脉(34%):这项研究表明,荷兰的治疗医生在使用(非)BGC(带或不带充气球囊)时存在差异,突出表明目前卒中治疗医生对使用(非)BGC的共识有限。
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
The use of a (non-) balloon guide catheter in endovascular stroke treatment, a registry of real-life use and nationwide questionnaire

Introduction

Despite literature suggesting benefits of a balloon guide catheter (BGC) in stroke thrombectomy, BGCs are not routinely used. This study aimed to get insights in the use of a BGC and the reasons (not) to inflate the balloon.

Methods

Data were used of the Maastricht Stroke Quality Registry (MaSQ-Registry), a prospective registry for quality purposes of stroke patients treated between September 2020-February 2023. Additionally, a Dutch nationwide questionnaire was sent among all stroke treating physicians of the Dutch Society of Interventional Radiology (NVIR). Information on the use and reasons for selecting a (non-)BGC and using the BGC was collected.

Results

Out of 511 patients registered in the MaSQ-Registry, 458 were included. In 69% (n=317) of the patients a BGC was used; in 68% (n=214) the balloon was not inflated. In 95% of the posterior circulation occlusions a non-BGC was used.
In total 47 treating physicians from sixteen stroke centers responded to the questionnaire. 51% (n=24) preferred a non-BGC and 30% (n=14) never used a BGC. 52% and 18% of the BGC-users estimated they inflate the balloon in 80-100% and 0-20% of the times, respectively. The main reasons reported for not inflating the balloon were when the BGC was occlusive (47%) or not placeable (34%) in the carotid artery.

Conclusion

This study shows variation in the use of (non-)BGC use with and without inflated balloon among treating physicians in the Netherlands, highlighting current limited consensus regarding the use of (non-)BGCs among stroke treating physicians.
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
5.00
自引率
4.00%
发文量
583
审稿时长
62 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Stroke & Cerebrovascular Diseases publishes original papers on basic and clinical science related to the fields of stroke and cerebrovascular diseases. The Journal also features review articles, controversies, methods and technical notes, selected case reports and other original articles of special nature. Its editorial mission is to focus on prevention and repair of cerebrovascular disease. Clinical papers emphasize medical and surgical aspects of stroke, clinical trials and design, epidemiology, stroke care delivery systems and outcomes, imaging sciences and rehabilitation of stroke. The Journal will be of special interest to specialists involved in caring for patients with cerebrovascular disease, including neurologists, neurosurgeons and cardiologists.
期刊最新文献
Association between leisure-time physical activity and stroke in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: A population-based study Aphasia profiles and trajectories in acute ischemic stroke: an observational study. Exergames for Rehabilitation in Stroke Survivors: Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses. Letter to the editor regarding "Hybrid clinical-radiomics model based on fully automatic segmentation for predicting the early expansion of spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage: A multi-center study". Possible Misdiagnosis of Pregnancy-Associated Stroke in the Emergency Department.
×
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