{"title":"颈动脉狭窄-目前的证据和治疗建议","authors":"Mandy D Müller, L. Bonati","doi":"10.1177/2514183X211001654","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Carotid artery stenosis is an important cause for stroke. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) reduces the risk of stroke in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis and to some extent in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. More than 20 years ago, carotid artery stenting (CAS) emerged as an endovascular treatment alternative to CEA. Objective and Methods: This review summarises the available evidence from randomised clinical trials in patients with symptomatic as well as in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Results: CAS is associated with a higher risk of death or any stroke between randomisation and 30 days after treatment than CEA (odds ratio (OR) = 1.74, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.33, p < 0.0001). In a pre-defined subgroup analysis, the OR for stroke or death within 30 days after treatment was 1.11 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.64) in patients <70 years old and 2.23 (95% CI 1.61 to 3.08) in patients ≥70 years old, resulting in a significant interaction between patient age and treatment modality (interaction p = 0.007). The combination of death or any stroke up to 30 days after treatment or ipsilateral stroke during follow-up also favoured CEA (OR = 1.51, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.85, p < 0.0001). In asymptomatic patients, there is a non-significant increase in death or stroke occurring within 30 days of treatment with CAS compared to CEA (OR = 1.72, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.97, p = 0.05). The risk of peri-procedural death or stroke or ipsilateral stroke during follow-up did not differ significantly between treatments (OR = 1.27, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.84, p = 0.22). Discussion and Conclusion: In symptomatic patients, randomised evidence has consistently shown CAS to be associated with a higher risk of stroke or death within 30 days of treatment than CEA. This extra risk is mostly attributed to an increase in strokes occurring on the day of the procedure in patients ≥70 years. In asymptomatic patients, there may be a small increase in the risk of stroke or death within 30 days of treatment with CAS compared to CEA, but the currently available evidence is insufficient and further data from ongoing randomised trials are needed.","PeriodicalId":242430,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Translational Neuroscience","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Carotid artery stenosis – Current evidence and treatment recommendations\",\"authors\":\"Mandy D Müller, L. Bonati\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/2514183X211001654\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Carotid artery stenosis is an important cause for stroke. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) reduces the risk of stroke in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis and to some extent in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. More than 20 years ago, carotid artery stenting (CAS) emerged as an endovascular treatment alternative to CEA. Objective and Methods: This review summarises the available evidence from randomised clinical trials in patients with symptomatic as well as in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Results: CAS is associated with a higher risk of death or any stroke between randomisation and 30 days after treatment than CEA (odds ratio (OR) = 1.74, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.33, p < 0.0001). In a pre-defined subgroup analysis, the OR for stroke or death within 30 days after treatment was 1.11 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.64) in patients <70 years old and 2.23 (95% CI 1.61 to 3.08) in patients ≥70 years old, resulting in a significant interaction between patient age and treatment modality (interaction p = 0.007). The combination of death or any stroke up to 30 days after treatment or ipsilateral stroke during follow-up also favoured CEA (OR = 1.51, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.85, p < 0.0001). In asymptomatic patients, there is a non-significant increase in death or stroke occurring within 30 days of treatment with CAS compared to CEA (OR = 1.72, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.97, p = 0.05). The risk of peri-procedural death or stroke or ipsilateral stroke during follow-up did not differ significantly between treatments (OR = 1.27, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.84, p = 0.22). Discussion and Conclusion: In symptomatic patients, randomised evidence has consistently shown CAS to be associated with a higher risk of stroke or death within 30 days of treatment than CEA. This extra risk is mostly attributed to an increase in strokes occurring on the day of the procedure in patients ≥70 years. In asymptomatic patients, there may be a small increase in the risk of stroke or death within 30 days of treatment with CAS compared to CEA, but the currently available evidence is insufficient and further data from ongoing randomised trials are needed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":242430,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical and Translational Neuroscience\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical and Translational Neuroscience\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/2514183X211001654\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Translational Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2514183X211001654","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3
摘要
背景:颈动脉狭窄是脑卒中的重要原因。颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)在一定程度上降低了有症状的颈动脉狭窄患者和无症状的颈动脉狭窄患者发生卒中的风险。20多年前,颈动脉支架植入术(CAS)作为一种替代CEA的血管内治疗方法出现。目的和方法:本综述总结了有症状和无症状颈动脉狭窄患者的随机临床试验的现有证据。结果:随机分组至治疗后30天,与CEA相比,CAS与更高的死亡或任何卒中风险相关(优势比(or) = 1.74, 95% CI 1.3 ~ 2.33, p < 0.0001)。在预先定义的亚组分析中,治疗后30天内卒中或死亡的OR在<70岁的患者中为1.11 (95% CI 0.74 - 1.64),在≥70岁的患者中为2.23 (95% CI 1.61 - 3.08),导致患者年龄和治疗方式之间存在显著的相互作用(相互作用p = 0.007)。治疗后30天内死亡或任何中风或随访期间同侧中风的合并也有利于CEA (or = 1.51, 95% CI 1.24 ~ 1.85, p < 0.0001)。在无症状患者中,与CEA相比,CAS治疗30天内发生的死亡或卒中发生率无显著增加(or = 1.72, 95% CI 1.00 ~ 2.97, p = 0.05)。随访期间术中死亡或卒中或同侧卒中的风险在不同治疗间无显著差异(or = 1.27, 95% CI 0.87至1.84,p = 0.22)。讨论和结论:在有症状的患者中,随机证据一致显示CAS与治疗30天内卒中或死亡的风险高于CEA。这种额外的风险主要是由于≥70岁的患者在手术当天发生中风的增加。在无症状患者中,与CEA相比,CAS治疗30天内卒中或死亡风险可能有小幅增加,但目前可获得的证据不足,需要来自正在进行的随机试验的进一步数据。
Carotid artery stenosis – Current evidence and treatment recommendations
Background: Carotid artery stenosis is an important cause for stroke. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) reduces the risk of stroke in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis and to some extent in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. More than 20 years ago, carotid artery stenting (CAS) emerged as an endovascular treatment alternative to CEA. Objective and Methods: This review summarises the available evidence from randomised clinical trials in patients with symptomatic as well as in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Results: CAS is associated with a higher risk of death or any stroke between randomisation and 30 days after treatment than CEA (odds ratio (OR) = 1.74, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.33, p < 0.0001). In a pre-defined subgroup analysis, the OR for stroke or death within 30 days after treatment was 1.11 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.64) in patients <70 years old and 2.23 (95% CI 1.61 to 3.08) in patients ≥70 years old, resulting in a significant interaction between patient age and treatment modality (interaction p = 0.007). The combination of death or any stroke up to 30 days after treatment or ipsilateral stroke during follow-up also favoured CEA (OR = 1.51, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.85, p < 0.0001). In asymptomatic patients, there is a non-significant increase in death or stroke occurring within 30 days of treatment with CAS compared to CEA (OR = 1.72, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.97, p = 0.05). The risk of peri-procedural death or stroke or ipsilateral stroke during follow-up did not differ significantly between treatments (OR = 1.27, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.84, p = 0.22). Discussion and Conclusion: In symptomatic patients, randomised evidence has consistently shown CAS to be associated with a higher risk of stroke or death within 30 days of treatment than CEA. This extra risk is mostly attributed to an increase in strokes occurring on the day of the procedure in patients ≥70 years. In asymptomatic patients, there may be a small increase in the risk of stroke or death within 30 days of treatment with CAS compared to CEA, but the currently available evidence is insufficient and further data from ongoing randomised trials are needed.