现代颈动脉血管重建术:颈动脉内膜切除术、颈动脉血管成形术和支架置入术以及经颈动脉血管重建术的比较综述。

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Abdelaziz Amllay, Andrew B Koo, Daniela Renedo, Varun Padmanaban, Ben Teasdale, Ryan M Hebert, Anil Arat, Taylor Duda, Joseph Schindler, Christopher J Stapleton, James D Rabinov, Aman B Patel, Charles C Matouk, Nanthiya Sujijantarat
{"title":"现代颈动脉血管重建术:颈动脉内膜切除术、颈动脉血管成形术和支架置入术以及经颈动脉血管重建术的比较综述。","authors":"Abdelaziz Amllay, Andrew B Koo, Daniela Renedo, Varun Padmanaban, Ben Teasdale, Ryan M Hebert, Anil Arat, Taylor Duda, Joseph Schindler, Christopher J Stapleton, James D Rabinov, Aman B Patel, Charles C Matouk, Nanthiya Sujijantarat","doi":"10.1055/a-2685-3141","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Carotid artery stenosis is a major cause of acute ischemic stroke, accounting for approximately 15% of cases. Although optimal medical therapy remains the cornerstone of management, current guidelines recommend consideration of surgical intervention for symptomatic patients with ≥50% stenosis and asymptomatic patients with ≥70% stenosis. Extensive evidence supports carotid endarterectomy (CEA) as the gold standard procedure, whereas transfemoral carotid angioplasty and stenting (TF-CAS) and transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) offer safe alternatives for patients with high surgical risk. Emerging data suggest that TCAR provides safety and efficacy profiles comparable to CEA and superior to TF-CAS in select patients. Considering these findings, selecting an appropriate revascularization strategy should rely on a multidisciplinary, individualized risk-benefit assessment. This article aims to provide a comparative review of the latest evidence on clinical indications, surgical techniques, and outcomes for current carotid revascularization strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":49544,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Neurology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Carotid Revascularization in the Modern Era: A Comparative Review of Carotid Endarterectomy, Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting, and Transcarotid Artery Revascularization.\",\"authors\":\"Abdelaziz Amllay, Andrew B Koo, Daniela Renedo, Varun Padmanaban, Ben Teasdale, Ryan M Hebert, Anil Arat, Taylor Duda, Joseph Schindler, Christopher J Stapleton, James D Rabinov, Aman B Patel, Charles C Matouk, Nanthiya Sujijantarat\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2685-3141\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Carotid artery stenosis is a major cause of acute ischemic stroke, accounting for approximately 15% of cases. Although optimal medical therapy remains the cornerstone of management, current guidelines recommend consideration of surgical intervention for symptomatic patients with ≥50% stenosis and asymptomatic patients with ≥70% stenosis. Extensive evidence supports carotid endarterectomy (CEA) as the gold standard procedure, whereas transfemoral carotid angioplasty and stenting (TF-CAS) and transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) offer safe alternatives for patients with high surgical risk. Emerging data suggest that TCAR provides safety and efficacy profiles comparable to CEA and superior to TF-CAS in select patients. Considering these findings, selecting an appropriate revascularization strategy should rely on a multidisciplinary, individualized risk-benefit assessment. This article aims to provide a comparative review of the latest evidence on clinical indications, surgical techniques, and outcomes for current carotid revascularization strategies.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49544,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Seminars in Neurology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Seminars in Neurology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2685-3141\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2685-3141","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

颈动脉狭窄是急性缺血性中风的主要原因,约占15%的病例。尽管最佳药物治疗仍然是治疗的基石,但目前的指南建议对有症状的狭窄≥50%的患者和无症状的狭窄≥70%的患者考虑手术干预。大量证据支持颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)是金标准手术,而经股动脉血管成形术和支架植入术(TF-CAS)和经颈动脉血管重建术(TCAR)为高风险患者提供了安全的选择。新出现的数据表明,在选定的患者中,TCAR的安全性和有效性与CEA相当,优于TF-CAS。考虑到这些发现,选择合适的血运重建策略应该依赖于多学科、个性化的风险-收益评估。本文旨在对当前颈动脉血运重建策略的临床适应症、手术技术和结果的最新证据进行比较回顾。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Carotid Revascularization in the Modern Era: A Comparative Review of Carotid Endarterectomy, Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting, and Transcarotid Artery Revascularization.

Carotid artery stenosis is a major cause of acute ischemic stroke, accounting for approximately 15% of cases. Although optimal medical therapy remains the cornerstone of management, current guidelines recommend consideration of surgical intervention for symptomatic patients with ≥50% stenosis and asymptomatic patients with ≥70% stenosis. Extensive evidence supports carotid endarterectomy (CEA) as the gold standard procedure, whereas transfemoral carotid angioplasty and stenting (TF-CAS) and transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) offer safe alternatives for patients with high surgical risk. Emerging data suggest that TCAR provides safety and efficacy profiles comparable to CEA and superior to TF-CAS in select patients. Considering these findings, selecting an appropriate revascularization strategy should rely on a multidisciplinary, individualized risk-benefit assessment. This article aims to provide a comparative review of the latest evidence on clinical indications, surgical techniques, and outcomes for current carotid revascularization strategies.

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
Seminars in Neurology
Seminars in Neurology 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
3.70%
发文量
65
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Seminars in Neurology is a review journal on current trends in the evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of neurological diseases. Areas of coverage include multiple sclerosis, central nervous system infections, muscular dystrophy, neuro-immunology, spinal disorders, strokes, epilepsy, motor neuron diseases, movement disorders, higher cortical function, neuro-genetics and neuro-ophthamology. Each issue is presented under the direction of an expert guest editor, and invited contributors focus on a single, high-interest clinical topic. Up-to-the-minute coverage of the latest information in the field makes this journal an invaluable resource for neurologists and residents.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信