高龄患者颈动脉内膜切除术:短期、中期和长期疗效。

IF 0.8 Q4 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Shabin Fahad, Sayali Shirsath, Matthew Metcalfe, Ahmed Elmallah
{"title":"高龄患者颈动脉内膜切除术:短期、中期和长期疗效。","authors":"Shabin Fahad,&nbsp;Sayali Shirsath,&nbsp;Matthew Metcalfe,&nbsp;Ahmed Elmallah","doi":"10.5758/vsi.230060","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has an established effect on stroke-free survival in patients with carotid artery stenosis. Most landmark trials excluded patients ≥80 years of age due to their perceived high risk and uncertainty regarding the benefits of CEA. Despite the ongoing global increase in life expectancy, guidelines have not changed. The current study aimed to assess CEA outcomes in patients ≥80 years of age.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>: Data from patients ≥80 years of age, who underwent CEA between April 2016 and April 2022, were collected. Demographic information, comorbidities, surgical details, operative details, outcomes, and post-CEA survival were reviewed, and long-term data up to April 2023 were collected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>: Over the 6-year study period, 258 CEA procedures were recorded, of which 70 (27.1%) were performed in patients ≥80 years of age; the mean age was 84 years (range, 80-96 years), 47 (67.1%) were males, and 69 (98.6%) were symptomatic. Twenty-three (32.9%) patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade 2, and 47 (67.1%) were grade 3. The 30-day stroke and mortality rates were 4.3% and 1.4%, respectively. At 1, 3, and 5 years, the cumulative freedom-from-stroke rates were 95.7%, 92.9%, and 91.4%, respectively, and the cumulative survival rates were 94.3%, 75.7%, and 61.4%, respectively. No risk factors affected early or late stroke or early mortality rates. Patients with ASA grade 3 had significantly lower cumulative survival than those with grade 2 (HR, 5.29; 95% CI, 1.590-17.603; P<0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>: CEA was safe and effective in average-risk, elderly patients. Higher risk patients (i.e., ASA 3) showed no increased 30-day risk for stroke or mortality but exhibited significantly worse long-term survival. Hence, careful consideration of the benefits before performing CEA is crucial.</p>","PeriodicalId":52311,"journal":{"name":"Vascular Specialist International","volume":"39 ","pages":"28"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ce/5f/vsi-39-28.PMC10519940.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Carotid Endarterectomy in the Very Elderly: Short-, Medium-, and Long-Term Outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Shabin Fahad,&nbsp;Sayali Shirsath,&nbsp;Matthew Metcalfe,&nbsp;Ahmed Elmallah\",\"doi\":\"10.5758/vsi.230060\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has an established effect on stroke-free survival in patients with carotid artery stenosis. Most landmark trials excluded patients ≥80 years of age due to their perceived high risk and uncertainty regarding the benefits of CEA. Despite the ongoing global increase in life expectancy, guidelines have not changed. The current study aimed to assess CEA outcomes in patients ≥80 years of age.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>: Data from patients ≥80 years of age, who underwent CEA between April 2016 and April 2022, were collected. Demographic information, comorbidities, surgical details, operative details, outcomes, and post-CEA survival were reviewed, and long-term data up to April 2023 were collected.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>: Over the 6-year study period, 258 CEA procedures were recorded, of which 70 (27.1%) were performed in patients ≥80 years of age; the mean age was 84 years (range, 80-96 years), 47 (67.1%) were males, and 69 (98.6%) were symptomatic. Twenty-three (32.9%) patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade 2, and 47 (67.1%) were grade 3. The 30-day stroke and mortality rates were 4.3% and 1.4%, respectively. At 1, 3, and 5 years, the cumulative freedom-from-stroke rates were 95.7%, 92.9%, and 91.4%, respectively, and the cumulative survival rates were 94.3%, 75.7%, and 61.4%, respectively. No risk factors affected early or late stroke or early mortality rates. Patients with ASA grade 3 had significantly lower cumulative survival than those with grade 2 (HR, 5.29; 95% CI, 1.590-17.603; P<0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>: CEA was safe and effective in average-risk, elderly patients. Higher risk patients (i.e., ASA 3) showed no increased 30-day risk for stroke or mortality but exhibited significantly worse long-term survival. Hence, careful consideration of the benefits before performing CEA is crucial.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":52311,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Vascular Specialist International\",\"volume\":\"39 \",\"pages\":\"28\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/ce/5f/vsi-39-28.PMC10519940.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Vascular Specialist International\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5758/vsi.230060\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vascular Specialist International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5758/vsi.230060","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)对颈动脉狭窄患者的无卒中生存率有着既定的影响。大多数具有里程碑意义的试验排除了年龄≥80岁的患者,因为他们认为CEA的高风险和益处的不确定性。尽管全球预期寿命持续增加,但指导方针没有改变。目前的研究旨在评估≥80岁患者的CEA结果。材料和方法:收集2016年4月至2022年4月期间接受CEA的≥80岁患者的数据。回顾了人口统计学信息、合并症、手术细节、手术细节和CEA后生存率,并收集了截至2023年4月的长期数据。结果:在6年的研究期间,记录了258例CEA手术,其中70例(27.1%)是在≥80岁的患者中进行的;平均年龄84岁(80-96岁),男性47例(67.1%),症状69例(98.6%)。23名(32.9%)患者为美国麻醉师协会(ASA)2级,47名(67.1%)患者为3级。30天的脑卒中发生率和死亡率分别为4.3%和1.4%。1年、3年和5年时,累计无卒中发生率分别为95.7%、92.9%和91.4%,累计生存率分别为94.3%、75.7%和61.4%。没有风险因素影响早期或晚期中风或早期死亡率。ASA 3级患者的累计生存率明显低于2级患者(HR,5.29;95%CI,1.590-17.603;P结论:CEA对平均风险的老年患者是安全有效的。高危患者(即ASA 3)的30天中风或死亡率没有增加,但长期生存率明显较差。因此,在进行CEA之前仔细考虑其益处是至关重要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Carotid Endarterectomy in the Very Elderly: Short-, Medium-, and Long-Term Outcomes.

Carotid Endarterectomy in the Very Elderly: Short-, Medium-, and Long-Term Outcomes.

Carotid Endarterectomy in the Very Elderly: Short-, Medium-, and Long-Term Outcomes.

Purpose: : Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has an established effect on stroke-free survival in patients with carotid artery stenosis. Most landmark trials excluded patients ≥80 years of age due to their perceived high risk and uncertainty regarding the benefits of CEA. Despite the ongoing global increase in life expectancy, guidelines have not changed. The current study aimed to assess CEA outcomes in patients ≥80 years of age.

Materials and methods: : Data from patients ≥80 years of age, who underwent CEA between April 2016 and April 2022, were collected. Demographic information, comorbidities, surgical details, operative details, outcomes, and post-CEA survival were reviewed, and long-term data up to April 2023 were collected.

Results: : Over the 6-year study period, 258 CEA procedures were recorded, of which 70 (27.1%) were performed in patients ≥80 years of age; the mean age was 84 years (range, 80-96 years), 47 (67.1%) were males, and 69 (98.6%) were symptomatic. Twenty-three (32.9%) patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade 2, and 47 (67.1%) were grade 3. The 30-day stroke and mortality rates were 4.3% and 1.4%, respectively. At 1, 3, and 5 years, the cumulative freedom-from-stroke rates were 95.7%, 92.9%, and 91.4%, respectively, and the cumulative survival rates were 94.3%, 75.7%, and 61.4%, respectively. No risk factors affected early or late stroke or early mortality rates. Patients with ASA grade 3 had significantly lower cumulative survival than those with grade 2 (HR, 5.29; 95% CI, 1.590-17.603; P<0.01).

Conclusion: : CEA was safe and effective in average-risk, elderly patients. Higher risk patients (i.e., ASA 3) showed no increased 30-day risk for stroke or mortality but exhibited significantly worse long-term survival. Hence, careful consideration of the benefits before performing CEA is crucial.

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
1.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
29
审稿时长
17 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信