股总动脉支架植入术和血栓内膜切除术的临床应用。

IF 1.7 2区 医学 Q3 PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE
Journal of Endovascular Therapy Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-11 DOI:10.1177/15266028231165697
Yo Iwata, Mitsuyoshi Takahara, Tatsuya Nakama, Naoki Fujimura, Kenji Suzuki, Terutoshi Yamaoka, Shigeru Fukuzawa
{"title":"股总动脉支架植入术和血栓内膜切除术的临床应用。","authors":"Yo Iwata, Mitsuyoshi Takahara, Tatsuya Nakama, Naoki Fujimura, Kenji Suzuki, Terutoshi Yamaoka, Shigeru Fukuzawa","doi":"10.1177/15266028231165697","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the outcomes of thromboendarterectomy (TEA) and endovascular therapy (EVT) with stenting for patients with atherosclerotic common femoral artery (CFA) occlusive disease.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>From a retrospective registry of 1193 consecutive patients with CFA treatment performed between 2018 and 2020 at 66 institutions in Japan, we identified patients who underwent TEA (n=432) or stent implantation (n=157). The primary outcome measures were the 1-year primary patency of TEA versus stenting with propensity score matching. The secondary outcome measures were perioperative complications, length of hospital stay, any reintervention, limb salvage, and overall survival. Interaction analysis for primary patency was performed with propensity score stratification to determine the appropriate target population for CFA stenting.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Propensity score matching extracted 101 pairs (101 patients in the EVT group and 253 patients in the TEA group). The 1-year primary patency rate was significantly higher in the TEA cohort (92.8% vs 84.6%, p=0.006). The freedom from reintervention rate was also significantly higher in the TEA cohort (94.0% vs 89.9%, p=0.030). However, the 1-year limb salvage (98.7% vs 100.0%, p=0.32), 1-year overall survival (90.8% vs 85.0%, p=0.14), and frequency of perioperative complications were not significantly different between the cohorts (6.9% vs 14.2%, p=0.10). Based on interaction analysis, the superiority of TEA over EVT in terms of patency was less apparent in patients with advanced age and chronic heart failure.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Thromboendarterectomy was superior to stenting in terms of primary patency and freedom from revascularization at 1 year. There was no significant difference in the incidence of perioperative complications between both groups. Thromboendarterectomy may be recommended as the standard treatment strategy for patients with atherosclerotic CFA disease, whereas stenting may be considered for patients with advanced age and chronic heart failure.</p><p><strong>Clinical impact: </strong>Thromboendarterectomy compared to stenting was the preferred revascularization strategy for patients with CFA disease in terms of primary patency and freedom from target lesion revascularization during the 1st year. The difference was attenuated in subgroups with advanced age (85 years or older) or chronic heart failure, thus stenting may be considered in patients with these backgrounds.</p>","PeriodicalId":50210,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","volume":" ","pages":"77-86"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Stent Implantation and Thromboendarterectomy for the Common Femoral Artery in Real-World Practice.\",\"authors\":\"Yo Iwata, Mitsuyoshi Takahara, Tatsuya Nakama, Naoki Fujimura, Kenji Suzuki, Terutoshi Yamaoka, Shigeru Fukuzawa\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15266028231165697\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the outcomes of thromboendarterectomy (TEA) and endovascular therapy (EVT) with stenting for patients with atherosclerotic common femoral artery (CFA) occlusive disease.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>From a retrospective registry of 1193 consecutive patients with CFA treatment performed between 2018 and 2020 at 66 institutions in Japan, we identified patients who underwent TEA (n=432) or stent implantation (n=157). The primary outcome measures were the 1-year primary patency of TEA versus stenting with propensity score matching. The secondary outcome measures were perioperative complications, length of hospital stay, any reintervention, limb salvage, and overall survival. Interaction analysis for primary patency was performed with propensity score stratification to determine the appropriate target population for CFA stenting.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Propensity score matching extracted 101 pairs (101 patients in the EVT group and 253 patients in the TEA group). The 1-year primary patency rate was significantly higher in the TEA cohort (92.8% vs 84.6%, p=0.006). The freedom from reintervention rate was also significantly higher in the TEA cohort (94.0% vs 89.9%, p=0.030). However, the 1-year limb salvage (98.7% vs 100.0%, p=0.32), 1-year overall survival (90.8% vs 85.0%, p=0.14), and frequency of perioperative complications were not significantly different between the cohorts (6.9% vs 14.2%, p=0.10). Based on interaction analysis, the superiority of TEA over EVT in terms of patency was less apparent in patients with advanced age and chronic heart failure.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Thromboendarterectomy was superior to stenting in terms of primary patency and freedom from revascularization at 1 year. There was no significant difference in the incidence of perioperative complications between both groups. Thromboendarterectomy may be recommended as the standard treatment strategy for patients with atherosclerotic CFA disease, whereas stenting may be considered for patients with advanced age and chronic heart failure.</p><p><strong>Clinical impact: </strong>Thromboendarterectomy compared to stenting was the preferred revascularization strategy for patients with CFA disease in terms of primary patency and freedom from target lesion revascularization during the 1st year. The difference was attenuated in subgroups with advanced age (85 years or older) or chronic heart failure, thus stenting may be considered in patients with these backgrounds.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50210,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Endovascular Therapy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"77-86\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Endovascular Therapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15266028231165697\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/4/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Endovascular Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15266028231165697","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较血栓动脉内膜切除术(TEA)和血管内治疗(EVT)与支架植入术治疗动脉粥样硬化性股总动脉(CFA)闭塞性疾病的疗效。材料和方法:从2018年至2020年在日本66家机构连续接受CFA治疗的1193例患者的回顾性登记中,我们确定了接受TEA (n=432)或支架植入(n=157)的患者。主要结局指标是TEA与倾向评分匹配的支架术的1年初级通畅度。次要结局指标为围手术期并发症、住院时间、任何再干预、肢体保留和总生存。通过倾向评分分层对原发性通畅进行相互作用分析,以确定CFA支架置入的合适目标人群。结果:倾向评分匹配共提取101对(EVT组101例,TEA组253例)。1年原发性通畅率在TEA队列中显著更高(92.8% vs 84.6%, p=0.006)。TEA队列的无再干预率也显著更高(94.0% vs 89.9%, p=0.030)。然而,1年肢体保留率(98.7% vs 100.0%, p=0.32)、1年总生存率(90.8% vs 85.0%, p=0.14)和围手术期并发症发生率在两组间无显著差异(6.9% vs 14.2%, p=0.10)。基于相互作用分析,在高龄慢性心力衰竭患者中,TEA优于EVT的优势不明显。结论:血栓动脉内膜切除术在1年的初步通畅和免于血运重建方面优于支架置入术。两组围手术期并发症发生率比较,差异无统计学意义。对于动脉粥样硬化性CFA患者,血栓动脉内膜切除术可能被推荐为标准治疗策略,而对于老年和慢性心力衰竭患者,支架植入术可能被考虑。临床影响:与支架置入术相比,血栓动脉内膜切除术是CFA患者首选的血运重建策略,在第一年的原发性通畅和目标病变血运重建方面。在高龄(85岁或以上)或慢性心力衰竭的亚组中,差异减弱,因此在这些背景的患者中可以考虑支架植入术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Stent Implantation and Thromboendarterectomy for the Common Femoral Artery in Real-World Practice.

Purpose: To compare the outcomes of thromboendarterectomy (TEA) and endovascular therapy (EVT) with stenting for patients with atherosclerotic common femoral artery (CFA) occlusive disease.

Materials and methods: From a retrospective registry of 1193 consecutive patients with CFA treatment performed between 2018 and 2020 at 66 institutions in Japan, we identified patients who underwent TEA (n=432) or stent implantation (n=157). The primary outcome measures were the 1-year primary patency of TEA versus stenting with propensity score matching. The secondary outcome measures were perioperative complications, length of hospital stay, any reintervention, limb salvage, and overall survival. Interaction analysis for primary patency was performed with propensity score stratification to determine the appropriate target population for CFA stenting.

Results: Propensity score matching extracted 101 pairs (101 patients in the EVT group and 253 patients in the TEA group). The 1-year primary patency rate was significantly higher in the TEA cohort (92.8% vs 84.6%, p=0.006). The freedom from reintervention rate was also significantly higher in the TEA cohort (94.0% vs 89.9%, p=0.030). However, the 1-year limb salvage (98.7% vs 100.0%, p=0.32), 1-year overall survival (90.8% vs 85.0%, p=0.14), and frequency of perioperative complications were not significantly different between the cohorts (6.9% vs 14.2%, p=0.10). Based on interaction analysis, the superiority of TEA over EVT in terms of patency was less apparent in patients with advanced age and chronic heart failure.

Conclusions: Thromboendarterectomy was superior to stenting in terms of primary patency and freedom from revascularization at 1 year. There was no significant difference in the incidence of perioperative complications between both groups. Thromboendarterectomy may be recommended as the standard treatment strategy for patients with atherosclerotic CFA disease, whereas stenting may be considered for patients with advanced age and chronic heart failure.

Clinical impact: Thromboendarterectomy compared to stenting was the preferred revascularization strategy for patients with CFA disease in terms of primary patency and freedom from target lesion revascularization during the 1st year. The difference was attenuated in subgroups with advanced age (85 years or older) or chronic heart failure, thus stenting may be considered in patients with these backgrounds.

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
5.30
自引率
15.40%
发文量
203
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Endovascular Therapy (formerly the Journal of Endovascular Surgery) was established in 1994 as a forum for all physicians, scientists, and allied healthcare professionals who are engaged or interested in peripheral endovascular techniques and technology. An official publication of the International Society of Endovascular Specialists (ISEVS), the Journal of Endovascular Therapy publishes peer-reviewed articles of interest to clinicians and researchers in the field of peripheral endovascular interventions.
×
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