切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华脑血管病杂志(电子版) ›› 2022, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (06) : 398 -407. doi: 10.11817/j.issn.1673-9248.2022.06.005

临床研究

颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术治疗支架内再狭窄的长期疗效分析
佟志勇1,(), 刘源1, 潘起晨1, 邹存义1, 程德殊1, 赵旭东1, 张劲松2, 金友贺2, 娄喆2   
  1. 1. 110001 沈阳,中国医科大学附属第一医院神经外科
    2. 110001 沈阳,中国医科大学附属第一医院心血管超声科
  • 收稿日期:2022-10-01 出版日期:2022-12-01
  • 通信作者: 佟志勇
  • 基金资助:
    2019年沈阳市科技计划项目人口与健康专项(19-112-4-062)

Long-term outcomes of carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty in the treatment of in-stent restenosis

Zhiyong Tong1,(), Yuan Liu1, Qichen Pan1, Cunyi Zou1, Deshu Cheng1, Xudong Zhao1, Jinsong Zhang2, Youhe Jin2, Zhe Lou2   

  1. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, the First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, 110001
    2. Department of Cardiovascular Ultrasound, the First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang, 110001
  • Received:2022-10-01 Published:2022-12-01
  • Corresponding author: Zhiyong Tong
引用本文:

佟志勇, 刘源, 潘起晨, 邹存义, 程德殊, 赵旭东, 张劲松, 金友贺, 娄喆. 颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术治疗支架内再狭窄的长期疗效分析[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2022, 16(06): 398-407.

Zhiyong Tong, Yuan Liu, Qichen Pan, Cunyi Zou, Deshu Cheng, Xudong Zhao, Jinsong Zhang, Youhe Jin, Zhe Lou. Long-term outcomes of carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty in the treatment of in-stent restenosis[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Cerebrovascular Diseases(Electronic Edition), 2022, 16(06): 398-407.

目的

评价颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术治疗支架内再狭窄(ISR)的可行性、安全性和长期疗效。

方法

回顾分析2018年10月至2022年3月中国医科大学附属第一医院神经外科收治的采用颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术治疗ISR患者8例。男性7例,女性1例,年龄为64.0(56.0,69.0)岁(范围为52~73岁)。颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术距离颈动脉支架植入术(CAS)的时间间隔为11.5(4.0,18.5)个月(范围4 d~124个月)。其中间隔4 d的病例为CAS术中保护伞滞留在支架内。均经脑血管造影确诊,行颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术治疗。其中1例患者外院颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术治疗ISR后22个月,出现症状性中度再狭窄,本院行颈动脉补片成形术。术后1、3、6、12个月及之后每年随访颈动脉超声或计算机断层扫描血管造影。

结果

所有患者均成功行颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术,6例患者取出支架和动脉硬化斑块,1例患者取出2枚支架、1个保护伞和动脉硬化斑块。7例(87.5%)患者术中监测经颅超声多普勒,5例(62.5%)使用颈动脉转流管。手术成功率为100%。术后无颅内出血和新发脑梗死,未出现心肌缺血及脑组织过度灌注。出现舌下神经和迷走神经损伤各1例,3个月随访时完全恢复。1例手术当日出现对侧上肢一过性无力发作。术后随访时间为29.5(17.5,42.0)个月(范围7~47个月)。随访期间未发生颈动脉中重度再狭窄,所有患者恢复正常生活。

结论

颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术可以安全有效地治疗ISR,术后长期疗效满意。

Objective

To evaluate the feasibility, safety and long-term efficacy of carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty in the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR).

Methods

The clinical data of 8 cases with ISR treated with carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty from October 2018 to March 2022 in the department of Neurosurgery of the first affiliated hospital of China Medical University were retrospectively analyzed. They were 52-73 years old, with a median age of 64.0 (IQR 56.0, 69.0) years. The interval between carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty and carotid artery stenting (CAS) ranged from 4 days to 124 months, with a median interval of 11.5 (IQR 4.0, 18.5) months. Among them, the case with an interval of 4 days was surgical retrieval of a filter protection device in CAS with two open-cell stents. All patients were diagnosed by digital subtraction angiography and treated with carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty. One of the patients presented with symptomatic moderate restenosis 22 months after ISR was treated by carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty in another hospital, and carotid artery patch angioplasty was performed in our hospital. Carotid ultrasound or computed tomography angiography was followed up at 1, 3, 6, 12 months and every year postoperatively.

Results

All patients underwent carotid artery patch angioplasty successfully. Stents and atherosclerotic plaque were removed in 6 patients. Two stents and one filter protection device and atherosclerotic plaque were removed in another patient. Transcranial ultrasound doppler was applied in 7 patients (87.5%),and carotid shunt tubes were used in 5 patients (62.5%). The success rate of surgical technique is 100%. No intracranial hemorrhage, new-onset cerebral infarction, myocardial ischemia, and cerebral tissue hyperperfusion occurred after the operation. There was one case of hypoglossal nerve injury and one of vagus nerve injury, who both recovered completely at 3-month follow-up. On the day of the operation, one patient had a transient attack of contralateral upper limb weakness. Postoperative follow-up was 7-47 months, with a median follow-up time of 29.5 (IQR 17.5, 42.0) months. No moderate or severe carotid artery restenosis occurred during follow-up, and all patients returned to normal life.

Conclusion

carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty can safely and effectively treat ISR and the postoperative long-term curative effect was satisfied

表1 颈动脉支架内再狭窄患者的基本临床资料
病例序号 性别 年龄(岁) CAS和颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术的时间间隔 CAS使用的支架和保护伞 支架内再狭窄分型 再狭窄部位、程度、是否有症状 颈动脉支架上端相对椎体的位置关系 对侧颈内动脉情况 颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术术前mRS
1 73 4 d(保护伞滞留) 开环,EV3,protégé(6~8)×40(第一枚,锥形支架),8×40(第二枚,直形支架),spiderRX 5.0保护伞滞留在2枚支架内 保护伞滞留 保护伞滞留在2枚支架中段,症状性,重度再狭窄 颈2椎体中段 闭塞,无症状 4
2 72 22个月 开环,直形支架,EV3,protégé 8×30 Ⅰ型 支架近心段,症状性,重度再狭窄 颈1椎体下缘 闭塞,无症状 1
3 52 12个月 开环,锥形支架,Abbott acculink Ⅱ型 支架中段,无症状,重度再狭窄 颈2椎体中段 无狭窄 0
4 64 11个月 开环,锥形支架,Abbott acculink,(6~8)×40 Ⅲ型 支架中段,症状性,极重度再狭窄 颈2椎体上缘 重度狭窄,无症状,本次术后4个月行颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术 2
5 66 15个月 开环,锥形支架,EV3,protégé Ⅲ型 支架中段,无症状,重度再狭窄 颈1椎体中段 重度狭窄,症状性,本次术前21个月行颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术,无再狭窄 0
6 54 124个月 开环,锥形支架,EV3,protégé RX(7~10)×40 Ⅲ型 支架中段,症状性,重度再狭窄 颈2椎体上缘 闭塞,无症状 2
7 58 CAS术后3个月重度再狭窄,外院颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术术后22个月症状性中度再狭窄,本院颈动脉补片成形术 闭环,直形,编织支架,Boston scientific, Carotid wallstent 9×40 Ⅲ型 支架中段,症状性,重度再狭窄,外院颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术后22个月,补片中段,症状性,中度再狭窄 支架上缘位于颈2椎体中段水平,颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术后再狭窄位于颈4椎体水平 重度狭窄,症状性,本次术前99个月行标准CEA,轻度再狭窄 1
8 64 5个月 闭环,直形,编织支架,Boston scientific, Carotid WALLSTENT 9×30 Ⅳ型 支架远心段1/3,无症状,重度再狭窄 颈2椎体中段 中度狭窄,无症状 0
图1 病例5,左侧颈动脉支架植入术术后15个月,无症状性支架中段重度狭窄。颈部CT血管造影(容积再现)显示:支架上端对应颈1椎体,支架下端对应颈4椎体
图2 病例1,颈动脉支架植入术(CAS)术中保护伞滞留在2枚支架中段。CAS术后4 d,颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术取出动脉硬化斑块、2枚支架和保护伞复合体。术中确认:斑块钙化严重,斑块内出血;2枚支架结合紧密,保护伞位于支架中段;由于保护伞张开,嵌入到支架网眼内,只能顺血流方向取出保护伞
图3 病例1,取出的保护伞内可见捕获的黄白色脂核斑块(有效防止了颈动脉支架植入术术中颈动脉斑块脱落进入颅内导致脑梗死),保护伞周围红色血栓形成(保护伞滞留在体内4 d)
图4 病例7,颈动脉支架植入术术后3个月,症状性支架中段重度再狭窄。外院颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术治疗后22个月,症状性补片中段中度再狭窄。行颈动脉补片成形术,纵行切开的颈内动脉和颈总动脉,确认:涤纶补片和动脉外膜及内膜融合良好;内膜增生(白色)伴部分黄化,局部红色血栓形成
图5 病例7,使用10 mm×75 mm涤纶补片缝合颈动脉成形,使用CV6(5-0)血管线缝合颈动脉和补片[由于第1次颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术植入的补片和外膜,内膜复合体厚韧,无法使用常规颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术缝合使用的CV7(6-0)血管线缝合]
图6 病例4,颈动脉支架植入术术后11个月,症状性支架中段重度再狭窄。颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术取出颈动脉硬化斑块和支架
图7 病例4,切开颈动脉硬化斑块和支架,确认:斑块内出血,支架内血栓形成,支架中段重度狭窄
图8 病例4,使用10 mm×75 mm涤纶补片缝合颈动脉成形
图9 病例6,颈动脉支架植入术术后124个月,症状性支架中段重度再狭窄。颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术取出颈动脉硬化斑块和支架
图10 病例6,切开颈动脉硬化斑块和支架,确认:不稳定斑块,脂核破碎,局部血栓形成,支架中段重度狭窄
图11 病例6,使用10 mm×75 mm涤纶补片缝合颈动脉成形,补片缝合范围跨越舌下神经
表2 颈动脉支架内再狭窄患者行颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术术中情况和术后随访
病例序号 手术时间 手术方式 术中确认再狭窄的原因 颈动脉转流管 颈内动脉残端压(mmHg) 涤纶补片的规格(mm) 术中测量颈动脉直径(mm) 出院时mRS评分(分) 最后随访时间,mRS评分,颈动脉情况
1 2018年10月 颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术切除斑块,2枚支架和保护伞 斑块钙化严重,保护伞滞留的两枚支架内,保护伞内有黄色斑块栓子和红色血栓形成 9F 43/35(40) 8×75

A:7.0~8.0;

B:10.0~10.0;

C:13.0~12.0;

D:11.0~11.0

1 47个月,0分,无狭窄
2 2019年3月 颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术切除斑块和支架 斑块钙化,支架覆盖远心端1/2的斑块 9F 未测量 10×75 未测量 0 42个月,0分,无狭窄
3 2019年3月 颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术切除斑块和支架 斑块钙化严重 未使用 未测量 8×75 未测量 0 42个月,0分,无狭窄
4 2019年12月 颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术切除斑块和支架 斑块内出血,支架内血栓形成, 未使用 未测量 10×75

A:6.0~8.5;

B:10.5~10.5;

C:9.5~11.5;

D:9.0~10.0

2 33个月,0分,无狭窄
5 2020年7月 颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术切除斑块和支架 斑块钙化严重,支架远心段和动脉壁粘连严重 9F 30/25(27) 10×75

A:4.0~6.5;

B:9.0~11.0;

C:11.5~12.0;

D:9.0~11.0

1 26个月,0分,无狭窄
6 2020年9月 颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术切除斑块和支架 动脉硬化,不稳定斑块,脂核破碎,局部血栓形成 10F 32/26(29) 10×75

A:8.2~10.0;

B:12.5~13.5;

C:13.5~14.0;

D:9.5~11.5

2 24个月,0分,无狭窄
7 2021年10月 颈动脉补片成形术 颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术术后22个月,内膜增生(白色),部分黄化,局部少量血栓形成 10F 37/28(32) 10×75

A:6.5~8.0;

B:8.0~11.0;

C:14.0~15.5;

D:12.0~14.0

0 11个月,0分,无狭窄
8 2022年2月 颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术切除斑块和支架 斑块较软,黄色脂核,支架切割进入斑块 未使用 未测量 8×120

A:5.5~6.0;

B:11.0~11.0;

C:11.0~11.0;

D:9.0~10.0

0 7个月,0分,无狭窄
图12 病例5,左侧颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术术后1周,颈部CT血管造影(容积再现)显示:颈动脉通畅,术区可见多个钛结扎夹,在CT血管造影上呈“大米粒”样,没有金属伪影
图13 病例5,左侧颈动脉内膜切除补片成形术术后1周,颈部CT血管造影(最大密度投影成像)显示:颈动脉通畅
1
Brott HG, Howard G, Roubin GS, et al. Long-term results of stenting versus endarterectomy for carotid-artery stenosis [J]. N Engl J Med, 2016, 374(11): 1021-1031.
2
Bonati LH, Gregson J, Dobson J, et al. Restenosis and risk of stroke after stenting or endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis in the International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS): secondary analysis of a randomised trial [J]. Lancet Neurol, 2018, 17(7): 587-596.
3
吴鉴今, 曲乐丰, 柏骏, 等. 颈动脉支架术后再狭窄的手术治疗 [J]. 中华医学杂志, 2015, 95(24): 1902-1905.
4
李冠增, 焦力群, 凌锋, 等. 颈动脉术后再狭窄的支架置入疗效分析 [J]. 中国脑血管病杂志, 2014, 11(3): 127-130.
5
唐骁, 符伟国, 陈斌, 等. 颈动脉再通术后重度再狭窄病变的诊治策略 [J]. 中国血管外科杂志(电子版), 2018, 10(4): 240-244.
6
唐骁, 郭大乔. 颈动脉支架成形术后再狭窄的诊治策略 [J]. 中国血管外科杂志(电子版), 2015, 7(2): 73-75.
7
Lal BK, Kaperonis EA, Cuadra S, et al. Patterns of in-stent restenosis after carotid artery stenting: classification and implications for longterm outcome [J]. J Vasc Surg, 2007, 46(5): 833-840.
8
Fox AJ. How to measure carotid stenosis [J]. Radiology, 1993, 186(2): 316-318.
9
Bonati LH. Restenosis after carotid artery stenting: remaining issues [J]. Lancet Neurol, 2012, 11(9): 740-741.
10
Lal BG, Beach KW, Roubin GS, et al. Restenosis after carotid artery stenting and endarterectomy:a secondary analysis of CREST, a randomised controlled trial [J]. Lancet Neurol, 2012, 11(9): 755-763.
11
Brown KE, Usman A, Kibbe MR, et al. Carotid stenting using tapered and nontapered stents: associated neurological complications and restenosis rates [J]. Ann Vasc Surg, 2009, 23(4): 439-445.
12
Maleux G, Marrannes J, Heye S, et al. Outcome of carotid artery stenting at 2 years follow-up: comparison of nitinol open cell versus stainless steel closed cell stent design [J]. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino), 2009, 50(5): 669-675.
13
Cao P, Giordano G, Rango PD, et al. Eversion versus conventional carotid endarterectomy: late results of a prospective multicenter randomized trial [J]. J Vasc Surg, 2000, 31(1 Pt 1): 19-30.
14
He CZ, Wang S, Zhou XH, et al. A review on the comparison of different treatments for carotid in-stent restenosis [J]. Can J Neurol Sci, 2019, 46(6): 666-681.
15
Ecker RD, Pichelmann MA, Meissner I, et al. Durability of carotid endarterectomy [J]. Stroke, 2003, 34(12): 2941-2944.
16
Tu J, Wang SW, Huo ZJ, et al. Repeated carotid endarterectomy versus carotid artery stenting for patients with carotid restenosis after carotid endarterectomy: systematic review and meta-analysis [J]. Surgery, 2015, 157(6): 1166-1173.
17
Arai S, Ikeda H, Kawamo M, et al. Surgical rescue retrieval of a filter protection device in carotid artery stenting with stent deformation: case report and literature review [J]. World Neurosurg, 2019, 122: 215-219.
[1] 徐逸男. 不同术式治疗梗阻性左半结直肠癌的疗效观察[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2025, 19(01): 72-75.
[2] 康婵娟, 张海涛, 翟静洁. 胰管支架置入术治疗急性胆源性胰腺炎的效果及对患者肝功能、炎症因子水平的影响[J/OL]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(06): 667-670.
[3] 李佳伟, 庞建智, 闫鹏宇, 卫阳兵, 杨晓峰. 术中输尿管识别技术研究进展[J/OL]. 中华腔镜泌尿外科杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 520-524.
[4] 马振威, 宋润夫, 王兵. ERCP胆道内支架与骑跨十二指肠乳头支架置入治疗不可切除肝门部胆管癌疗效的Meta分析[J/OL]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 807-812.
[5] 韩加刚, 王振军. 梗阻性左半结肠癌的治疗策略[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 450-458.
[6] 石阳, 于剑锋, 曹可, 翟志伟, 叶春祥, 王振军, 韩加刚. 可扩张金属支架置入联合新辅助化疗治疗完全梗阻性左半结肠癌围手术期并发症分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 464-471.
[7] 梁轩豪, 李小荣, 李亮, 林昌伟. 肠梗阻支架置入术联合新辅助化疗治疗结直肠癌急性肠梗阻的疗效及其预后的Meta 分析[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(06): 472-482.
[8] 张迪, 王春霞, 张学东, 李发馨, 庞淅文, 陈一锋, 张维胜, 王涛. 梗阻性左半结直肠癌自膨式金属支架置入后行腹腔镜手术与开腹手术的短期临床疗效比较[J/OL]. 中华结直肠疾病电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 375-380.
[9] 胡子豪, 王喆, 陈建海, 齐岩松, 徐永胜. 聚合物材料在肩袖损伤治疗中的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华肩肘外科电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 362-368.
[10] 苏朝江, 刘佳丽, 姜燕, 许厅, 刘俪婷, 陈彦, 刘宗旸. 血透患者小直径动脉经皮腔内血管成形术后行动静脉内瘘术的疗效[J/OL]. 中华肾病研究电子杂志, 2024, 13(05): 249-255.
[11] 孙明策, 韩世焕. 海藻酸盐水凝胶支架在颅骨缺损修复中的应用进展[J/OL]. 中华神经创伤外科电子杂志, 2024, 10(05): 310-314.
[12] 钟小军, 杨清峰, 邹忠元, 丘宁宁, 李见英, 邹四珍, 黄小琴, 郭冠华, 牛立志. 支气管镜联合数字减影血管造影在恶性气道狭窄金属支架置入中的应用[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 317-322.
[13] 何中海, 贾振宇, 刘圣. 血栓负荷评分对支架取栓治疗急性前循环大血管闭塞首过效应的预测价值[J/OL]. 中华介入放射学电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 338-343.
[14] 神童, 申程, 张艳艳, 颜欣卓, 甘立军. 冠心病合并类风湿关节炎患者PCI术后死亡一例[J/OL]. 中华诊断学电子杂志, 2024, 12(04): 241-244.
[15] 牟磊, 徐东成, 韩鑫, 徐长江, 韩坤锜, 薛叶潇, 牟媛, 秦文玲, 刘相静, 陈哲, 高楠. 五虫通络胶囊防治椎动脉开口支架术后再狭窄发生的效果[J/OL]. 中华脑血管病杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(05): 467-472.
阅读次数
全文


摘要


AI


AI小编
你好!我是《中华医学电子期刊资源库》AI小编,有什么可以帮您的吗?