Journal of neurology · 2007
Neuropsychological consequences of endarterectomy and endovascular angioplasty with stent placement for treatment of symptomatic carotid stenosis: a prospective randomised study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Witt Karsten, Börsch Katharina, Daniels Christine, Walluscheck Knut, Alfke Karsten, Jansen Olav, Czech Norbert, Deuschl Günther, Stingele Robert
Аннотация
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous studies compared carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stent placement (CAS) for treatment of symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. Whereas most previous studies showed both treatment modalities to be associated with a comparable risk of periprocedural cerebrovascular complications, these previous studies have shown significantly more microemboli and significantly more lesions in diffusion-weighted MR imaging after CAS compared to CEA. The clinical relevance of these differences remains unknown. We therefore compared the neuropsychological consequences of CAS and CEA and additionally measured the S100beta protein, a marker of cerebral damage.
METHODS: A total of 48 patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis greater than 70 % (according to ECST criteria) were enrolled and 45 patients participated in the follow-up. The patients were randomly assigned for CEA (24 patients) or CAS (21 patients). S100beta protein values were evaluated 2 hours before the procedure, as well as one and two hours thereafter. Patients were assessed before treatment, and again 6 and 30 days after treatment using a comprehensive neuropsychological test battery.
RESULTS: Patients of the CAS and the CEA groups did not significantly differ in terms of age, gender, education, degree of carotid artery stenosis, cerebrovascular symptoms and vascular risk factors. Following previously used criteria, a cognitive change in patients was assumed to have occurred when there was a decline of more than one standard deviation in two or more tests assessing various cognitive domains. Six days and 30 days after the treatment both groups showed a comparable number of patients with cognitive changes compared to baseline. There were no significant differences in S100beta protein values.
CONCLUSION: These results provide some reassurance that CAS is not associated with greater cognitive deterioration than CEA is.
METHODS: A total of 48 patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis greater than 70 % (according to ECST criteria) were enrolled and 45 patients participated in the follow-up. The patients were randomly assigned for CEA (24 patients) or CAS (21 patients). S100beta protein values were evaluated 2 hours before the procedure, as well as one and two hours thereafter. Patients were assessed before treatment, and again 6 and 30 days after treatment using a comprehensive neuropsychological test battery.
RESULTS: Patients of the CAS and the CEA groups did not significantly differ in terms of age, gender, education, degree of carotid artery stenosis, cerebrovascular symptoms and vascular risk factors. Following previously used criteria, a cognitive change in patients was assumed to have occurred when there was a decline of more than one standard deviation in two or more tests assessing various cognitive domains. Six days and 30 days after the treatment both groups showed a comparable number of patients with cognitive changes compared to baseline. There were no significant differences in S100beta protein values.
CONCLUSION: These results provide some reassurance that CAS is not associated with greater cognitive deterioration than CEA is.