[1]孟军鹏,孟 林△.颈动脉支架植入术对症状性颈动脉狭窄患者血清炎症因子及认知功能影响的临床研究*[J].陕西医学杂志,2020,49(7):796-799.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.10007377.2020.07.007]
　MENG Junpeng,MENG Lin..Effects of carotid artery stenting on serum inflammatory factors and cognitive function in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis[J].,2020,49(7):796-799.[doi:DOI:10.3969/j.issn.10007377.2020.07.007]
点击复制

颈动脉支架植入术对症状性颈动脉狭窄患者血清炎症因子及认知功能影响的临床研究*
分享到：

《陕西医学杂志》[ISSN:1000-7377/CN:61-1281/TN]

卷:
49
期数:
2020年7期
页码:
796-799
栏目:
临床研究
出版日期:
2020-07-05

文章信息/Info

Title:
Effects of carotid artery stenting on serum inflammatory factors and cognitive function in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis
作者:
孟军鹏; 孟 林△
陕西省第四人民医院神经内科(西安 710043)
Author(s):
MENG Junpeng; MENG Lin.
Department of Neurology,the Fourth People's Hospital of Shaanxi Province(Xi'an 710043)
关键词:
颈动脉支架植入术;  症状性颈动脉狭窄;  血清炎症因子;  认知功能;  颈动脉内膜剥脱术;  并发症
Keywords:
Carotid artery stenting;  Symptomatic carotid stenosis;  Serum inflammatory factors;  Cognitive function;  Carotid endarterectomy;  Complications
分类号:
R543.5
DOI:
DOI:10.3969/j.issn.10007377.2020.07.007
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的:研究了颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)对症状性颈动脉狭窄患者血清炎症因子、认知功能的影响。方法:纳入症状性颈动脉狭窄患者96例,按照手术方法的不同分为颈动脉内膜剥脱术(CEA)组和CAS组,各48例。比较两组的治疗效果,治疗前后的炎症因子水平变化以及不同治疗时间的认知功能。结果:CEA组术后5例(10.42%)患者出现切口血肿,3例(6.25%)出现神经损伤,不良反应发生率16.67%(8/48)。CAS组术后2例(4.17%)患者出现切口血肿, 3例(6.25%)发生高灌注综合征,不良反应发生率10.42%(5/48)。两组围术期不良反应发生率、病死率、术后随访结果等比较,差异均无统计意义(P>0.05)。治疗后,CAS组和CEA组肿瘤坏死因子-α(TNF-α)、白介素-6(IL-6)和高敏C反应蛋白(hs-CRP)水平均明显增高(P<0.05),其中CAS组TNF-α、IL-6和hs-CRP水平均明显低于CEA组(P<0.05)。治疗后不同时间,与治疗前相比,两组MMSE评分均明显增加(P<0.05),其中CAS组和CEA组治疗后不同时间的MMSE评分相比,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:CEA和CAS治疗症状性颈动脉狭窄的疗效和安全性相当,且均能有效改善术后患者的认知功能。然而CAS属于微创手术,操作简单,适应证广泛,且治疗后与CEA相比,对机体炎征反证影响更小。
Abstract:
Objective:To study the effects of carotid artery stenting(CAS)on serum inflammatory factors and cognitive function in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis. Methods:A total of 96 patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis were enrolled and divided into CEA group and CAS group according to different surgical methods,with 48 cases in each group. The CEA group was treated with carotid endarterectomy(CEA),and the CAS group was treated with CAS. The treatment effects,changes in inflammatory factors levels before and after treatment,and cognitive function at different treatment periods were compared between the two groups. Results:In the CEA group,5 patients(10.42%)had incisional hematomas,and 3 patients(6.25%)had nerve damage,and the incidence of adverse complications was 16.67%(8/48). In the CAS group,2 cases(4.17%)had incisional hematomas,3 patients(6.25%)had hyperperfusion syndrome,and the incidence of adverse complications was 10.42%(5/48). There were no significant differences in perioperative adverse complications,mortality and postoperative follow-up results between the two groups(P>0.05). After treatment,the levels of TNF-α,IL-6 and hs-CRP in the CAS group and CEA group were significantly increased(P<0.05),and the levels of TNF-α,IL-6 and hs-CRP in the CAS group were significantly lower than those in the CEA group(P<0.05). At different time after treatment,the MMSE scores of the two groups were significantly increased than those before treatment(P<0.05),but there was no significant difference in the MMSE scores between the two groups(P>0.05). Conclusion:CEA and CAS are effective and safe in the treatment of symptomatic carotid stenosis,and both can effectively improve the cognitive function of postoperative patients. However,CAS is a minimally invasive surgery with simple operation and wide indications. Compared with CEA,CAS has less effect on the body's inflammation response.

参考文献/References:

[1] 刘冀荣.阿托伐他汀钙治疗脑卒中80例颈动脉超声检查与血脂变化观察[J].陕西医学杂志,2015,44(1):33-34.
[2] 方传勤,吴小三. 症状性颈动脉狭窄对急性脑梗死患者短期预后的影响[J]. 中华老年心脑血管病杂志,2014,16(3):233-236.
[3] 张永成,陈 岚. 颈动脉支架植入术治疗症状性颈动脉狭窄的临床研究[J]. 江西医药,2014,49(5):409-411.
[4] 陈 忠,杨耀国. 颈动脉狭窄诊治指南[J]. 中国血管外科杂志:电子版,2017,9(3):169-175.
[5] 陈蓓蕾,黄 敏,李 军,等. 症状性颈动脉狭窄患者缺血性脑卒中再发的危险因素和治疗策略[J]. 中风与神经疾病杂志,2016,33(2):131-134.
[6] 王清亮,陆文杰,陈咸川.益气活血化痰通络方对颈动脉粥样硬化患者T细胞亚群影响的研究[J].陕西中医,2019,40(3):307-310.
[7] 许志剑,余丹枫,蒋烽烽,等. 颈动脉内膜剥脱术和支架成形术治疗老年颈动脉狭窄的临床研究[J]. 中华老年医学杂志,2019,38(3):265-268.
[8] 黄亚波,周 鹏,陆 挺,等.颈动脉内膜切除术治疗症状性颈动脉极重度狭窄[J].中华神经外科杂志,2018,34(5):490-494.
[9] 郭亚东,焦力群. 颈动脉支架植入术治疗放疗后颈动脉狭窄[J]. 广东医学,2015,36(7):1060-1062.
[10] 张 嵘,汪青松,黄海滨. 颈动脉支架植入术与药物治疗颈动脉狭窄疗效比较[J]. 安徽医学,2015,36(10):1236-1238.
[11] 陶昀璐,华 扬,焦力群,等.超声评估颈动脉支架置入术后残余狭窄的影响因素[J].中华神经外科杂志,2018,34(5):495-499.
[12] 刘 鹏,樊雪强,叶志东. 颈动脉内膜切除术和支架植入术的合理选择[J]. 中国普通外科杂志,2014,23(6):715-718.
[13] 唐志鹏,陈荣举,李沿东,等. 颈动脉支架植入术与内膜剥脱术对患者认知功能、炎性因子水平及凝血功能的影响[J]. 中国现代医药杂志,2019,21(10):47-50.
[14] 田 臻,杨 扬,吴艳云. 颈动脉支架置入术治疗颅外颈动脉狭窄的近期疗效及对患者凝血功能与炎症反应的影响[J]. 广西医科大学学报,2018,35(9):71-74.
[15] 李 蕾,姜国忠. 颈动脉支架置入对颈动脉狭窄患者认知功能变化与脑白质改变的相关性研究[J]. 中西医结合心血管病电子杂志,2018,12(14):70-72.

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
*陕西省重点研发计划项目(2018SF-267)
更新日期/Last Update: 2020-07-28