北京大学学报(医学版) ›› 2016, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (1): 160-165. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-167X.2016.01.029

• 论著 • 上一篇    下一篇

股腘动脉病变球囊扩张与支架植入的疗效对比研究

庄金满, 李选△, 李天润, 傅军, 栾景源, 王昌明   

  1. (北京大学第三医院介入血管外科,北京100191)
  • 出版日期:2016-02-18 发布日期:2016-02-18
  • 通讯作者: 李选 E-mail:xuanlivip@sina.com

Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty versus stent implantation for treatment of femoral and popliteal artery lesion resulted from arteriosclerosis obliterans

ZHUANG Jin-man, LI Xuan△, LI Tian-run, FU Jun, LUAN Jing-yuan, WANG Chang-ming   

  1. (Department of Interventional Radiology and Vascular Surgery, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing 100191, China)
  • Online:2016-02-18 Published:2016-02-18
  • Contact: LI Xuan E-mail:xuanlivip@sina.com

摘要:

目的:比较单纯经皮腔内血管成形术(percutaneous transluminal angioplasty,PTA)与PTA联合支架植入两种方法治疗股腘动脉病变的近、远期疗效。方法:回顾性分析2003年1月至12月北京大学第三医院收治的95例(107条患肢)股腘动脉病变患者的临床资料,根据患者接受的治疗方式,将其分为PTA组(单纯PTA,60条患肢)和支架组(PTA联合支架植入,47条患肢),采用门诊和电话问诊方式随访。结果:PTA组60 条患肢中22条为单纯股腘动脉病变,13条合并髂动脉病变,17条合并膝下动脉病变,8条合并髂动脉及膝下动脉病变;支架组47条患肢中18条为单纯股腘动脉病变,8条合并髂动脉病变,15条合并膝下动脉病变,6条合并髂动脉及膝下动脉病变。两组患者的年龄、性别构成、合并症、治疗前踝肱指数及Rutherford分级差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05),但PTA组中泛大西洋协作组(Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus,TASC)C/D级所占比例低于支架组(58.3% vs.76.6%,P=0.047)。PTA组和支架组随访时间分别48.0(5.0,108.0)个月和40.0(3.0,96.0)个月,差异无统计学意义(P=0.064)。支架组治疗费用及近期总有效率明显高于PTA组[(33 882.7±8 695.6)元vs.(17 754.8±3 654.2)元, P<0.001;93.6% vs.80.0%,P=0.044];近期显效率尽管略高于PTA组,但差异无统计学意义(31.9% vs.21.7%,P=0.231);近期有效率以及并发症发生率与PTA组相比差异无统计学意义(58.3% vs. 58.3%, P=0.724;1.7% vs.2.1%,P=1.000);两组均无近期恶化及围术期死亡病例。支架组远期显效率低于PTA组,恶化率高于PTA组,但差异均无统计学意义(8.5% vs. 15.0%,P=0.381;14.9% vs.5.0%,P=0.081);两组远期总有效率、累积保肢率及再手术率差异无统计学意义(66.0% vs. 66.7%,P=0.939;94.7% vs.94.1%,P=0.884;31.9% vs. 31.7%,P=1.000)。两组1~10年一期及二期累积通畅率差异无统计学意义(P=0.837,P=0.622)。进一步分组比较表明,支架组TASC A/B级和C/D级患者近期显效率、总有效率及远期恶化率均高于PTA组,但差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:对于动脉硬化闭塞症导致的股腘动脉病变,支架植入虽提高了近期疗效,但远期疗效和保肢率方面与单纯PTA无显著差异,且治疗费用增加。

关键词: 动脉硬化, 闭塞性, 股动脉, 腘动脉, 血管成形术, 支架

Abstract:

Objective: To study the clinical effects of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) versus stent implantation (ST) after PTA for the treatment of femoral and popliteal artery lesion resulted from arteriosclerosis obliterans. Methods: One hundred and three patients (119 limbs) treated for femoral and popliteal artery lesion resulted from arteriosclerosis obliterans for ten years were reviewed, of whom 60 limbs were treated by PTA and the other 47 by PTA combined with stent implantation.Results:Among the 60 limbs of the PTA group, there were 22 limbs involved only in femoral and popliteal artery; 13 limbs combined with iliac artery lesion; 17 limbs combined with infrapopliteal artery lesion; 8 limbs combined with iliac and infrapopliteal artery lesion. Among the 47 limbs of the ST group, there were 18 limbs involved only in femoral and popliteal artery; 8 limbs combined with iliac artery lesion; 15 limbs combined with infrapopliteal artery lesion; 6 limbs combined with iliac and infrapopliteal artery lesion. There was no significant difference between the two groups on age, sex, concomitant disease, ankle brachial index(ABI) before treatment and Rutherford classification (P>0.05). The patients’Trans-atlantic inter-society consensus (TASC) C/D was lower in the PTA group than that in the ST group (58.3% vs.76.6%, P=0.047).The follow-up periods were 48.0 (5.0,108.0) and 40.0 (3.0,96.0) months respectively (P=0.064).Compared with the PTA group, the ST group had a better short-term total effective rate (93.6% vs.80.0%, P=0.044) and a higher cost [(33 882.7±8 695.6) yuan vs. (17 754.8±3 654.2) yuan, P<0.001]. The short-term marked effective rate of the ST group was higher than that of the PTA group, but the difference was not significant (31.9% vs.21.7%, P=0.231). There was no significant difference between the two groups on short-term efficiency, and complication rates (58.3% vs. 58.3%, P=0.724; 1.7% vs.2.1%, P=1.000). There was no death during perioperative period and no short-term deterioration in both the groups. The long-term marked effective rate was lower and the deterioration rate was higher in the ST group than that in the PTA group, but the difference was not significant (8.5% vs. 15.0%, P=0.381; 14.9% vs. 5.0%, P=0.081).There was no significant difference between the two group on long term total effective rate,accumulative limb salvage rate and reoperation rate (66.0% vs. 66.7%, P=0.939; 94.7% vs. 94.1%, P=0.884; 31.9% vs. 31.7%, P=1.000), and the 1 to 10 years primary and secondary patency rates were similar (P=0.837, P=0.622).When compared based on TASC classification, TASC A/B patients in the ST group had a higher short-term marked effective rate, a higher short-term total effective rate and a higher long-term deterioration rate than those in the PTA group, but the difference was not significant (36.4% vs. 24.0%, P=0.353; 100.0% vs. 88.0%, P=0.322; 18.2% vs. 4.0%, P=0.216). TASC C/D patients had a similar result (30.6% vs. 20.0%, P=0.307; 91.7% vs. 74.3%, P=0.050; 13.9% vs. 5.7%, P=0.226). Both TASC A/B and TASC C/D patients in the ST group had a similar accumulative limb salvage rate with that in the PTA group (90.9% vs. 90.6%, P=0.920; 97.1% vs. 94.1%, P=0.796). Conclusion: Stent implantation can increase the cost and short term effective rate at the same time and is not superior to PTA on the long term effective rate and limb salvage rate for femoral and popliteal artery lesion resulted from arteriosclerosis obliterans.

Key words: Arteriosclerosis obliterans, Femoral artery, Popliteal artery, Angioplasty, Stents

中图分类号: 

  • R654.3
[1] 朱正达,高岩,何汶秀,方鑫,刘洋,魏攀,闫志敏,华红. 红色诺卡氏菌细胞壁骨架治疗糜烂型口腔扁平苔藓的疗效及安全性[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2021, 53(5): 964-969.
[2] 庄金满,李天润,李选,栾景源,王昌明,冯琦琛,韩金涛. Rotarex 旋切导管在下肢动脉硬化闭塞症支架内再狭窄中的应用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2021, 53(4): 740-743.
[3] 董文敏,王明瑞,胡浩,王起,许克新,徐涛. Allium覆膜金属输尿管支架长期留置治疗输尿管-回肠吻合口狭窄的初期临床经验及随访结果[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2020, 52(4): 637-641.
[4] 钱亚龙,徐帅,刘海鹰. 椎间盘镜辅助脊髓刺激电极植入治愈下肢缺血1例[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2020, 52(2): 378-381.
[5] 曹春玲,杨聪翀,屈小中,韩冰,王晓燕. 可注射羟乙基壳聚糖基水凝胶理化性能及其对人牙髓细胞增殖和成牙本质向分化的作用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2020, 52(1): 10-17.
[6] 贾子昌,李选,郑梅,栾景源,王昌明,韩金涛. 复合手术治疗无残端的症状性长段颈内动脉慢性闭塞[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2020, 52(1): 177-180.
[7] 赵海燕,樊东升,韩金涛. 重度颈内动脉狭窄伴未破裂动脉瘤的治疗策略[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2019, 51(5): 829-834.
[8] 贾子昌,卞焕菊,李选,栾景源,王昌明,刘启佳,韩金涛. Neuroform EZ支架在治疗复杂症状性颅内动脉重度狭窄中的应用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2019, 51(5): 835-839.
[9] 贾子昌,卞焕菊,韩金涛,赵海燕,栾景源,王昌明,李选. 颈动脉支架成形术后脑高灌注综合征[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2019, 51(4): 733-736.
[10] 贾子昌,李选,李小刚,曾祥柱,栾景源,王昌明,韩金涛. 机械取栓治疗急性缺血性脑卒中单中心研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2019, 51(2): 256-259.
[11] 李榕,陈科龙,王勇,刘云松,周永胜,孙玉春. 骨组织工程支架3D打印系统的建立与支架宏微结构精度的可控性评价[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2019, 51(1): 115-119.
[12] 张倩莉,袁重阳,刘力,温世鹏,王晓燕. 胶原静电纺纳米纤维膜对人牙髓细胞生物学行为的影响[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2019, 51(1): 28-34.
[13] 庄金满,李选,李天润,赵军,栾景源,王昌明. 股浅动脉重建对下肢动脉硬化闭塞症治疗的随机病例对照研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(1): 153-157.
[14] 冯琦琛,李选,栾景源,王昌明,李天润. 肾滤过分数评价肾动脉支架植入术对动脉硬化性肾动脉狭窄的治疗效果[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2017, 49(1): 158-163.
[15] 蒋京军, 卿洪琨, 张小明, 张学民, 李伟, 沈晨阳, 李清乐, 焦洋. 经皮穿刺缝合与股动脉切开在主动脉瘤腔内修复术中的对照研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2016, 48(5): 850-854.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] 张三. 中文标题测试[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2010, 42(1): 1 -10 .
[2] 赵磊, 王天龙 . 右心室舒张末期容量监测用于肝移植术中容量管理的临床研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2009, 41(2): 188 -191 .
[3] 万有, , 韩济生, John E. Pintar. 孤啡肽基因敲除小鼠电针镇痛作用增强[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2009, 41(3): 376 -379 .
[4] 张燕, 韩志慧, 钟延丰, 王盛兰, 李玲玲, 郑丹枫. 骨骼肌活组织检查病理诊断技术的改进及应用[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2009, 41(4): 459 -462 .
[5] 张安阳, 范田园. 运用响应曲面法优化核黄素磷酸钠海藻酸钙胃漂浮微球[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2009, 41(6): 682 -686 .
[6] 赵奇, 薛世华, 刘志勇, 吴凌云. 同向施压测定自酸蚀与全酸蚀粘接系统粘接强度[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2010, 42(1): 82 -84 .
[7] 林红, 王玉凤, 吴野平. 学校生活技能教育对小学三年级学生行为问题影响的对照研究[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2007, 39(3): 319 -322 .
[8] 丰雷, 程嘉, 王玉凤. 注意缺陷多动障碍儿童的运动协调功能[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2007, 39(3): 333 -336 .
[9] 李岳玲, 钱秋瑾, 王玉凤. 儿童注意缺陷多动障碍成人期预后及其预测因素[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2007, 39(3): 337 -340 .
[10] . 书讯[J]. 北京大学学报(医学版), 2007, 39(3): 225 -328 .