Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Risk and outcome profile of carotid endarterectomy with proximal intervention is concerning in multi-institutional assessment.
Clouse, W Darrin; Ergul, Emel A; Wanken, Zachary J; Kleene, Julia; Stone, David H; Darling, R Clement; Cambria, Richard P; Conrad, Mark F.
Afiliación
  • Clouse WD; Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass. Electronic address: wclouse@partners.org.
  • Ergul EA; Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass.
  • Wanken ZJ; Section of Vascular Surgery, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH.
  • Kleene J; Albany Vascular Group, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY.
  • Stone DH; Section of Vascular Surgery, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH.
  • Darling RC; Albany Vascular Group, Albany Medical College, Albany, NY.
  • Cambria RP; Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass.
  • Conrad MF; Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Mass.
J Vasc Surg ; 68(3): 760-769, 2018 09.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29622356
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

Approaching tandem bifurcation and brachiocephalic disease using carotid endarterectomy (CEA) with ipsilateral proximal endovascular intervention (IPE) has been promulgated as safe and durable. There have been recent concerns about neurologic risk with this technique. The goal of this study was to define stroke and perioperative risk with this uncommon procedure across multiple centers.

METHODS:

Between August 2002 and July 2016, patients who underwent CEA + IPE were identified by operative records at three institutions. Primary end points were perioperative stroke and death, restenosis, freedom from neurologic event, and need for reintervention. Factors related to these end points were analyzed.

RESULTS:

There were 62 patients who underwent CEA + IPE. The average age was 69 ± 9 years. Most were female 34 (55%); 56 (90%) were taking a statin and at least one antiplatelet agent. Bilateral internal carotid stenosis (>50%) was present in 32 (52%); 26 (42%) patients were symptomatic and 12 (19%) had undergone prior ipsilateral CEA. Bifurcation operations included longitudinal CEA/patch (38 [61%]), eversion CEA (20 [32%]), bypass graft (3 [5%]), and CEA/primary repair (1 [2%]). CEA was performed first in 53 (85%). All IPEs included stenting, with a single stent used in 58 (94%). Balloon-expandable stents were placed in the majority of patients (51 [82%]). Proximal arteries treated included the innominate (20 [32%]), left common carotid (32 [52%]), right common carotid (8 [13%]) and both innominate and right common carotid (2 [3%]). IPE was protected by carotid cross-clamp in 48 (77%). Shunting occurred in 14 (23%). There were four (6.5%) perioperative ipsilateral strokes and two hyperperfusion events. There were three (4.8%) operative deaths, one from stroke and two cardiovascular. Combined stroke and death rate was 11.3% and was not different between centers. Mean clinical follow-up was 6 ± 4 years. Mean imaging follow-up was 3 ± 4 years. Restenosis ≥50% at either intervention occurred in 20 (34%). Reintervention was performed for five proximal and three bifurcation failures (14%). Symptomatic status, redo operation, carotid clamp protection, multiple stents, and procedural order were not associated with operative stroke. Carotid clamp protection was associated with less restenosis (P = .003). Redo operation (P = .04) and hyperlipidemia (P = .05) were associated with reintervention. The 5-year actuarial survival was 81%, whereas freedom from stroke and reintervention were 94% and 81%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS:

Perioperative stroke and death with CEA + IPE are substantial and consistent across centers. It is strikingly different from isolated CEA or CEA added to open brachiocephalic reconstruction. Restenosis is frequent, and reintervention at either the proximal stent or bifurcation is common. This technical strategy should be used cautiously and selectively reserved for those who are symptomatic with hemodynamically relevant tandem lesions and unfit for open revascularization.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Complicaciones Posoperatorias / Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud / Endarterectomía Carotidea / Estenosis Carotídea / Accidente Cerebrovascular / Procedimientos Endovasculares Tipo de estudio: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: J Vasc Surg Asunto de la revista: ANGIOLOGIA Año: 2018 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Complicaciones Posoperatorias / Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud / Endarterectomía Carotidea / Estenosis Carotídea / Accidente Cerebrovascular / Procedimientos Endovasculares Tipo de estudio: Etiology_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Límite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Revista: J Vasc Surg Asunto de la revista: ANGIOLOGIA Año: 2018 Tipo del documento: Article