Eversion technique increases the risk for post-carotid endarterectomy hypertension.

OBJECTIVE: The incidence of postoperative hypertension (HTN) after eversion carotid endarterectomy (e-CEA) was compared with that after standard carotid endarterectomy (s-CEA). METHODS: In a retrospective analysis from January 1998 to January 2000, 217 patients underwent 219 CEAs for symptomatic (68) or asymptomatic (151) high-grade (>80%) carotid artery stenosis by either standard (137) or eversion (82) techniques. The eversion technique involves an oblique transection of the internal carotid artery at the carotid bulb and a subsequent endarterectomy by everting the internal carotid artery over the atheromatous plaque. All procedures were done under general anesthesia, and somatosensory-evoked potentials were used for cerebral monitoring. Patients with s-CEA were compared with those with e-CEA for postoperative hemodynamic instability, carotid sinus nerve block, requirement for intravenous vasodilators or vasopressors, stroke, and death. RESULTS: Patients who underwent e-CEA had a significantly (P <.005) increased postoperative blood pressure and required more frequent intravenous antihypertensive medication (24%), compared with patients having an s-CEA (6%). Furthermore, postoperative vasopressors were required after 10% of s-CEAs, but after none of the e-CEAs. No statistically significant difference was noted in the morbidity or mortality of patients after s-CEA and e-CEA. CONCLUSION: e-CEA is a substantial risk factor for HTN in the immediate postoperative period, when compared with the s-CEA. This difference would be even more remarkable in the absence of antihypertensive medications in the e-CEA group and vasopressors in the s-CEA group. Therefore, particular attention should be focused on diagnosing and controlling postoperative HTN in patients after e-CEA.

Management of coexisting coronary artery and asymptomatic carotid artery disease: report of a series of patients treated with coronary bypass alone.

BACKGROUND: A retrospective chart review of 94 patients with asymptomatic high-grade carotid stenosis undergoing coronary bypass (and valve replacement in some cases) was performed to determine whether significant carotid lesions can be safely ignored in patients undergoing cardiac surgical procedures. These operations were performed during a 2-year period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: There were 55 men and 39 women, with an age range of 37-89 years. Seventy-one patients had unilateral high-grade carotid stenosis, 17 patients had bilateral high-grade lesions, and six patients had unilateral high-grade stenosis and contralateral occlusion. Associated medical problems were recorded and short-term follow-up was obtained. RESULTS: There was one perioperative stroke and no deaths in this group of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Although these data indicate that high-grade carotid stenoses may be safely ignored during cardiac surgical procedures, a multicentre prospective randomized trial is needed to determine the appropriate treatment of the patient with coexisting carotid and coronary artery disease.