Endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting: the quest continues part two

The middle-term outcome of carotid endarterectomy and stenting for treatment of ischemic stroke in Chinese patients

This study aims to investigate the complication and middle-term outcome of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) in Chinese patients, which was a retrospective case-control study and perioperative complications and 2-year end points were analyzed. Follow-up was done by a certified doctor, and restenosis was detected by ultrasound. Operation success rate were 100% in two groups. CAS showed the higher incidence rate of all stroke/TIA at 30days post-procedure (7.89% VS 1.85%, P = 0.038), odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval, 4.54 (1.09–18.97), but there was no difference in the incidence rate of stroke subgroups, mortality and myocardial infarction between two groups. The higher incidence of hypertension with CEA (14.42% VS 5.26%, P = 0.012), OR: 2.90 (1.26–6.65) and hypotension with CAS (14.91% VS 1.85%, P = 0.001), OR: 0.11 (0.03–0.42). No difference in all stroke, ipsilateral stroke and mortality between two groups at 24 months post-procedures, however, the total incidence rate of stroke/death was higher in CAS (12.84% VS 4.72%, P = 0.036), OR: 2.98 (1.08,8.23). Higher restenosis rate of CAS was examined (13.76% VS 5.66%, P = 0.045), OR: 2.66 (1.02, 6.74). CAS and CEA showed a similar middle-term outcome, but CAS showed a higher incidence rate of stroke and restenosis after operation.

Cost-Effectiveness of Two Decision Strategies for Shunt Use During Carotid Endarterectomy

Background

Arterial shunting during carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is essential in some patients because of insufficient cerebral perfusion during cross-clamping. However, the optimal diagnostic modality identifying these patients is still debated. None of the currently used modalities has been proved superior to another. The aim of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of two modalities, stump pressure measurement (SPM) versus electroencephalography (EEG) combined with transcranial Doppler (TCD) during CEA.

Methods

Two retrospective cohorts of consecutive patients undergoing CEA with different intraoperative neuromonitoring strategies (SPM vs. EEG/TCD) were analyzed. Clinical data were collected from patient hospital records. Primary clinical outcome was in-hospital stroke or death. Total admission costs were calculated based on volumes of healthcare resources. Analyses of effects and costs were adjusted for clinical differences between patients by means of a propensity score, and cost-effectiveness was estimated.

Results

A total of 503 (239 SPM; 264 EEG/TCD) patients were included, of whom 19 sustained a stroke or died during admission (3.3 vs. 4.2%, respectively, adjusted risk difference 1.3% (95% CI −2.3–4.8%)). Median total costs were €4946 (IQR 4424–6173) in the SPM group versus €7447 (IQR 6890–8675) in the EEG/TCD group. Costs for neurophysiologic assessments were the main determinant for the difference.

Conclusions

Given the evidence provided by this small retrospective study, SPM would be the favored strategy for intraoperative neuromonitoring if cost-effectiveness was taken into account when deciding which strategy to adopt.

Clinical results of carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy

Objective:

To review our results of carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA).

Methods:

We evaluated the medical records of patients undergoing carotid artery revascularization procedure, between 2001 and 2013 in Baskent University Hospital, Ankara, Turkey. Carotid artery stenting or CEA procedures were performed in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (≥70%) or symptomatic stenosis (≥50%). Demographic data, procedural details, and clinical outcomes were recorded. Primary outcome measures were in 30-day stroke/transient ischemic attacks (TIA)/amaurosis fugax or death. Secondary outcome measures were nerve injury, bleeding complications, length of stay in hospital, stroke, restenosis (ICA patency), and all-cause death during long-term follow-up.

Results:

One hundred ninety-four CEA and 115 CAS procedures were performed for symptomatic and/or asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. There is no significant differences 30-day mortality and neurologic morbidity between CAS (13%) and CEA procedures (7.7%). Length of stay in hospital were significantly longer in CEA group (p=0.001). In the post-procedural follow up, only in symptomatic patients, restenosis rate was higher in the CEA group (p=.045). The other endpoints did not differ significantly.

Conclusions:

Endovascular stent treatment of carotid artery atherosclerotic disease is an alternative for vascular surgery, especially for patients that are high risk for standard CEA. The increasing experience, development of cerebral protection systems and new treatment protocols increases CAS feasibility.

Anatomical Considerations on Surgical Anatomy of the Carotid Bifurcation

Surgical anatomy of carotid bifurcation is of unique importance for numerous medical specialties. Despite extensive research, many aspects such as precise height of carotid bifurcation, micrometric values of carotid arteries and their branches as their diameter, length, and degree of tortuosity, and variations of proximal external carotid artery branches are undetermined. Furthermore carotid bifurcation is involved in many pathologic processes, atheromatous disease being the commonest. Carotid atheromatous disease is a major predisposing factor for disabling and possibly fatal strokes with geometry of carotid bifurcation playing an important role in its natural history. Consequently detailed knowledge of various anatomic parameters is of paramount importance not only for understanding of the disease but also for design of surgical treatment, especially selection between carotid endarterectomy and carotid stenting. Carotid bifurcation paragangliomas constitute unique tumors with diagnostic accuracy, treatment design, and success of operative intervention dependent on precise knowledge of anatomy. Considering those, it becomes clear that selection and application of proper surgical therapy should consider anatomical details. Further research might ameliorate available treatment options or even lead to innovative ones.

Long-Term Outcomes of Carotid Endarterectomy and Carotid Artery Stenting for Carotid Artery Stenosis: Real-World Status in Japan

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

We investigated long-term outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) in our institute to evaluate the outcomes of real-world practice in Japan.

METHODS

Between August 2006 and July 2013, 203 consecutive carotid revascularizations with either CEA or CAS were performed in our institute. The initial treatment was regarded as the starting point in the cases of the patients who received treatment by bilateral carotid artery stenosis or retreatment. We assessed the long-term outcomes with survival analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 182 patients (CEA 111, CAS 71), including 86 symptomatic patients, were included in the current study with a mean follow-up period of 42.9 months. The periprocedural stroke/death/myocardial infarction (MI) rate was 3.6% for CEA and 5.6% for CAS groups (P = .71). Estimates of the 4-year event-free rate from the primary end point (the composite of any stroke, death, or MI within 30 days, and any ipsilateral stroke thereafter) using competing risk analysis were 3.6% for CEA and 7.1% for CAS (P = .156). Kaplan-Meier estimates of the 4-year event-free rate from the secondary end point (the composite of any stroke, death, or MI within 30 days, and any stroke or death thereafter) were 13.8% for CEA and 19.1% for CAS (P = .072). Age was the only significant predictor for the primary end point. Both age and CAS were significant predictors for the secondary end point.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study on real-world practices demonstrated perioperative and long-term outcomes that were comparable to previous major studies of large numbers of patients.

Carotid Endarterectomy: Current Concepts and Practice Patterns

Background Stroke is the number one cause of disability and third leading cause of death among adults in the United States. A major cause of stroke is carotid artery stenosis (CAS) caused by atherosclerotic plaques. Randomized trials have varying results regarding the equivalence and perioperative complication rates of stents versus carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in the management of CAS. Objectives We review the evidence for the current management of CAS and describe the current concepts and practice patterns of CEA. Methods A literature search was conducted using PubMed to identify relevant studies regarding CEA and stenting for the management of CAS. Results The introduction of CAS has led to a decrease in the percentage of CEA and an increase in the number of CAS procedures performed in the context of all revascularization procedures. However, the efficacy of stents in patients with symptomatic CAS remains unclear because of varying results among randomized trials, but the perioperative complication rates exceed those found after CEA. Conclusions Vascular surgeons are uniquely positioned to treat carotid artery disease through medical therapy, CEA, and stenting. Although data from randomized trials differ, it is important for surgeons to make clinical decisions based on the patient. We believe that CAS can be adopted with low complication rate in a selected subgroup of patients, but CEA should remain the standard of care. This current evidence should be incorporated into practice of the modern vascular surgeon.