Sites of recurrence and long-term results of redo surgery

Carotid Surgery Following Previous Carotid Endarterectomy Is Safe and Effective

With the perceived high risk of repeat carotid surgery, carotid angioplasty and stenting have been advocated recently as the preferred treatment of recurrent carotid disease following carotid endarterectomy. An experience with the operative treatment of recurrent carotid disease to document the risks and benefits of this procedure is presented. A review of a prospectively acquired vascular registry over a 10-year period (Jan. 1990-Jan. 2000) was undertaken to identify patients undergoing repeat carotid surgery following previous carotid endarterectomy. All patients were treated with repeat carotid endarterectomy, carotid interposition graft, or subclavian-carotid bypass. The perioperative stroke and death rate, operative complications, life-table freedom from stroke, and rates of recurrent stenosis were documented. During the study period 56 patients underwent repeat carotid surgery, comprising 6% of all carotid operations during this period. The indication for operation was symptomatic disease recurrence in 41 cases (73%) and asymptomatic recurrent stenosis? 80% in 15 cases (27%). The average interval from the prior carotid endarterectomy to the repeat operation was 78 months (range 3 weeks-297 months). The operations performed included repeat carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty in 31 cases (55%), interposition grafts in 19 cases (34%), and subclavian-carotid bypass in 6 cases (11%). There were three perioperative strokes with one resulting in death for a perioperative stroke and death rate of 5.4%. One minor transient cranial nerve (CN IX) injury occurred. Mean follow-up was 29 months (range, 1-1 16 months). Life-table freedom from stroke was 95% at 1 year and 90% at 5 years. Recurrent stenosis (? 80%) developed in three patients (5.4%) during follow-up, including one internal carotid artery occlusion. Two patients (3.6%) underwent repeat surgery. Repeat surgery for recurrent cerebrovascular disease following carotid endarterectomy is safe and provides durable freedom from stroke. Most patients are candidates for repeat endarterectomy with patching, but interposition grafting is often required. These results strongly support the continued role of repeat carotid surgery in the treatment of recurrent carotid disease.

Repeated carotid endarterectomy versus carotid artery stenting for patients with carotid restenosis after carotid endarterectomy: Systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Carotid restenosis (CRS) after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is an issue that cannot be ignored. This study was undertaken to compare the outcomes of repeated CEA (redo CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) for CRS after CEA.

METHODS

We performed a systematic analysis using the search terms "CEA restenosis," "carotid restenosis," or "CEA recurrent stenosis" in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane Library databases. After applying the inclusion criteria, all available data were summarized to evaluate the effects of redo CEA and CAS for patients with CRS after prior CEA.

RESULTS

Fifty articles (9 comparative studies and 41 noncomparative studies) involving 4,399 patients were included. No differences were observed in the 30-day perioperative mortality, stroke and transient ischemic attack rates in the comparative studies (P > .05) and the noncomparative studies (P > .05). Patients undergoing redo CEA suffered more cranial nerve injuries (CNIs) than those undergoing CAS (P < .05), but most of these cases recovered within 3 months. Patients treated with redo CEA exhibited similar myocardial infarction (MI) rates to those treated with CAS in the comparative studies (P = .53), but the rate was higher in the noncomparative studies (P < .01). However, a nonsignificant difference was noted in freedom from stroke at 36 months in the comparative studies (P = .47) and at 12 months in the noncomparative studies (P = .89). The risk of restenosis was greater in the CAS patients than in the redo CEA patients (P < .05 for comparative and noncomparative studies).

CONCLUSION

Both redo CEA and CAS are safe and feasible for CRS after CEA. Although the incidences of CNI and MI were increased in the redo CEA group, most of the CNI cases were reversible. Patients treated with CAS were more likely to develop restenosis than those treated with redo CEA over long-term follow-up.

Indications for treatment of recurrent carotid stenosis

Background

There is significant variation in the indications for intervention in patients with recurrent carotid artery stenosis. The aim of the present study was to describe these indications in a contemporary cohort of patients.

Methods

This was a systematic review of all peer-reviewed studies reporting on the indications for carotid intervention in patients with recurrent stenosis after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) that were published between 1990 and 2012.

Results

There were 50 studies reporting on a total of 3524 patients undergoing a carotid procedure; of these, 3478 underwent CEA as the initial intervention. Reintervention was by CEA in 2403 patients and by CAS in 1121. Only 54·7 per cent of the patients were treated for any symptoms and, importantly, just 444 (23·1 per cent of 1926 symptomatic patients) underwent intervention for documented ipsilateral symptoms. None of the studies reported whether the patients were evaluated for other sources of emboli. The remaining 45·3 per cent of patients had asymptomatic restenosis and in the majority of the studies were treated when the degree of stenosis exceeded 80 per cent. The time to repeat intervention was significantly longer in patients with recurrent atherosclerosis, in asymptomatic patients and in patients undergoing CEA.

Conclusion

The reported criteria for retreatment of carotid stenosis were not rigorous and there is still significant ambiguity surrounding the indications for intervention.

Open surgery remains a valid option for the treatment of recurrent carotid stenosis

OBJECTIVE

The choice between open surgery (OS) and transluminal carotid angioplasty with stenting (CAS) for the treatment of primary carotid stenosis remains controversial. However, CAS is considered a valid option for selected cases, such as recurrent carotid stenosis (RCS). Tertiary RCS seems to be a concerning issue after CAS but few large reports focused on the durability of CAS and OS. We report our early and long-term results with OS for RCS.

METHODS

From 1989 to 2006, perioperative data regarding 4245 consecutive surgical carotid reconstructions was prospectively collected. Patients whose indication was RCS were subjected to further analysis. Indications for surgery were symptomatic RCS >50% or asymptomatic RCS >80%. Freedom from neurologic event was defined as the absence of any ipsilateral symptom at any time after the procedure. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate freedom from reintervention, freedom from restenosis >50% and occlusion, freedom from neurologic event and survival.

RESULTS

A total of 119 patients (2.8%) with RCS underwent OS. The average time from the primary OS was 59.4 +/- 54.5 months (range, 2-204). Forty-nine patients (41%) were symptomatic. In 103 patients (87%), the technique did not differ from a primary approach. Postoperative (<30 days) combined stroke and death rate was 3.3%. Cranial nerve injury occurred in 5 cases (4.2%). With a mean follow-up of 53 +/- 48 months (range, 1-204), 3 patients had an ipsilateral stroke (including one hemorrhagic stroke) and 7 were diagnosed with a tertiary RCS >50%. At 5 years, Kaplan-Meier estimates of freedom from reintervention, freedom from restenosis and occlusion, freedom from neurologic event, and survival were 99%, 91%, 89%, and 91%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

OS for RCS is not a high-risk procedure and provides excellent long-term results, with low rates of tertiary RCS and reinterventions. The comparison between OS and CAS in this indication suffers from the absence of standardized follow-up paradigms after primary OS and the lack of prospective randomized trial comparing the two techniques. Despite these limitations in the available data, we conclude that OS should remain the first line therapy when treatment of RCS is indicated.

MMP and TIMP alterations in asymptomatic and symptomatic severe recurrent carotid artery stenosis

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine whether the plasma levels of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs)-2 and -9 and their specific inhibitors (tissue inhibitors of metalloproteinases (TIMPs-1 and -2)) were altered in patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic, severe, recurrent carotid artery stenosis.

PATIENTS

Fifty-two patients (out of a total of 621) who had undergone successful carotid artery endarterectomy (CEA) between 1999 and 2003 and developed recurrent carotid artery stenosis (>/=70%) were included in the study. Restenosis was symptomatic in 23 patients and asymptomatic in 29 patients.

METHODS

Recurrent carotid artery stenosis was classified based on presentation, and as early-intermediate (6 months to 3 years) or late (>3 years). A detailed clinical history was taken and two blood samples were drawn from each patient to determine plasma levels of MMPs and TIMPs along with other biological parameters. Recurrent stenosis was confirmed with computed tomographic angiography.

RESULTS

Patients with symptomatic restenosis had significantly (p<0.001) higher active MMP-2 and -9 plasma values and significantly (p<0.001) lower TIMP-1 and -2 plasma values when compared to patients with asymptomatic restenosis. Plasma concentrations of active MMPs were higher and TIMPs lower in patients affected with late recurrent stenosis as compared to early-intermediate restenosis (p<0.001). No differences were recorded in latent MMP plasma values. Multivariate analysis showed that active MMP-2 and -9 were independent predictors of late recurrent carotid artery stenosis (p<0.03 and p<0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher plasma concentrations of active MMP-2 and -9 were associated with an increased risk of carotid restenosis with plaque recurrence.

Interposition grafts for difficult carotid artery reconstruction: a 17-year experience

Carotid interposition grafts (CIP) for carotid artery revascularization can be a viable alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) for complex carotid disease. This is a retrospective review of the UCLA 17-year experience with CIP for carotid reconstruction. Carotid operations performed between 1988 and 2005 revealed 41 CIP procedures in 39 patients using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE, n = 31) or reversed greater saphenous vein (Vein) (n = 10). Perioperative data and long-term follow-up for each conduit were statistically compared. There were no significant differences in demographics, risk factors, operative indications, complications, or 30-day perioperative deaths. There was one postoperative stroke in each group, for an overall stroke rate of 4.9% (PTFE 3.2%, Vein 10%). There was one asymptomatic occlusion and there were two high-grade restenoses in the PTFE group compared with one asymptomatic occlusion and one high-grade restenosis in the Vein group. Overall primary patency was 90% and the assisted primary patency was 97% for the PTFE group (mean follow-up 50 months), whereas primary patency was 80% (mean follow-up 30 months) in the Vein group. CIP is a safe and effective technique with excellent long-term follow-up for complex carotid reconstruction when CEA or CAS may be contraindicated.

Patient selection for carotid stenting versus endarterectomy: A systematic review

Carotid artery stenting has emerged as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy for the treatment of severe extracranial carotid stenosis in patients with anatomic or clinical factors that increase their risk of complications with surgery, yet there remains a substantial amount of variability and uncertainty in clinical practice in the referral of patients for stenting vs endarterectomy. By undertaking a thorough review of the literature, we sought to better define which subsets of patients with "high-risk" features would be likely to preferentially benefit from carotid stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Although only a single randomized trial comparing the outcomes of carotid stenting with distal protection and endarterectomy has been completed, a wealth of observational data was reviewed. Relative to endarterectomy, the results of carotid stenting seem favorable in the setting of several anatomic conditions that render surgery technically difficult, such as restenosis after prior endarterectomy, prior radical neck surgery, and previous radiation therapy involving the neck. The results of stenting are also favorable among patients with severe concomitant cardiac disease. Carotid endarterectomy, alternatively, seems to represent the procedure of choice among patients 80 years of age or older in the absence of other high-risk features. Overall, existing data support the concept that carotid stenting and endarterectomy represent complementary rather than competing modes of therapy. Pending the availability of randomized trial data to help guide procedural selection, which is likely many years away, an objective understanding of existing data is valuable to help select the optimal mode of revascularization therapy for patients with severe carotid artery disease who are at heightened surgical risk.

Endovascular Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis After Carotid Artery Stenting: Immediate and Midterm Results

PURPOSE

To evaluate the immediate and midterm outcome and analyze the debris captured after repeat endovascular intervention for the treatment of in-stent restenosis after carotid artery stenting (CAS).

METHODS

Thirty-one consecutive patients (27 men; mean age 63.7+/-13.0 years, range 53- 81) underwent repeat endovascular intervention (balloon angioplasty and provisional stenting) for the treatment of 32 in-stent restenoses following CAS.

RESULTS

Procedural success was achieved in all patients. An additional stent was implanted in 10 (31%) cases. No procedural complication was observed. Filter analysis was performed in 17 (53%) procedures; on 12 (71%), macroscopically visible material was captured. The histomorphometric analysis performed on 6 (19%) filters showed fibrin nets entrapping erythrocytes, leucocytes, platelets, and in 2 cases, fibrous hypercellular tissue fragments. At 30 days and during follow-up (mean 17+/-5 months), no deaths, transient ischemic attacks, or strokes were observed. In 1 (3.1%) patient, asymptomatic recurrence of ISR was found on Doppler ultrasonography and successfully treated with balloon angioplasty.

CONCLUSION

Repeat endovascular intervention using balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting and routine cerebral protection appears to be a feasible, safe, and clinically effective strategy for the treatment of in-stent restenosis after CAS.

Impact of Carotid Artery Angioplasty and Stenting on Management of Recurrent Carotid Artery Stenosis

Citing the higher perioperative risk of redo carotid surgery, balloon angioplasty and stenting of the carotid artery (CAS) has been advocated for recurrent carotid stenosis (RCS). To examine the impact of CAS on the management and outcome of recurrent stenosis, a retrospective review of a prospectively compiled database was performed. From a registry of patients treated for carotid disease, 105 procedures were performed from 1992 to 2002 for RCS. For comparison, two study groups were examined. Time I consisted of 77 reoperations performed through 1998, before CAS was introduced at our institution. Time II included 12 reoperations and 16 CAS procedures performed for RCS from 1999 through 2002. Using perioperative stroke as a measure of outcome, the results for time II were poorer than for time I (7.2% vs. 5.2%, p = NS). Overall, the risk of perioperative stroke was the same for reoperation (5/89) and CAS (1/16) (5.6% vs. 6.3%, p = NS). Although not statistically significant, there was a trend toward a higher risk of perioperative stroke for patients treated with reoperation during the latter time period (8.3% vs. 5.2%, p = NS). This probably relates to the finding that during time II, CAS was most likely to be used in asymptomatic patients (68.6% vs. 41.7%, p = NS) with early (<3 years) RCS (87.5% vs. 41.7%, p= 0.01). No patient with asymptomatic, early RCS had a perioperative stroke with either surgery or CAS (0/35 cases, 0%). The presence of preoperative neurologic symptoms was significantly predictive of a perioperative stroke among all procedures performed for RCS (13.6% vs. 0%, p = 0.004). Contrary to suggestions that CAS might improve the management of RCS, a review of our data shows the overall risk of periprocedural stroke to be no better since CAS has become available. The bias for using CAS for asymptomatic myointimal hyperplastic lesions, and reoperation for frequently symptomatic late recurrent atherosclerotic disease, makes direct comparisons of the two techniques for treating RCS difficult. It is expected that the overall risk for redo carotid surgery will increase, as fewer low-risk patients will be receiving open procedures. However, the increased risk among symptomatic patients undergoing reoperation suggests that endovascular techniques should be investigated among this group of cases as well.

Safety and durability of redo carotid operation: an 11-year experience

PURPOSE

With the recent emergence of carotid stenting in the management of carotid disease, the role of surgery has been challenged, particularly for recurrent carotid stenosis. This study was undertaken to determine the safety and durability of redo carotid operation (RCO) for recurrent stenosis.

METHODS

A retrospective review identified 64 consecutive patients who underwent 66 RCOs between 1990 and 2000. There were 33 males (52%) and 31 females, with a mean age of 68.2 years (range, 38-84 years). The mean interval from the primary carotid surgery to RCO was 77.5 months (range, 1-292 months). Operative indications were severe asymptomatic stenosis in 33 cases (50%), transient ischemic attacks (TIA) or amaurosis fugax in 25 (38%), recent stroke in 6 (9%), and nonhemispheric symptoms in 1. Two operations were tertiary carotid reconstructions. A total of 56 (85%) patch angioplasties were performed, 49 with vein and 6 with synthetic material. Primary closure was performed in three cases (5%), whereas interposition grafts were required in eight (12%). Complete follow-up was available in 59 patients (92%) and averaged 4.3 years (range, 0.2-12.9 years); 97% of patients underwent follow-up duplex scanning.

RESULTS

There were no operative deaths and only two operative strokes (3.1%). Permanent cranial nerve deficit occurred in one patient (1.5%). Late stroke occurred in five patients: four ipsilateral and one contralateral. Kaplan-Meier estimates for 5- and 10-year stroke-free survival were 92% and 74%, and for overall survival were 72% and 50%. Duplex scanning detected significant recurrent carotid stenosis (>80%) or occlusion in six cases (9%) at a mean follow-up of 4.1 years. Kaplan-Meier estimates for freedom from recurrent stenosis of >80% were 94% and 86% at 5 and 10 years.

CONCLUSIONS

RCO for recurrent carotid stenosis can be performed safely with excellent protection from stroke and long-term durability. These data provide a standard against which the results of carotid stenting can be compared.

Recurrent Stenosis and Contralateral Occlusion: High-risk Situations in Carotid Endarterectomy?

Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) has been proposed as a treatment option for carotid occlusive disease in high-risk patients including those with recurrent stenosis (RS) and contralateral occlusion (CO). This study reviews the results of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with RS and CO. We conducted a retrospective review from our vascular registry of 1670 patients who underwent CEAs ( n = 1950) from January 1990 through December 2001. Procedures included RS 86 (4.4%), CO 112 (5.7%), and control 1752 (89.9%). There were 37 strokes in the entire group (1.9%). Among the high-risk group with RS and CO, there were 6 strokes, (RS n = 2, CO n = 4) 3%. There were 31 strokes in the control group 1.8% ( p = NS). Postoperative TIAs were observed more frequently in patients with CO ( n = 2) or RS ( n = 2), 1.8% and 2.3%, respectively ( p < 0.05). Neck hematomas, intracerebral hemorrhages, and myocardial infarctions did not differ between groups. Three deaths occurred within 30 days (0.15%); one was a patient with CO. Renal failure and symptomatic disease were each associated with a higher risk of perioperative stroke; among patients with renal failure there were 6 strokes (4.6%) p < 0.05, in symptomatic patients there were 26 strokes (2.7%) p < 0.05. Multivariate logistic regression analysis confirmed that preoperative renal disease and surgery for symptomatic disease were both significant predictors of perioperative stroke ( p < 0.05; odds ratio 2.177 and 2.943 respectively) while neither RS nor CO was from these results we concluded that the presence of RS and CO do not increase the risk of perioperative stroke in CEA.

Early postsurgical carotid restenosis: redo surgery versus angioplasty/stenting

PURPOSE

To compare the results of balloon angioplasty/stenting (BA/S) versus redo surgery in patients with early carotid restenosis.

METHODS

Sixty-one patients (35 women; mean age 69 years, range 46-82) with early restenosis (<24 months from the primary endarterectomy) in 63 carotid arteries were treated during a 5-year period; 41 patients (41 arteries) had redo surgery (group A) and 20 patients (22 arteries) had BA/S (group B). Patients were followed regularly with duplex ultrasound to detect >or=50% recurrent restenosis (RRS) after redo surgery or BA/S. Kaplan-Meier life-table analysis was used to estimate the stroke-free survival rates and freedom from >or=50% RRS.

RESULTS

The demographic and clinical characteristics were comparable for both groups, as were the perioperative stroke and death rates (2.4% and 0% for group A, respectively, versus 4.5% and 0% for group B, p=0.46). Group A had a 12% incidence of cranial nerve injury (all transient) versus 0% for group B (p=0.11); however, group B had a higher incidence of >or=50% RRS than group A (32% versus 0%, p=0.0003). The stroke-free survival rates for redo surgery at 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months were 100%, 100%, 100%, 100%, and 88% versus 95%, 95%, 84%, 84%, and 63% for BA/S (p=0.067). Redo surgery had a 100% freedom from >or=50% RRS at the same time intervals, while recurrent restenosis rates for the BA/S patients were 95%, 86%, 69%, 52%, and 52% (p<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

BA/S and redo surgery have comparable stroke and death rates in the treatment of early RCS; however, redo surgery is associated with cranial nerve injuries (transient), while stent patients have a higher incidence of recurrent lesions. These considerations should be kept in mind when selecting the appropriate treatment for patients with early postsurgical restenosis.

Redo carotid endarterectomy versus primary carotid endarterectomy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Several authorities have recently advocated carotid stenting for recurrent carotid stenosis because of the perception that redo surgery has a higher complication rate than primary carotid endarterectomy (CEA). This study compares the early and late results of reoperations versus primary CEA.

METHODS

All reoperations for recurrent carotid stenosis performed during a recent 7-year period by a single vascular surgeon were compared with primary CEA. Because all redo CEAs were done with polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) or vein patch closure, we only analyzed those primary CEAs that used the same patch closures. A Kaplan-Meier life-table analysis was used to estimate stroke-free survival rates and freedom from >/=50% recurrent stenosis.

RESULTS

Of 547 primary CEAs, 265 had PTFE or saphenous vein patch closure, and 124 reoperations had PTFE or vein patch closure during the same period. Both groups had similar demographic characteristics. The indications for reoperation and primary CEA were symptomatic stenosis in 78% and 58% of cases and asymptomatic >/=80% stenosis in 22% and 42% of cases, respectively (P<0.001). The 30-day perioperative stroke and transient ischemic attack rates for reoperation and primary CEA were 4.8% versus 0.8% (P=0.015) and 4% versus 1.1%, respectively, with no perioperative deaths in either group. Cranial nerve injury was noted in 17% of reoperation patients versus 5.3% of primary CEA patients; however, most of these injuries were transient (P<0.001). Mean hospital stay was 1.8 days for reoperation versus 1.6 days for primary CEA. Cumulative rates of stroke-free survival and freedom from >/=50% recurrent stenosis for reoperation and primary CEA at 1, 3, and 5 years were 96%, 91%, and 82% and 98%, 96%, and 95% versus 94%, 92%, and 91% and 98%, 96%, and 96%, respectively (no significant differences).

CONCLUSIONS

Reoperation carries higher perioperative stroke and cranial nerve injury rates than primary CEA. However, reoperations are durable and have stroke-free survival rates that are similar to primary CEA. These considerations should be kept in mind when carotid stenting is recommended instead of reoperation.

Reoperations for carotid artery stenosis: role of primary and secondary reconstructions

PURPOSE

This is an analysis of the role of primary and secondary carotid artery reconstructions and systemic risk factors on the incidence and timing of reoperations and their perioperative and late outcomes.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively stored data. Between 1981 and 1999, 69 secondary carotid artery procedures were performed on 66 patients (3 were bilateral). Of these, 29 operations and patients came from my series of 1514 primary carotid endarterectomies (CEAs). Overall, secondary operations were performed on 37 women (1 bilateral) and 29 men (2 bilateral) with a mean age of 68 years. Indications for reoperation were transient ischemic attack in 27%, stroke in 12%, global ischemia in 9%, and asymptomatic > or = 70% recurrent stenosis in 52%. Secondary reconstruction was by saphenous vein patching in 57% (n = 39), Dacron patching in 29% (n = 20), polytetrafluoroethylene patch in 1% (n = 1), and interposition bypass graft in 13% (n = 9). The main outcome measures included restenosis, re-restenosis, and perioperative and late stroke and death.

RESULTS

Reoperations were more frequent after originally primarily closed CEA (6.2%) than after patched CEA (1.6%, P =.01). Reoperations after Dacron-patched CEA occurred at a mean of 16 months compared with a mean of 84 months for vein-patched CEA (P <.001). Male sex and history of smoking have a slightly adverse but not statistically significant effect on the incidence and time of reoperation. Restenosis in the distal common carotid artery requiring reoperation had a near-linear rate of occurrence, whereas that in the internal carotid artery segment was bimodal with a higher incidence in the first 3 years and after 7 years. There were no (0%) 30-day perioperative deaths. There were two (2.9%) 30-day strokes (1 major, 1 minor). Over a mean follow-up of 50 months (range, 1-180), the Kaplan-Meier cumulative survival was 74% at 5 years and 54% at 10 years. This is significantly higher than late death after primary CEA independent of age. The cumulative freedom from stroke rate was 90% at 5 years and 86% at 10 years. After secondary procedures re-recurrent stenosis > or = 25% occurred in 25% (n = 17), > or = 50% in 13% (n = 9), and > or = 70% in 4% (n = 3). There was no statistically significant difference in stroke or re-restenosis rates between vein-patched, Dacron-patched, and bypassed reoperations, although re-recurrence tended to occur earlier after Dacron-patched than vein-patched procedures. Analysis of pooled literature data and the results of this study for stroke and re-restenosis outcomes by type secondary reconstruction (patch versus bypass graft) and by material (vein versus synthetic) give a balanced picture of near equality for each. Vein- and Dacron-patched arteries have similar outcomes, whereas polytetrafluoroethylene appears to be superior to vein and Dacron for interposition bypass graft.

CONCLUSIONS

Secondary carotid artery operations are more frequent after primarily closed CEA than patched CEA. Perioperative mortality and stroke rates for reoperations are within the acceptable window of primary CEA. The incidence of late death after reoperations is higher than after primary CEA. The perioperative stroke, late stroke, and re-restenosis outcomes of vein- and Dacron-patched secondary operations are similar, as are those for patched and bypassed carotid arteries.

Reconstructive surgery of the extracranial arteries

The first carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is usually accredited to Eastcott who reported in 1954 the successful incision of a diseased carotid bulb with end-to-end anastomosis of the internal carotid artery (ICA) to the common carotid artery (CCA). During the following years surgeons were quick to adopt and improve the intuitively attractive procedure. But by the early to mid 1980s several leading neurologists began to question the growing number of CEAs performed at that time. Six major CEA trials were then designed which are now completed or nearing completion. Most conclusive data are available from the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) for symptomatic carotid disease, and from the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study (ACAS) for asymptomatic carotid disease. The key result of these studies is that CEA is beneficial to high grade symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis. While the benefit in symptomatic disease is clear, it may be negligible in asymptomatic patients suffering from other medical conditions, the most important being coronary artery disease. Since the conclusions from the different studies vary significantly, guidelines and recommendations with regard to CEA have been issued by a number of interest groups, so-called consensus conferences. The best known guidelines are published by the American Heart Association (AHA). However, the practice of interest groups to issue guidelines is currently being criticized, the main reason being that interest groups have different ideas and all claim the right to issue guidelines. At present we recommend CEA for symptomatic high-grade stenosis in patients without significant coincident disease. With regard to asymptomatic stenosis we suggest surgery to otherwise healthy patients if the stenosis is very narrow or progressive. Preoperative evaluation has changed over the years. Currently we recommend duplex sonography in combination with intra- and extracranial magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). Concurrent coronary artery disease is a major consideration in the perioperative management, and the use of a specific algorithm is recommended. Surgery is performed under general anaesthesia with intraoperative monitoring such as electroencephalography (EEG) and transcranial Doppler (TCD). A temporary intraluminal shunt is used selectively if after cross-clamping the flow velocity in the middle cerebral artery (MCA) falls to below 30 to 40% of baseline. For years we employed routine barbiturate neuroprotection during cross-clamping. At the present time we use barbiturate selectively, if the flow velocity in the MCA falls to below 30 to 40% of baseline and if the use of a temporary intraluminal shunt is not possible due to difficult anatomic conditions. The reason to abandon systematic barbiturate protection was to accelerate recovery from anaesthesia. Our patients are monitored overnight on the ICU or a surveillance unit. Routine hospitalization after surgery is 5 to 7 days with a control duplex sonography being performed prior to discharge. A number of details with regard to surgical technique and perioperative management are a matter of discussion. Our surgical routine is described here step by step. Such management resulted in 6 major complications among the 402 cases with 4 of cardiopulmonary and 2 of cerebrovascular origin. For the future we can expect the development of percutaneous transluminal techniques competing with standard carotid endarterectomy. At the present time several comparative studies are under way. Irrespective of the technical approach to treat carotid stenosis, several other issues have to be clarified before long. One of the major unresolved items is the timing of treatment after completed stroke. In this regard prospective trials need to be performed. Although numerically not as important as carotid stenosis, vertebral artery (VA) and subclavian artery (SA) stenoses are more and more accepted as indication for surgical

Long-term follow-up of reoperative carotid surgery

BACKGROUND

We examined our long-term results of carotid reoperation to identify risk factors for morbidity and secondary recurrence.

METHODS

Medical record review revealed 27 patients had reoperative surgery for recurrent stenosis. Demographics, operative details, pathology, clinical outcome, and follow-up imaging results were reviewed.

RESULTS

No neurologic deficits and no mortalities were noted perioperatively. Long-term follow-up (average 54 months) revealed an 85% 5-year and 29% 10-year estimated survival. The 5- and 10-year estimated neurologic event rates were 15% and 35%, respectively. These included 3 ipsilateral strokes and 1 ipsilateral TIA; only the TIA involved secondary restenosis. Follow-up imaging revealed a 21% incidence of secondary restenosis, occurring more frequently in patients with hyperlipidemia (P < 0.05) and previous contralateral endarterectomy (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

(1) Reoperation provides long-term protection from stroke due to recurrent stenosis. (2) Secondary restenosis rates appear higher than those for primary surgery. (3) Hyperlipidemia and contralateral endarterectomy are risk factors for secondary restenosis.

Reoperation for carotid stenosis is as safe as primary carotid endarterectomy

PURPOSE

Patients with recurrent carotid artery stenosis are sometimes referred for carotid angioplasty and stenting because of reports that carotid reoperation has a higher complication rate than primary carotid endarterectomy. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a difference exists between outcomes of primary carotid endarterectomy and reoperative carotid surgery.

METHODS

Medical records were reviewed for all carotid operations performed from September 1993 through March 1998 by vascular surgery faculty at a single academic center. The results of primary carotid endarterectomy and operation for recurrent carotid stenosis were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 390 operations were performed on 352 patients. Indications for primary carotid endarterectomy (n = 350) were asymptomatic high-grade stenosis in 42% of the cases, amaurosis fugax and transient ischemic symptoms in 35%, global symptoms in 14%, and previous stroke in 9%. Indications for reoperative carotid surgery (n = 40) were symptomatic recurrent lesions in 50% of the cases and progressive high-grade asymptomatic stenoses in 50%. The results of primary carotid endarterectomy were no postoperative deaths, an overall stroke rate of 1.1% (three postoperative strokes, one preoperative stroke after angiography), and no permanent cranial nerve deficits. The results of operations for recurrent carotid stenosis were no postoperative deaths, no postoperative strokes, and no permanent cranial nerve deficits. In the primary carotid endarterectomy group, the mean hospital length of stay was 2.6 +/- 1. 1 days and the mean hospital cost was $9700. In the reoperative group, the mean length of stay was 2.6 +/- 1.5 days and the mean cost was $13,700. The higher cost of redo surgery is accounted for by a higher preoperative cerebral angiography rate (90%) in redo cases as compared with primary endarterectomy (40%).

CONCLUSION

In this series of 390 carotid operations, the procedure-related stroke/death rate was 0.8%. There were no differences between the stroke-death rates after primary carotid endarterectomy and operation for recurrent carotid stenosis. Operation for recurrent carotid stenosis is as safe and effective as primary carotid endarterectomy and should continue to be standard treatment.

Redo carotid surgery: An analysis of materials and configurations used in carotid reoperations and their influence on perioperative stroke and subsequent recurrent stenosis

OBJECTIVE

The ideal method of arterial reconstruction in operations for recurrent carotid disease after prior endarterectomy is unknown. The goal of this study was to review a series of carotid reoperations and to determine whether the surgical technique influenced the rate of perioperative stroke, late stroke, or secondary restenosis.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of 82 carotid reoperations performed on 74 patients at our institution.

RESULTS

The patient population included 39 men (52.7%) and 35 women (47.3%), with a mean age of 67.5 years. The indications for redo surgery included transient ischemic attack or amaurosis fugax in 35.3% of the patients, stroke in 6.1%, and asymptomatic restenosis (>80%) in 58.5%. Patch angioplasty with or without redo endarterectomy was used in 47 cases (57.3%), with saphenous vein in 26 (31.7%), Dacron in 15 (18.3%), and polytetrafluoroethylene in 6 (7.3%). Interposition grafting was used in 35 cases (42.7%), with saphenous vein in 9 (11.0%), Dacron in 10 (12.2%), and polytetrafluoroethylene in 16 (19.5%). The perioperative complications included three strokes (3.7%). There was a trend toward increased perioperative neurologic complications with interposition grafting when compared with patch angioplasty (8.6% vs 2.1%), although this did not reach statistical significance. Long-term clinical follow-up was obtained in all cases with a mean duration of 35 months, with follow-up duplex scanning performed in 89.2%. The late failures of redo surgery included four significant secondary restenoses and five total occlusions. There was a trend towards improved long-term results with interposition grafting as opposed to patch angioplasty. However, the cases in which reconstruction was performed with a vein had a significantly higher rate of late failures (stroke, secondary recurrent stenosis, or occlusion) than those in which reconstruction was performed with any prosthetic material (26.7% vs 2.3%; P =.002 by Fisher exact test).

CONCLUSION

The use of autologous material for redo carotid surgery in any configuration appears to significantly increase the rate of subsequent recurrent stenosis or total occlusion of the operated artery. The reason for this finding is unclear but may be related to both host and technical factors. Prosthetic material may be more durable in the long-term for redo carotid surgery. Interposition grafting for redo carotid surgery may increase the perioperative neurologic complication rate to some degree; however, this was not statistically significant in this series. Interposition grafting may be a more durable solution in long-term follow-up than redo endarterectomy and patch angioplasty. A longer follow-up period will be needed to confirm this conclusion.