Subclavian to Carotid Artery Transposition: Medial versus Lateral Approach

Abstract

IntroductionSubclavian to carotid transposition (SCT) is gaining importance as an adjunct for thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR). Two different anatomical approaches are described. We reviewed our experience with both approaches to evaluate the occurrence of complications and long-term outcome.Materials/methodsWe report the outcome of 150 SCTs carried between October 1979 and April 200710/79 at 2 university based tertiary care centers. Independent neurologic evaluation was performed.ResultsLateral and medial approaches were used in 83 (55.4%) and 67 (44.6%) cases, respectively. The internal thoracic artery and the thyrocervical trunk were sacrificed more frequently when the lateral approach was used (1.5% vs 39.8%; p=0.0001 and 1.5% vs 49.4%; p=0.0001, respectively). The medial approach was associated with significantly less complications (8, 11.9%, compared to 24, 28.9%, p=0.012). Thirty day mortality was 0.7%. Median follow-up was 36 months (1–227), and no subclavian artery occlusions were identified.ConclusionsSCT is a durable procedure for the management of occlusive pathologies of the proximal subclavian artery occlusion. The medial approach is associated with significantly fewer complications