Carotid-carotid crossover bypass: Is it a durable procedure?

AbstractPurpose: Reconstruction of a diseased common carotid artery may necessitate direct repair via aortic artery-based revascularization. However, carotid-carotid artery crossover grafting is an alternative extra-anatomic option that obviates the need for median sternotomy. We analyzed our results with carotid-carotid artery crossover bypass surgery. Methods: Data were analyzed for all patients undergoing carotid-carotid crossover bypass surgery from 1995 to 2000. Data on patient demographics, indications for surgery, perioperative morbidity and mortality, and graft patency were retrieved from a vascular surgery data base and hospital records. Stroke-free survival and graft patency were determined with life table methods. Results: Over 5 years, 24 carotid-carotid artery crossover bypass procedures were performed to treat both symptomatic (n = 19, 79%) and asymptomatic (n = 5, 17%) disease. Nine procedures (38%) were performed in men, 3 (13%) in patients with diabetes, 12 (50%) in active smokers, and 2 in patients with a history of Takayasu arteritis. Patient mean age was 63 years (range, 38-79 years). Twenty-three patients (96%) received polytetrafluoroethylene conduit grafts, and the remaining patients received vein grafts. Ten (42%) patients underwent concomitant endarterectomy. There were no perioperative deaths. One patient (4%) had asymptomatic early occlusion, one had transient neurologic deficit (4%), one (4%) required additional surgery because of bleeding, and one (4%) had a perioperative cerebrovascular accident (stroke). Three (17%) asymptomatic late occlusions were identified at 11, 57, and 64 months, respectively. Mean follow-up was 30 months (range, 1-70 months). Primary patency was 88%, and secondary patency was 92% at 3 years. Stroke-free survival was 94% at 4 years. Conclusion: Carotid-carotid artery crossover bypass surgery is a safe and durable procedure. Its use precludes the need for median sternotomy and provides acceptable stroke-free survival. (J Vasc Surg 2003;37:582-5.

Early carotid endarterectomy after acute stroke

AbstractPurposeCarotid endarterectomy (CEA) after acute stroke is generally delayed 6 to 8 weeks because of fear of stroke progression. This delay can result in an interval stroke rate of 9% to 15%. We analyzed our results with CEA performed within 1 to 4 weeks of stroke.MethodsRecords for all patients undergoing CEA after stroke between 1980 and 2001 were analyzed. Perioperative evaluation included carotid duplex scanning or angiography, and head computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. All patients with nonworsening neurologic status, additional brain territory at risk for recurrent stroke, and severe ipsilateral carotid stenosis underwent CEA. Patients were grouped according to time of CEA after stroke: group 1, first week; group 2, second week; group 3, third week; group 4, fourth week. Statistical analysis was performed with the χ2 test, logistic regression, and analysis of variance.ResultsTwo hundred twenty-eight patients underwent CEA within 1 to 4 weeks of stroke. Perioperative permanent neurologic deficits occurred in 2.8% of patients in group 1 (72 procedures), 3.4% of patients in group 2 (59 procedures), 3.4% of patients in group 3 (29 procedures), and 2.6% of patients in group 4 (78 procedures). There was no relationship between location or size of preoperative infarct and time of surgery. Only preoperative infarct size correlated with probability of neurologic deficit after CEA (P < .05).ConclusionIncidence of postoperative stroke exacerbation is similar at all intervals. The results are within acceptable limits for treatment of symptomatic carotid stenosis. CEA may be performed within 1 month of stroke with similar results at all intervals during this period

Strategies to improve spinal cord ischemia in endovascular thoracic aortic repair: Outcomes of a prospective cerebrospinal fluid drainage protocol

PurposeAlthough endovascular repair of thoracic aortic aneurysm has been shown to reduce the morbidity and mortality rates, spinal cord ischemia remains a persistent problem. We evaluated our experience with spinal cord protective measures using a standardized cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drainage protocol in patients undergoing endovascular thoracic aortic repair.MethodsFrom 2004 to 2006, 121 patients underwent elective (n = 52, 43%) and emergent (n = 69, 57%) endovascular thoracic aortic stent graft placement for thoracic aortic aneurysm (TAA) (n = 94, 78%), symptomatic penetrating ulceration (n = 11, 9%), pseudoaneurysms (n = 5, 4%) and traumatic aortic transactions (n = 11, 9%). In 2005, routine use of a CSF drainage protocol was established to minimize the risks of spinal cord ischemia. The CSF was actively drained to maintain pressures <15 mm Hg and the mean arterial blood pressures were maintained at ≥90 mm Hg. Data was prospectively collected in our vascular registry for elective and emergent endovascular thoracic aortic repair and the patients were divided into 2 groups (+CSF drainage protocol, −CSF drainage protocol). A χ2 statistical analysis was performed and significance was assumed for P < .05.ResultsOf the 121 patients with thoracic stent graft placement, the mean age was 72 years, 62 (51%) were male, and 56 (46%) underwent preoperative placement of a CSF drain, while 65 (54%) did not. Both groups had similar comorbidities of coronary artery disease (24 [43%] vs 27 [41%]), hypertension (44 [79%] vs 50 [77%]), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (18 [32%] vs 22 [34%]), and chronic renal insufficiency (10 [17%] vs 12 [18%]). None of the patients with CSF drainage developed spinal cord ischemia (SCI), and 5 (8%) of the patients without CSF drainage developed SCI within 24 hours of endovascular repair (P< .05). All patients with clinical symptoms of SCI had CSF drain placement and augmentation of systemic blood pressures to ≥90 mm Hg, and 60% (3 of 5 patients) demonstrated marked clinical improvement.ConclusionPerioperative CSF drainage with augmentation of systemic blood pressures may have a beneficial role in reducing the risk of paraplegia in patients undergoing endovascular thoracic aortic stent graft placement. However, selective CSF drainage may offer the same benefit as mandatory drainage