Selective shunting with eversion carotid endarterectomy

AbstractPurposeThe consensus is that eversion carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is a safe, effective, and durable surgical technique. Concern remains, however, regarding insertion of a shunt during the procedure. We studied the advisability of shunting with eversion CEA by comparing patients who underwent eversion CEA with and without shunting.MethodsOver 9 years, 624 primary eversion CEAs were performed in 580 selected patients to treat symptomatic (n = 398, 63.8%) and asymptomatic (n = 226, 36.2%) carotid lesions. All eversion CEAs were performed by the same surgeon (E.B.), with the patient under deep general anesthesia, with continuous electroencephalographic (EEG) monitoring for selective shunting, based exclusively on EEG changes consistent with cerebral ischemia. A Pruitt-Inahara shunt was used in 43 eversion CEAs (6.9%). All patients underwent postoperative duplex ultrasound scanning and clinical follow-up at 1, 6, and 12 months and once a year thereafter. Mean follow-up was 52 months (range, 3-91 months). The main end points were perioperative (30-day) stroke and death, and recurrent stenosis.ResultsNo perioperative death occurred in this series. Overall, ischemic perioperative stroke occurred in 4 of 624 patients (0.6%). Two strokes were minor and two were major. Only one (major) stroke occurred in the group with shunt insertion (1 of 43, 2.3%; P = not significant); the everted internal carotid artery was patent. Long-term follow-up was performed in all living patients. There was no late recurrent stenosis (>50%), and one late asymptomatic occlusive event occurred in the group without shunt insertion.ConclusionsShunt insertion can be safely performed during eversion CEA. Perioperative mortality and morbidity after eversion CEA are not statistically modified with shunting

Prospective randomized study on bilateral above-knee femoropopliteal revascularization: polytetrafluoroethylene graft versus reversed saphenous vein

n/

Early and long-term outcomes of carotid endarterectomy in the very elderly: An 18-year single-center study

ObjectiveTo evaluate the perioperative (30-day) and long-term outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in elderly patients with severe symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid disease. Although the efficacy of CEA in preventing stroke in selected patients has been clearly demonstrated, concern has been expressed about the role of CEA in people over 80 years old.MethodsAn analysis was conducted on a prospectively compiled computerized database of all primary CEAs performed at our institution from 1990 to 2007. Descriptive demographic data, risk factors, surgical details, perioperative strokes and deaths, and other complications were recorded. All patients underwent postoperative duplex ultrasound scanning and clinical follow-up at one, six, and 12 months, and yearly thereafter. Survival analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier life-tables. Long-term relative survival after CEA was assessed against age- and gender-matched controls.ResultsIn all, 1769 CEAs were performed in 1562 patients, 193 of them (207 CEAs; group I) were ≥ 80 years old and 1371 were younger (1562 CEAs; group II). All CEA procedures were performed with patients under deep general anesthesia with continuous perioperative EEG monitoring for selective shunting. No strokes or deaths occurred in group I, whereas there were 11 perioperative strokes and three deaths in group II (1%). A complete follow-up (median, 5.2 years) was obtained in 185 elderly patients: no late occlusions or restenoses were detected, while the seven-year freedom from stroke and death were 96.6% and 52.4%, respectively. The relative seven-year survival rate was 99.8%.ConclusionsCEA in elderly patients proved safe and effective, with an excellent long-term durability. The long-term relative survival after CEA in elderly patients was better than in an age-and gender-matched population, so the likelihood of living long enough to benefit from CEA is not jeopardized by being very elderly

Surgical vs medical treatment for isolated internal carotid artery elongation with coiling or kinking in symptomatic patients: A prospective randomized clinical study

n/

Reconstructive surgery for complex aortoiliac occlusive disease in young adults

BackgroundAlthough aortoiliofemoral bypass grafting is the optimal revascularization method for patients with severe aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD), previous studies have documented poor patency rates in young adults. This study investigated whether young patients with AIOD have worse outcomes in patency, limb salvage, and long-term survival rates after reconstructive surgery than their older counterparts.MethodsPatients aged ≤50 years undergoing reconstructive surgery at our institution for AIOD between 1995 and 2010 were compared with a cohort of randomly selected patients aged ≥60 years (two for each of the young patients, matched for year of operation), analyzing demographics, risk factors, indications for surgery, operative details, and outcomes.ResultsAmong 927 consecutive patients undergoing primary surgery for AIOD, 78 (8.4%) aged ≤50 years (mean age, 48.4 years) and 156 older control patients (mean age, 71.2 years) were identified. The younger patients were mainly men (81%) and 59% had surgery for limb salvage and 41% for disabling claudication (P = .02). Compared with older patients, they were significantly more likely to be smokers (90% vs 72%; P = .002) and had previously needed significantly more inflow procedures (28% vs 16%; P = .03). Only one death occurred perioperatively (30-day) among the control patients, and no major amputations or graft infections occurred in either group. The need for subsequent infrainguinal reconstructions was greater in the younger patients (18% vs 7%; P = .01). The primary patency rates were inferior in the younger patients at 5 years (82% and 75%) and 10 years (95% and 90%; P = .01), whereas assisted secondary patency (89% and 82% vs 96% and 91%; P = .08), secondary patency (93% and 86% vs 98% and 92%; P = .19), limb salvage (88% and 83% vs 95% and 91%; P = .13), and survival rates (87% and 76% vs 91% and 84%; P = .32) were comparable in the two groups.ConclusionsThis study shows that despite a higher primary graft failure rate than that in older patients, aortoiliofemoral revascularization for complex AIOD is a safe procedure for younger patients with disabling claudication or limb-threatening ischemia, providing they are willing to follow a regular protocol to complete their postoperative surveillance and to undergo graft revision as necessary

High-grade symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis in the very elderly. A challenge for proponents of carotid angioplasty and stenting

Abstract Background Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is often considered as the preferred treatment for severe carotid occlusive disease in patients labelled as "high risk", including those aged 80 or more. We analyzed 30-day stroke risk and death rates after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for severe symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid disease in patients aged 80 or more, by comparison with the outcome of CAS reported in the recently- published literature. Methods A retrospective review was conducted on a prospectively compiled computerized database of all primary CEAs performed by a single surgeon at our institution from 1990 to 2003. Descriptive demographic data, risk factors, surgical details, perioperative strokes and deaths, and other complications were recorded. Results In all, 1260 CEAs were performed in 1099 patients; 1145 were performed in 987 patients less than 80 years old, and 115 were performed in 112 patients aged 80 or more. There were 11 perioperative strokes in the 1145 procedures in the younger group, for a stroke rate of 0.8%, and no strokes in the 115 procedures in the older group. The death rates were 0% for the octogenarians and 0.3% for the younger group. Conclusion The conviction that older age means higher risk needs to be revised. Patients aged 80 or more can undergo CEA with no more perioperative risks than younger patients. Proponents of CAS should bear this in mind before recommending CAS as the best therapeutic option for such patients.</p