Literature DB >> 23835404

Evaluation of the outcomes of endovascular management for patients with head and neck cancers and associated carotid blowout syndrome of the external carotid artery.

F-C Chang1, C-B Luo, J-F Lirng, C-J Lin, H-M Wu, S-C Hung, W-Y Guo, M M H Teng, C-Y Chang.   

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate factors related to the technical and haemostatic outcomes of endovascular management in patients with head and neck cancers (HNC) associated with carotid blowout syndrome (CBS) of the external carotid artery (ECA).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2002 and 2011, 34 patients with HNC with CBS involving branches of the ECA underwent endovascular therapy. Treatment included embolization with microparticles, microcoils, or acrylic adhesives. Fisher's exact test was used to examine demographic features, clinical and angiographic severities, and clinical and imaging findings as predictors of endovascular management outcomes.
RESULTS: Technical success and immediate haemostasis were achieved in all patients. Technical complications were encountered in one patient (2.9%). Rebleeding occurred in nine patients (26.5%). Angiographic vascular disruption grading from slight (1) to severe (4) revealed that the 18 patients with acute CBS had scores of 2 (2/18, 11.1%), 3 (3/18, 16.7%), and 4 (13/18, 72.2%). The 16 patients with impending and threatened CBS had scores of 1 (1/16, 6.25%), 2 (5/16, 31.25%), and 3 (10/16, 62.5%; p = 0.0003). For the 25 patients who underwent preprocedural computed tomography (CT)/magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations within 3 months of treatment, the agreement between clinical and imaging findings reached the sensitivity, specificity, and kappa values for recurrent tumours (1, 0.7143, 0.7826), soft-tissue defect (0.9091, 0.3333, 0.2424), and sinus tract/fistula (0.4737, 0, 0.4286).
CONCLUSION: Endovascular management for patients with CBS of the ECA had high technical success and safety but was associated with high rebleeding rates. We suggest applying aggressive post-procedural follow-up and using preprocedural CT/MRI to enhance the periprocedural diagnosis.
Copyright © 2013 The Royal College of Radiologists. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23835404     DOI: 10.1016/j.crad.2013.02.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Radiol        ISSN: 0009-9260            Impact factor:   2.350


  6 in total

1.  Outcomes of interventions for carotid blowout syndrome in patients with head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Nathan L Liang; Brian D Guedes; Umamaheswar Duvvuri; Michael J Singh; Rabih A Chaer; Michel S Makaroun; Ulka Sachdev
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2016-02-28       Impact factor: 4.268

2.  Outcomes of endovascular occlusion and stenting in the treatment of carotid blowout.

Authors:  Waleed Brinjikji; Harry J Cloft
Journal:  Interv Neuroradiol       Date:  2015-06-18       Impact factor: 1.610

3.  Management of Cutaneously Exposed Carotid Stents in Recurrent and Unresectable Head and Neck Cancer.

Authors:  André Beer-Furlan; Ashley Heilingoetter; Christopher Rayle; Thomas O'Toole; Thomas J Nielsen; Richard Webster Crowley; Samer Al-Khudari
Journal:  J Neurol Surg B Skull Base       Date:  2020-10-12

4.  Prediction of Borderzone Infarction by CTA in Patients Undergoing Carotid Embolization for Carotid Blowout.

Authors:  B-C Lee; Y-H Lin; C-W Lee; H-M Liu; A Huang
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 3.825

5.  Endovascular Management of Post-Irradiated Carotid Blowout Syndrome.

Authors:  Feng-Chi Chang; Chao-Bao Luo; Jiing-Feng Lirng; Chung-Jung Lin; Han-Jui Lee; Chih-Chun Wu; Sheng-Che Hung; Wan-Yuo Guo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-06       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Impending Carotid Blowout Stabilization Using an LT-D Tube.

Authors:  G Desuter; A Gregoire; Q Gardiner; P M Francois
Journal:  Case Rep Otolaryngol       Date:  2014-04-01
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.