Laura Capoccia1, Nunzio Montelione2, Danilo Menna2, Andrea Cassoni3, Valentino Valentini3, Giorgio Iannetti3, Enrico Sbarigia2, Francesco Speziale2. 1. Vascular Surgery Division, Department of Surgery "Paride Stefanini", Policlinico Umberto I, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy. Electronic address: laura.capoccia@uniroma1.it. 2. Vascular Surgery Division, Department of Surgery "Paride Stefanini", Policlinico Umberto I, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy. 3. Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Policlinico Umberto I, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The location of the carotid bifurcation and a very distal extension of internal carotid atherosclerotic disease may challenge vascular surgeons performing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) by increasing technical difficulty and possibly the incidence of cranial nerve damage or palsies. The objective of the present study is to report on the safety of CEA with mandibular subluxation (MS) and to compare results of CEA in 2 groups of patients treated by standard CEA or by MS-CEA according to rates of major neurologic complications, death, and the occurrence of postoperative peripheral nerve palsy. METHODS: Between July 2000 and June 2012, 1,357 CEAs were performed. MS was additionally used in 43 patients. Only patients with primary atherosclerotic internal carotid artery (ICA) lesions in the 2 groups (38 in the MS-CEA group and 1,289 in the standard CEA group) were considered for comparative analysis. RESULTS: MS-CEA patients were more frequently male (P = 0.03), presented more frequently with symptomatic lesions (P = 0.007), longer lesions (P = 0.01), and had common ICA bypass implantation (P = 0.02). Mean follow-up was 68.75 ± 37.87 months (range: 1-144 months). No perioperative neurologic mortality and no prolonged discomfort related to MS was recorded. The overall neurologic morbidity rate (major stroke/minor stroke/transient ischemic attach) was comparable in the 2 groups (P = 0.78). The overall immediate peripheral nerve injury rate was 7.89% in the MS-CEA group and 5.27% in the standard CEA group (P = 0.73). Three cases of permanent dysphonia in the standard CEA group (0.23%) and 1 case of dysphagia in the MS-CEA group (2.63%) were reported at follow-up (P = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: MS-CEA can be a very useful technical adjunct for high-located carotid bifurcations or challenging carotid lesions, with an overall risk comparable to that of standard CEA.
BACKGROUND: The location of the carotid bifurcation and a very distal extension of internal carotid atherosclerotic disease may challenge vascular surgeons performing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) by increasing technical difficulty and possibly the incidence of cranial nerve damage or palsies. The objective of the present study is to report on the safety of CEA with mandibular subluxation (MS) and to compare results of CEA in 2 groups of patients treated by standard CEA or by MS-CEA according to rates of major neurologic complications, death, and the occurrence of postoperative peripheral nerve palsy. METHODS: Between July 2000 and June 2012, 1,357 CEAs were performed. MS was additionally used in 43 patients. Only patients with primary atherosclerotic internal carotid artery (ICA) lesions in the 2 groups (38 in the MS-CEA group and 1,289 in the standard CEA group) were considered for comparative analysis. RESULTS: MS-CEA patients were more frequently male (P = 0.03), presented more frequently with symptomatic lesions (P = 0.007), longer lesions (P = 0.01), and had common ICA bypass implantation (P = 0.02). Mean follow-up was 68.75 ± 37.87 months (range: 1-144 months). No perioperative neurologic mortality and no prolonged discomfort related to MS was recorded. The overall neurologic morbidity rate (major stroke/minor stroke/transient ischemic attach) was comparable in the 2 groups (P = 0.78). The overall immediate peripheral nerve injury rate was 7.89% in the MS-CEA group and 5.27% in the standard CEA group (P = 0.73). Three cases of permanent dysphonia in the standard CEA group (0.23%) and 1 case of dysphagia in the MS-CEA group (2.63%) were reported at follow-up (P = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: MS-CEA can be a very useful technical adjunct for high-located carotid bifurcations or challenging carotid lesions, with an overall risk comparable to that of standard CEA.
Authors: Reinaldo Benevides Dos Santos; André Brito Queiroz; Ronald José Ribeiro Fidelis; Cicero Fidelis Lopes; José Siqueira de Araújo Journal: J Vasc Bras Date: 2017 Oct-Dec