Masaaki Hokari1, Naoki Nakayama2, Ken Kazumata2, Toshiya Osanai2, Toshitaka Nakamura3, Hiroshi Yasuda4, Satoshi Ushikoshi4, Hideo Shichinohe2, Takeo Abumiya2, Satoshi Kuroda5, Kiyohiro Houkin2. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Japan. Electronic address: karimasa@med.hokudai.ac.jp. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Hokkaido University Graduate School of Medicine, Sapporo, Japan. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Azabu Neurosurgical Hospital, Sapporo, Japan. 4. Department of Neurosurgery, Hokkaido Medical Center, Sapporo, Japan. 5. Department of Neurosurgery, Graduate School of Medicine and Pharmaceutical Science, University of Toyama, Toyama, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) are beneficial procedures for patients with high-grade cervical carotid stenosis. However, it is sometimes difficult to manage patients with bilateral carotid stenosis. To decide the treatment strategy, one of the most important questions is whether contralateral stenosis increases the risk of patients undergoing CEA. METHODS: This retrospective study included 201 patients with carotid stenosis who underwent a total of 219 consecutive procedures (CEA 189/CAS 30). We retrospectively analyzed outcomes in patients with carotid stenosis who were treated with either CEA or CAS and evaluated whether or not contralateral lesions increases the risk of patients undergoing CEA or CAS. Furthermore, we retrospectively verified our treatment strategy for bilateral carotid stenosis. RESULTS: The incidences of perioperative complications were 5.3% in the CEA patients and 6.7% in the CAS patients, respectively. There was no significant difference between these 2 groups. The existences of contralateral occlusion and/or contralateral stenosis were not associated with perioperative complications in both the groups. There were 32 patients with bilateral severe carotid stenosis (>50%). Of those, 13 patients underwent bilateral revascularizations; CEA followed by CEA in 8, CEA followed by CAS in 3, CAS followed by CEA + coronary artery bpass grafting in 1, and CAS followed by CAS in 1. CONCLUSIONS: Our date showed that the existence of contralateral carotid lesion was not associated with perioperative complications, and most of our cases with bilateral carotid stenosis initially underwent CEA.
BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) are beneficial procedures for patients with high-grade cervical carotid stenosis. However, it is sometimes difficult to manage patients with bilateral carotid stenosis. To decide the treatment strategy, one of the most important questions is whether contralateral stenosis increases the risk of patients undergoing CEA. METHODS: This retrospective study included 201 patients with carotid stenosis who underwent a total of 219 consecutive procedures (CEA 189/CAS 30). We retrospectively analyzed outcomes in patients with carotid stenosis who were treated with either CEA or CAS and evaluated whether or not contralateral lesions increases the risk of patients undergoing CEA or CAS. Furthermore, we retrospectively verified our treatment strategy for bilateral carotid stenosis. RESULTS: The incidences of perioperative complications were 5.3% in the CEA patients and 6.7% in the CASpatients, respectively. There was no significant difference between these 2 groups. The existences of contralateral occlusion and/or contralateral stenosis were not associated with perioperative complications in both the groups. There were 32 patients with bilateral severe carotid stenosis (>50%). Of those, 13 patients underwent bilateral revascularizations; CEA followed by CEA in 8, CEA followed by CAS in 3, CAS followed by CEA + coronary artery bpass grafting in 1, and CAS followed by CAS in 1. CONCLUSIONS: Our date showed that the existence of contralateral carotid lesion was not associated with perioperative complications, and most of our cases with bilateral carotid stenosis initially underwent CEA.