Literature DB >> 30223012

A Regional Experience with Carotid Endarterectomy in Patients with a History of Neck Radiation.

Laura T Boitano1, Emel A Ergul1, Adam Tanious1, James C Iannuzzi1, Michol A Cooper1, David H Stone2, W Darrin Clouse1, Mark F Conrad3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Historically, a history of neck radiation has been considered as an anatomic risk factor for poor outcomes after carotid endarterectomy (CEA). However, this is based on small and primarily single institution reports with few comparative series. This study uses a regional quality database to compare perioperative outcomes of CEA in patients with and without a history of neck radiation (RAD and NORAD, respectively).
METHODS: The Vascular Study Group of New England database was queried for all CEA from 2003 to 2017. The RAD group included a history of neck radiation. Primary end points included perioperative stroke (30-day), myocardial infarction (MI) (in-hospital), death (30-day), a composite end point including major adverse events (MAEs: stroke, MI, and death), and long-term survival.
RESULTS: Overall, 18,832 patients underwent CEA (18,551 NORAD, 281 RAD). Baseline demographics differed in the following: the RAD group more frequently had a history of contralateral carotid artery stenting (1.4% vs. 0.3%, P = 0.009), anatomic high risk features (12.8% vs. 1.3%, P < 0.001), and contralateral carotid occlusion (5.3% vs. 2.4%, P = 0.005). The NORAD cohort comprised mostly women (38.9% vs. 29.5%, P < 0.001), had American Society of Anesthesiologists class 4 or 5 (8.0% vs. 4.6%, P = 0.035), had higher body mass index (28.3 ± 5.6 vs. 27.1 ± 5.4, P < 0.001), on a beta blocker preoperatively (68.0% vs. 62.3%, P = 0.042), and had major cardiovascular comorbidities including coronary artery disease (29.6% vs. 22.1%, P = 0.006). There were no differences in the percent stenosis, proportion symptomatic (37.4% vs. 34.2%, P = 0.259), use of preoperative antiplatelet agents or statins. Electroencephalography monitoring was more frequently used in RAD (54.5% vs. 46.0%, P = 0.005). There was no difference in perioperative complications, including stroke (RAD 0.4% vs. NORAD 0.7%, P > 0.999), MI (0.4% vs. 0.9%, P = 0.736), death (0.7% vs. 0.6%, P = 0.683), MAE (2.1% vs. 2.2%, P > 0.999), or long-term survival (79.9% vs. 85.0%, P = 0.357). When only symptomatic or asymptomatic stenosis was considered, there remained no difference in primary end points. However, perioperative neurologic events (transient ischemic attack or stroke) was higher in symptomatic RAD versus symptomatic NORAD (6.7% vs. 2.6%, P = 0.020).
CONCLUSIONS: This regional experience with CEA in RAD patients shows similar perioperative morbidity, mortality, and long-term survival when compared with CEA for standard surgical patients (NORAD). Symptomatic presentation was associated with higher perioperative neurologic events, but this was not reflected in stroke rates. RAD is not always a contraindication to CEA and select patients can expect outcomes comparable to standard surgical patients.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30223012     DOI: 10.1016/j.avsg.2018.08.069

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0890-5096            Impact factor:   1.466


  2 in total

1.  Outcomes of carotid artery stenting in patients with radiation arteritis compared with those with atherosclerotic disease.

Authors:  Samantha Danielle Minc; Dylan Thibault; Luke Marone
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2021-11-30       Impact factor: 4.268

Review 2.  The less invasive paradox, why carotid artery stenting is not suitable for the high-risk patient.

Authors:  Matthew Machin; Safa Salim; Sarah Onida; Alun Huw Davies
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-10
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.