Literature DB >> 9576071

A randomized study on eversion versus standard carotid endarterectomy: study design and preliminary results: the Everest Trial.

P Cao1, G Giordano, P De Rango, S Zannetti, R Chiesa, G Coppi, D Palombo, C Spartera, V Stancanelli, E Vecchiati.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The EVEREST Trial was designed to determine whether the surgical technique influences the durability and complications of carotid endarterectomy (CEA). The current report focuses on the study design and preliminary results.
METHODS: EVEREST is a randomized multicenter trial. A total of 1353 patients with carotid stenosis requiring surgical treatment were randomly assigned to received standard (n = 675) or eversion (n = 678) CEA. Primary end points included carotid occlusion, major stroke, death, and restenosis rate.
RESULTS: The rate of perioperative major stroke and death (1.3 for each study group) and the incidence of early carotid occlusion (0.6% for eversion vs 0.4% for standard) were similar. No significant differences were found between eversion and standard CEA with respect to incidence of perioperative transient ischemic accident, minor stroke, cranial nerve injuries, neck hematoma, myocardial infarction, or surgical defects as detected with intraoperative quality controls. Clamping time was significantly shorter for eversion CEA compared with patch standard procedures (31.7 +/- 15.9 vs 34.5 +/- 14.4 minutes, p = 0.02). A shunt was inserted in 11% of patients undergoing eversion CEAs and in 16% of patients undergoing standard procedures. Overall 30-day events occurred in 13.3% of the eversion group and in 11.4% of the standard group (p = 0.3). At a mean follow-up of 14.9 months (range, 1 to 38 months), 16 (2.4%) restenoses occurred in the eversion group and 28 (4.1%) occurred in the standard group (odds ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval, 0.3 to 1.1; p = 0.08).
CONCLUSION: The preliminary results of the EVEREST Trial suggest that eversion CEA is a safe and rapid procedure with low major complication rates. No significant differences in restenosis rates were observed between eversion and standard CEA at the available follow-up. Longer-term results are necessary to assess whether the eversion technique influences the durability of CEA.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9576071     DOI: 10.1016/s0741-5214(98)70223-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0741-5214            Impact factor:   4.268


  10 in total

Review 1.  Update on surgical management for asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

Authors:  Margaret H Walkup; Peter L Faries
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 2.931

2.  Completion angioscopy following carotid endarterectomy by the eversion technique or the standard longitudinal arteriotomy with patch closure.

Authors:  H Y Osman; C P Gibbons
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 1.891

3.  Associations of Perioperative Variables With the 30-Day Risk of Stroke or Death in Carotid Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis.

Authors:  Christoph Knappich; Andreas Kuehnl; Bernhard Haller; Michael Salvermoser; Ale Algra; Jean-Pierre Becquemin; Leo H Bonati; Richard Bulbulia; David Calvet; Gustav Fraedrich; John Gregson; Alison Halliday; Jeroen Hendrikse; George Howard; Olav Jansen; Mahmoud B Malas; Peter A Ringleb; Martin M Brown; Jean-Louis Mas; Thomas G Brott; Dylan R Morris; Steff C Lewis; Hans-Henning Eckstein
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2019-11-18       Impact factor: 7.914

4.  A prospective randomized study on bilateral carotid endarterectomy: patching versus eversion.

Authors:  E Ballotta; L Renon; G Da Giau; A Toniato; C Baracchini; E Abbruzzese; M Saladini; P Moscardo
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2000-07       Impact factor: 12.969

5.  [Open therapy of carotid stenosis by endarterectomy].

Authors:  E S Debus; A Larena; Ch Wintzer
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 0.955

6.  Comparative results of conventional and eversion carotid endarterectomy.

Authors:  Jae Hoon Lee; Bo Yang Suh
Journal:  Ann Surg Treat Res       Date:  2014-09-25       Impact factor: 1.859

7.  Comparison of Results Classical and Eversion Carotid Endarterectomy.

Authors:  Muhamed Djedovic; Emir Mujanovic; Amel Hadzimehmedagic; Dragan Totic; Haris Vukas; Haris Vranic
Journal:  Med Arch       Date:  2017-04

Review 8.  Carotid artery stenting vs. carotid endarterectomy in the management of carotid artery stenosis: Lessons learned from randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Mohamed M Salem; Abdulrahman Y Alturki; Matthew R Fusco; Ajith J Thomas; Bob S Carter; Clark C Chen; Ekkehard M Kasper
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2018-04-16

9.  Eversion Carotid Endarterectomy : A Short Review.

Authors:  Lazar B Davidovic; Ivan Z Tomic
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2020-03-02

10.  Conventional Carotid Endarterectomy with Shunt versus Eversion Carotid Endarterectomy without Shunt does the Technique Influence the Outcome in Symptomatic Critical Carotid Stenosis.

Authors:  Vineeth Kumar; Sreekumar Ramachandran; P N Sylaja; Shivanesan Pitchai
Journal:  Asian J Neurosurg       Date:  2021-05-28
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.