Cargando…

Patch Angioplasty or Primary Closure Following Carotid Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis

Objectives  Guidelines recommend routine patching to prevent restenosis following carotid endarterectomy, mainly based on studies performed many years ago with different perioperative care and medical treatment compared with current standards. Aim of the present study was to compare primary closure...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Huizing, Eline, Vos, Cornelis G., Hulsebos, Robin G., van den Akker, Peter J., Borst, Gert Jan de, Ünlü, Çağdaş
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Thieme Medical Publishers 2018
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6003887/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29915809
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1655757
_version_ 1783332416733052928
author Huizing, Eline
Vos, Cornelis G.
Hulsebos, Robin G.
van den Akker, Peter J.
Borst, Gert Jan de
Ünlü, Çağdaş
author_facet Huizing, Eline
Vos, Cornelis G.
Hulsebos, Robin G.
van den Akker, Peter J.
Borst, Gert Jan de
Ünlü, Çağdaş
author_sort Huizing, Eline
collection PubMed
description Objectives  Guidelines recommend routine patching to prevent restenosis following carotid endarterectomy, mainly based on studies performed many years ago with different perioperative care and medical treatment compared with current standards. Aim of the present study was to compare primary closure (PRC) versus patch closure (PAC) in a contemporary cohort of patients. Methods  Consecutive patients treated by carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic stenosis between January 2006 and April 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Primary outcome was restenosis at 6 weeks and 1 year and occurrence of ipsilateral stroke. Secondary outcomes were mortality, complications, and reintervention rates. Results  Five hundred carotid artery endarterectomies were performed. Fifty-nine patients were excluded because eversion endarterectomy was performed or because they were asymptomatic. PRC was performed in 349 and PAC in 92 patients. Restenosis at 6 weeks was 6.0% in the PAC group versus 3.0% in the PRC group ( p  = 0.200). Restenosis at 1 year was 31.6 versus 14.1%, respectively ( p  = 0.104). No difference was found for stroke (3.4 vs 1.1%, p  = 0.319), death (1.1 vs 0.0%, p  = 0.584), or other complications (1.1 vs 0.0%, p  = 0.584), respectively. Conclusions  It remains unclear whether routine patching should be recommended for all patients. A strategy of selective patching compared with routine patching, based on internal carotid artery diameter and other patient characteristics, deserves further investigation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6003887
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Thieme Medical Publishers
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60038872018-06-18 Patch Angioplasty or Primary Closure Following Carotid Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis Huizing, Eline Vos, Cornelis G. Hulsebos, Robin G. van den Akker, Peter J. Borst, Gert Jan de Ünlü, Çağdaş Surg J (N Y) Objectives  Guidelines recommend routine patching to prevent restenosis following carotid endarterectomy, mainly based on studies performed many years ago with different perioperative care and medical treatment compared with current standards. Aim of the present study was to compare primary closure (PRC) versus patch closure (PAC) in a contemporary cohort of patients. Methods  Consecutive patients treated by carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic stenosis between January 2006 and April 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Primary outcome was restenosis at 6 weeks and 1 year and occurrence of ipsilateral stroke. Secondary outcomes were mortality, complications, and reintervention rates. Results  Five hundred carotid artery endarterectomies were performed. Fifty-nine patients were excluded because eversion endarterectomy was performed or because they were asymptomatic. PRC was performed in 349 and PAC in 92 patients. Restenosis at 6 weeks was 6.0% in the PAC group versus 3.0% in the PRC group ( p  = 0.200). Restenosis at 1 year was 31.6 versus 14.1%, respectively ( p  = 0.104). No difference was found for stroke (3.4 vs 1.1%, p  = 0.319), death (1.1 vs 0.0%, p  = 0.584), or other complications (1.1 vs 0.0%, p  = 0.584), respectively. Conclusions  It remains unclear whether routine patching should be recommended for all patients. A strategy of selective patching compared with routine patching, based on internal carotid artery diameter and other patient characteristics, deserves further investigation. Thieme Medical Publishers 2018-06-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6003887/ /pubmed/29915809 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1655757 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Huizing, Eline
Vos, Cornelis G.
Hulsebos, Robin G.
van den Akker, Peter J.
Borst, Gert Jan de
Ünlü, Çağdaş
Patch Angioplasty or Primary Closure Following Carotid Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis
title Patch Angioplasty or Primary Closure Following Carotid Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis
title_full Patch Angioplasty or Primary Closure Following Carotid Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis
title_fullStr Patch Angioplasty or Primary Closure Following Carotid Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis
title_full_unstemmed Patch Angioplasty or Primary Closure Following Carotid Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis
title_short Patch Angioplasty or Primary Closure Following Carotid Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis
title_sort patch angioplasty or primary closure following carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid artery stenosis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6003887/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29915809
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1655757
work_keys_str_mv AT huizingeline patchangioplastyorprimaryclosurefollowingcarotidendarterectomyforsymptomaticcarotidarterystenosis
AT voscornelisg patchangioplastyorprimaryclosurefollowingcarotidendarterectomyforsymptomaticcarotidarterystenosis
AT hulsebosrobing patchangioplastyorprimaryclosurefollowingcarotidendarterectomyforsymptomaticcarotidarterystenosis
AT vandenakkerpeterj patchangioplastyorprimaryclosurefollowingcarotidendarterectomyforsymptomaticcarotidarterystenosis
AT borstgertjande patchangioplastyorprimaryclosurefollowingcarotidendarterectomyforsymptomaticcarotidarterystenosis
AT unlucagdas patchangioplastyorprimaryclosurefollowingcarotidendarterectomyforsymptomaticcarotidarterystenosis