Cargando…

Hybrid surgery versus endovascular intervention for patients with chronic internal carotid artery occlusion: A single-center retrospective study

OBJECTIVE: Chronic internal carotid artery occlusion (CICAO) can cause transient ischemic attack (TIA) and ischemic stroke. Carotid artery stenting (CAS) with embolic protection devices and hybrid surgery combining carotid endarterectomy and endovascular treatment are effective methods for carotid r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sun, Tao, He, Yiming, Wang, Fei, Mao, Bo, Han, Mengtao, Zhao, Peng, Wu, Wei, Wang, Yunyan, Li, Xingang, Wang, Donghai
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9478368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36117814
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.976318
_version_ 1784790555261140992
author Sun, Tao
He, Yiming
Wang, Fei
Mao, Bo
Han, Mengtao
Zhao, Peng
Wu, Wei
Wang, Yunyan
Li, Xingang
Wang, Donghai
author_facet Sun, Tao
He, Yiming
Wang, Fei
Mao, Bo
Han, Mengtao
Zhao, Peng
Wu, Wei
Wang, Yunyan
Li, Xingang
Wang, Donghai
author_sort Sun, Tao
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Chronic internal carotid artery occlusion (CICAO) can cause transient ischemic attack (TIA) and ischemic stroke. Carotid artery stenting (CAS) with embolic protection devices and hybrid surgery combining carotid endarterectomy and endovascular treatment are effective methods for carotid revascularization. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the effect and safety of the two surgical procedures. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective study. In this study, 44 patients who underwent hybrid surgery and 35 who underwent endovascular intervention (EI) at our center were enrolled consecutively between May 2016 and March 2022. All patients were classified into four groups (A-D), as described by Hasan et al. We recorded and analyzed clinical data, angiographic characteristics, technical success rate, perioperative complications, and follow-up data. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between hybrid surgery group and EI group, except for plasma high density lipoproteins (HDL) levels (median [interquartile range]: hybrid surgery, 0.99 [0.88–1.18] vs. EI, 0.85 [0.78–0.98] mmol/L, P = 0.001). The technical success rate of hybrid surgery was higher than that of EI (37/44 [84.1%] vs. 18/35 [51.4%], P = 0.002; type A: 15/16 [93.8%] vs. 10/11 [90.9%], P = 1.000; type B: 9/10 [90.0%] vs. 5/7 [71.4%], P = 0.537; type C: 12/15 [80.0%] vs. 3/12 [25.0%], P = 0.004; type D: 1/3 [33.3%] vs. 0/5 [0%], P = 0.375). No significant difference was observed in the incidence of perioperative complications between the two procedures (hybrid surgery: 7/44 [15.9%] vs. EI: 6/35 [17.1%], P = 0.883). In addition, there were no significant differences in the rates of stroke and restenosis during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with symptomatic CICAO, hybrid surgery may have an advantage over EI in successfully recanalizing occluded segments. There was no significant difference in safety and restenosis between hybrid surgery and EI.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9478368
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94783682022-09-17 Hybrid surgery versus endovascular intervention for patients with chronic internal carotid artery occlusion: A single-center retrospective study Sun, Tao He, Yiming Wang, Fei Mao, Bo Han, Mengtao Zhao, Peng Wu, Wei Wang, Yunyan Li, Xingang Wang, Donghai Front Surg Surgery OBJECTIVE: Chronic internal carotid artery occlusion (CICAO) can cause transient ischemic attack (TIA) and ischemic stroke. Carotid artery stenting (CAS) with embolic protection devices and hybrid surgery combining carotid endarterectomy and endovascular treatment are effective methods for carotid revascularization. The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the effect and safety of the two surgical procedures. METHODS: This was a single-center retrospective study. In this study, 44 patients who underwent hybrid surgery and 35 who underwent endovascular intervention (EI) at our center were enrolled consecutively between May 2016 and March 2022. All patients were classified into four groups (A-D), as described by Hasan et al. We recorded and analyzed clinical data, angiographic characteristics, technical success rate, perioperative complications, and follow-up data. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between hybrid surgery group and EI group, except for plasma high density lipoproteins (HDL) levels (median [interquartile range]: hybrid surgery, 0.99 [0.88–1.18] vs. EI, 0.85 [0.78–0.98] mmol/L, P = 0.001). The technical success rate of hybrid surgery was higher than that of EI (37/44 [84.1%] vs. 18/35 [51.4%], P = 0.002; type A: 15/16 [93.8%] vs. 10/11 [90.9%], P = 1.000; type B: 9/10 [90.0%] vs. 5/7 [71.4%], P = 0.537; type C: 12/15 [80.0%] vs. 3/12 [25.0%], P = 0.004; type D: 1/3 [33.3%] vs. 0/5 [0%], P = 0.375). No significant difference was observed in the incidence of perioperative complications between the two procedures (hybrid surgery: 7/44 [15.9%] vs. EI: 6/35 [17.1%], P = 0.883). In addition, there were no significant differences in the rates of stroke and restenosis during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with symptomatic CICAO, hybrid surgery may have an advantage over EI in successfully recanalizing occluded segments. There was no significant difference in safety and restenosis between hybrid surgery and EI. Frontiers Media S.A. 2022-09-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9478368/ /pubmed/36117814 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.976318 Text en © 2022 Sun, He, Wang, Mao, Han, Zhao, Wu, Wang, Li and Wang. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Surgery
Sun, Tao
He, Yiming
Wang, Fei
Mao, Bo
Han, Mengtao
Zhao, Peng
Wu, Wei
Wang, Yunyan
Li, Xingang
Wang, Donghai
Hybrid surgery versus endovascular intervention for patients with chronic internal carotid artery occlusion: A single-center retrospective study
title Hybrid surgery versus endovascular intervention for patients with chronic internal carotid artery occlusion: A single-center retrospective study
title_full Hybrid surgery versus endovascular intervention for patients with chronic internal carotid artery occlusion: A single-center retrospective study
title_fullStr Hybrid surgery versus endovascular intervention for patients with chronic internal carotid artery occlusion: A single-center retrospective study
title_full_unstemmed Hybrid surgery versus endovascular intervention for patients with chronic internal carotid artery occlusion: A single-center retrospective study
title_short Hybrid surgery versus endovascular intervention for patients with chronic internal carotid artery occlusion: A single-center retrospective study
title_sort hybrid surgery versus endovascular intervention for patients with chronic internal carotid artery occlusion: a single-center retrospective study
topic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9478368/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36117814
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2022.976318
work_keys_str_mv AT suntao hybridsurgeryversusendovascularinterventionforpatientswithchronicinternalcarotidarteryocclusionasinglecenterretrospectivestudy
AT heyiming hybridsurgeryversusendovascularinterventionforpatientswithchronicinternalcarotidarteryocclusionasinglecenterretrospectivestudy
AT wangfei hybridsurgeryversusendovascularinterventionforpatientswithchronicinternalcarotidarteryocclusionasinglecenterretrospectivestudy
AT maobo hybridsurgeryversusendovascularinterventionforpatientswithchronicinternalcarotidarteryocclusionasinglecenterretrospectivestudy
AT hanmengtao hybridsurgeryversusendovascularinterventionforpatientswithchronicinternalcarotidarteryocclusionasinglecenterretrospectivestudy
AT zhaopeng hybridsurgeryversusendovascularinterventionforpatientswithchronicinternalcarotidarteryocclusionasinglecenterretrospectivestudy
AT wuwei hybridsurgeryversusendovascularinterventionforpatientswithchronicinternalcarotidarteryocclusionasinglecenterretrospectivestudy
AT wangyunyan hybridsurgeryversusendovascularinterventionforpatientswithchronicinternalcarotidarteryocclusionasinglecenterretrospectivestudy
AT lixingang hybridsurgeryversusendovascularinterventionforpatientswithchronicinternalcarotidarteryocclusionasinglecenterretrospectivestudy
AT wangdonghai hybridsurgeryversusendovascularinterventionforpatientswithchronicinternalcarotidarteryocclusionasinglecenterretrospectivestudy