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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |