Cargando…

Strategy of carotid artery stenting as first-line treatment and carotid endarterectomy for carotid artery stenosis: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND: The main surgical options for stenosis of the carotid artery are carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS). The number of CAS procedures performed in Japan greatly exceeds that of CEA procedures. In this study, we used data from a single center to examine CAS and CEA...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Okamoto, Takanari, Inoue, Yasuo, Oi, Yuta, Taniyama, Ichita, Houri, Takashi, Teramukai, Satoshi, Hashimoto, Naoya
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Scientific Scholar 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9699868/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36447860
http://dx.doi.org/10.25259/SNI_820_2022
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The main surgical options for stenosis of the carotid artery are carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS). The number of CAS procedures performed in Japan greatly exceeds that of CEA procedures. In this study, we used data from a single center to examine CAS and CEA for carotid artery stenosis. METHODS: The subjects were patients with carotid artery stenosis who underwent CAS or CEA between January 2012 and May 2020. CAS was the first-choice treatment. CEA was used in cases with vulnerable plaques, a relatively low risk of general anesthesia, and no anatomical features disadvantageous for endarterectomy. RESULTS: A total of 140 cases (102 CAS and 38 CEA) were examined. There were more elderly patients in the CAS group. The CEA group had a higher rate of vulnerable plaques and only one case with an unfavorable anatomy for CEA. Major adverse events (stroke) occurred in two CAS cases. In multivariate logistic analysis, postoperative ischemic lesions were independently associated with age (odds ratio [OR] = 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01–1.26, P = 0.026) and vulnerable plaque (OR = 5.54, 95% CI: 1.48–20.70, P = 0.011) in the CAS group, but not in the CEA group. CONCLUSION: The results reflect the treatment algorithm at our hospital, indicating that triage is accurate. Thus, it is beneficial to assign cases based primarily on plaque vulnerability and anatomical risk for CEA, and to not hesitate to perform CEA simply because of old age. CAS as first-line treatment and CEA are effective and safe, which reflect the treatment situation in Japan.