1
|
Squizzato F, Zivelonghi C, Menegolo M, Xodo A, Colacchio EC, De Massari C, Grego F, Piazza M, Antonello M. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the outcomes of carotid endarterectomy after intravenous thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke. J Vasc Surg 2024:S0741-5214(24)01682-3. [PMID: 39159889 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2024.08.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2024] [Revised: 07/18/2024] [Accepted: 08/03/2024] [Indexed: 08/21/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUNDS Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) is the mainstay of treatment for patients presenting with acute ischemic stroke, while carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is indicated in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis. However, the impact of prior IVT on the outcomes of CEA (IVT-CEA) is not clear. The aim of this study was to determine whether IVT may create additional stroke and death risk for CEA, compared to CEA performed in the absence of a history of recent IVT, and to determine the optimal timing for CEA after IVT METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and metanalysis on studies comparing the outcomes of IVT-CEA versus CEA, using Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases. RESULTS We included 11 retrospective comparative studies, in which 135644 patients underwent CEA and 2070 underwent IVT-CEA. The pooled rate of perioperative stroke was 4.2% in the IVT-CEA group and 1.3% in the CEA group (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.12-1.58, p =.21), with a high heterogenicity (I2 = 93%). The rate of stroke/death was 5.9% in patients undergoing IVT-CEA 1.9% in those receiving CEA only (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.15-1.14, I2 = 92%, p=.09); after exclusion of studies including TIA as presenting symptom, stroke/death risk was 3.6% in IVT-CEA and 3.0% in CEA (OR 1.42, 95%CI 0.80-2.53, I2=50%, p=.11). The risk of stoke decreased with a delay in the performance of CEA (p=.268). Using results of the meta-regression, the calculated delay of CEA that allows for a <6% risk was 4.6 days. Compared to CEA, patients undergoing IVT-CEA had a significantly higher risk of ICH (2.5% vs 0.1% OR 0.11, 95% CI 0.06-0.21, I2 = 28%, p < .001) and neck haematoma requiring reintervention (3.6% vs 2.3%, OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.43-0.85, I2 = 0%, p = .003). CONCLUSION In patients presenting with an acute ischemic stroke, CEA can be safely performed after a prior endovenous thrombolysis, maintaining a stroke/death risk <6%. After IVT, CEA should be deferred for at least 5 days to minimize the risk for ICH and neck bleeding.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Cecilia Zivelonghi
- Department of Neurology and Stroke Unit, Verona University Hospital, Verona, Italy
| | - Mirko Menegolo
- Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Division, Padua University, Padua, Italy
| | - Andrea Xodo
- Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Division, "San Bortolo" Hospital, AULSS8 Berica, Vicenza, Italy
| | | | - Chiara De Massari
- Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Division, Padua University, Padua, Italy
| | - Franco Grego
- Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Division, Padua University, Padua, Italy
| | - Michele Piazza
- Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Division, Padua University, Padua, Italy
| | - Michele Antonello
- Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Division, Padua University, Padua, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kakkos SK, Vega de Ceniga M, Naylor R. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Peri-Procedural Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Carotid Interventions Following Thrombolysis. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2021; 62:340-349. [PMID: 34266765 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2021.06.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2021] [Revised: 06/01/2021] [Accepted: 06/03/2021] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) after thrombolytic therapy (TT). DATA SOURCES Medline, Scopus, and Cochrane databases. REVIEW METHODS Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies involving patients who underwent CEA/CAS after TT. RESULTS In 25 studies (n = 147 810 patients), 2 557 underwent CEA (n = 2 076) or CAS (n = 481) following TT. After CEA, the pooled peri-procedural stroke/death rate was 5.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 3.3 - 7.5) and intracranial haemorrhage (ICH) was 3.4% (95% CI 1.7 - 5.6). After CAS, the pooled peri-procedural stroke/death rate was 14.9% (95% CI 11.9 - 18.2) and ICH was 5.5% (95% CI 3.7 - 7.7). In case control studies comparing CEA outcomes in patients receiving TT vs. no TT, peri-procedural death/stroke was non-significantly higher after TT (4.3% vs. 1.5%; odds ratio [OR] 2.34, 95% CI 0.74 - 7.47), but ICH was significantly higher after TT (2.2% vs. 0.12%; OR 7.82, 95% CI 4.07 - 15.02), as was local haematoma formation (3.6% vs. 2.26%; OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.17 - 2.33). In case control studies comparing CAS outcomes in patients receiving TT vs. no TT, peri-procedural stroke/death was significantly higher after TT (5.2% vs. 1.5%; OR 8.49, 95% CI 2.12 - 33.95) as was ICH (5.4% vs. 0.7%; OR 7.48, 95% CI 4.69 - 11.92). Meta-regression analysis demonstrated an inverse association between the time interval from intravenous (IV) TT to undergoing CEA and the risk of peri-procedural stroke/death (p = .032). Peri-operative stroke/death was 13.0% when CEA was performed three days after TT and 10.6% when performed four days after TT, with the risk reducing to within the currently accepted 6% threshold after six-seven days had elapsed. CONCLUSION Peri-procedural ICH and local haematoma were significantly more frequent in patients undergoing CEA after TT (vs. no TT), although there were no randomised comparisons. Peri-procedural hazards were also significantly higher for CAS after TT. The inverse relationship between timing to CEA and peri-procedural stroke/death mandates careful patient selection and suggests that it may be safer to defer CEA for six-seven days after TT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stavros K Kakkos
- Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital of Patras, Patras, Greece.
| | - Melina Vega de Ceniga
- Department of Angiology and Vascular Surgery, Hospital de Galdakao-Usansolo, Galdakao and Biocruces Bizkaia Health Research Institute, Barakaldo, Spain
| | - Ross Naylor
- Leicester Vascular Institute, Glenfield Hospital, Leicester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Brinster CJ, Sternbergh WC. Safety of urgent carotid endarterectomy following thrombolysis. THE JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY 2020; 61:149-158. [PMID: 32225134 DOI: 10.23736/s0021-9509.20.11179-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Acute ischemic stroke is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide, and the incidence of ischemic stroke is predicted to increase in coming years. Carotid atherosclerotic occlusive disease accounts for up to 20% of all ischemic strokes, and mounting evidence suggests that, in the setting of an acute ischemic stroke due to carotid disease, earlier treatment with carotid intervention results in better outcomes. In patients with acute ischemic stroke, systemic or intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) has revolutionized ischemic stroke therapy, and intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) has become the principal treatment for acute ischemic stroke when administered within 3 to 4.5 hours of neurologic symptom onset. Given these trends in acute ischemic stroke therapy, vascular specialists are increasingly asked to perform carotid intervention following IVT, but reports in the literature examining outcomes in this circumstance are scarce, and the data regarding the appropriate interval from IVT to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) remains controversial. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION Literature searches were performed in PubMed (MEDLINE) and Ovid examining journal articles published between January 1st, 1998 and September 30th, 2019. The search terms used were: "urgent carotid endarterectomy," "carotid endarterectomy" AND "thrombolysis," "acute stroke and thrombolysis," "timing of carotid endarterectomy," and various combinations of these terms. EVIDENCE SYTNHESIS A total of 21 published reports detailing outcomes in 1165 patients have been published to date, with an average interval from IVT to CEA of 7.1 days, a cumulative 30-day stroke and death rate of 4.1% (0-18%) and a mean frequency of intracranial hemorrhage of 2.6% (0-18%). The aggregate data from the 21 reported series suggest that CEA can be performed safely within the first 14 days after the onset of neurologic symptoms in patients receiving antecedent IVT, however, data regarding the safety of urgent CEA within 48 to 72 hours of thrombolysis is conflicting, with some series reporting excellent results and others showing an increased risk of ICH, stroke, and/or death in these select patients. CONCLUSIONS Given the trend toward expedited treatment of acute ischemic stroke with subsequent transfer to regional referral centers, vascular specialists will be confronted with an increasing number of patients who may require urgent CEA after antecedent IVT. Further study is warranted to clearly delineate the appropriate interval from IVT to CEA and, specifically, to establish the safety of CEA with 72 hours of tPA administration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Clayton J Brinster
- Section of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA, USA -
| | - W Charles Sternbergh
- Section of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Ochsner Clinic Foundation, New Orleans, LA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Fortin W, Chaput M, Elkouri S, Beaudoin N, Blair JF. Carotid endarterectomy after systemic thrombolysis in a stroke population. J Vasc Surg 2019; 71:1254-1259. [PMID: 31526691 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2019.05.061] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/09/2019] [Accepted: 05/25/2019] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Vascular specialists are increasingly being requested to perform carotid endarterectomy (CEA) after intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) for stroke patients, raising concerns about hemorrhagic complications. Few case series and registry reports have assessed the question, and even fewer studies have included a control group. The aim of this study was to evaluate the overall outcome of patients undergoing CEA after IVT and to compare them with contemporary patients with CEA after simple stroke (non-IVT group). It also aimed to evaluate the differences in outcomes of stroke patients requiring CEA between nonvascular and vascular centers. METHODS The data of 169 consecutive patients who have undergone CEA after stroke in a single center was analyzed from January 2011 to December 2016, 27 of them (16%) having undergone previous IVT. A comparative analysis between the non-IVT and the IVT groups was performed. The time between stroke diagnosis and referral to a vascular specialist was also studied. RESULTS Age, sex, and cardiovascular comorbidities were similar in both groups. Median time between stroke and CEA was 13 days (Q1-Q3, 8-23 days), with 16 of the 27 patients (59%) in the IVT group undergoing CEA less than 14 days after the initial event. There were three intracranial hemorrhages (2.1%) in the non-IVT group versus one (3.7%) in the IVT group (P = NS). The overall 30-day combined stroke and death rate was 7.1% (6.3% in the non-IVT group vs 11.1% in the IVT group; P = .70). The incidence of postoperative cervical hematoma requiring reoperation was similar in both groups (2.1% vs 3.7%; P = NS). The median time between diagnosis of stroke and referral to a vascular specialist was higher for patients in nonvascular centers compared with vascular centers (3.5 days vs 1.0 day; P < .001), which translated to fewer patients referred from nonvascular centers undergoing surgery in the 14-day window period (38% vs 67%; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS In this retrospective analysis, CEA after IVT showed similar outcomes when compared with the overall CEA after stroke population. Stroke patients diagnosed in nonvascular centers were referred later than those in vascular centers and, although postoperative outcomes were similar, that was correlated with fewer patients undergoing surgery in a timely fashion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William Fortin
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Division of Vascular Surgery, Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; Faculty of Medicine, Université de Montréal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Miguel Chaput
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Stephane Elkouri
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Nathalie Beaudoin
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Jean-François Blair
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Centre Hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Beneš V, Bradáč O, Horváth D, Suchomel P, Beneš V. Surgery of acute occlusion of the extracranial internal carotid artery - a meta-analysis. VASA 2019; 49:6-16. [PMID: 31210589 DOI: 10.1024/0301-1526/a000801] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Abstract
Acute occlusion of the extracranial internal carotid artery (eICA) is associated with poor prognosis. Surgical desobliteration has not received adequate attention in recent years. We therefore conducted a literature review and meta-analysis of surgical studies published after 2000 that treated eICA occlusion surgically in an emergency setting. The search identified 10 relevant articles that included a total of 175 patients. The outcomes analysed included rates of recanalization (93 %), early neurological improvement (66 %), modified Rankin Scale 0-2 (62 %), mortality (5 %), early reocclusion (4 %), in-hospital stroke (4 %) and symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage (4 %). In conclusion, acute surgical desobliteration of eICA occlusion leads to high rates of recanalization and a majority of patients experience early neurological improvement and achieve favourable outcome. Rates of mortality, early reocclusion, in-hospital stroke and sICH are acceptable in the view of unfavourable natural history.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vladimír Beneš
- Department of Neurosurgery, Regional Hospital Liberec, Liberec, Czech Republic
| | - Ondřej Bradáč
- Department of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - David Horváth
- Institute of Scientific Information, Charles University, First Faculty of Medicine and General University Hospital in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Petr Suchomel
- Department of Neurosurgery, Regional Hospital Liberec, Liberec, Czech Republic
| | - Vladimír Beneš
- Department of Neurosurgery and Neurooncology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and Military University Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Savardekar AR, Narayan V, Patra DP, Spetzler RF, Sun H. Timing of Carotid Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis: A Snapshot of Current Trends and Systematic Review of Literature on Changing Paradigm towards Early Surgery. Neurosurgery 2019; 85:E214-E225. [DOI: 10.1093/neuros/nyy557] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2018] [Accepted: 01/31/2019] [Indexed: 11/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Abstract
Carotid revascularization has been recommended as the maximally beneficial treatment for stroke prevention in patients with recently symptomatic carotid stenosis (SCS). The appropriate timing for performing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) within the first 14 d after the occurrence of the index event remains controversial. We aim to provide a snapshot of the pertinent current literature related to the timing of CEA for patients with SCS. A systematic review of literature was conducted to study the timing of CEA for SCS. The guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) were followed. A total of 63 articles were identified as relevant to this topic. A summary of 15 articles favoring urgent CEA (within 48 h) for SCS within 48 h of index event and 9 articles not favoring urgent CEA is presented. A consensus is still to be achieved on the ideal timing of CEA for SCS within the 14-d window presently prescribed. The current literature suggests that patients who undergo urgent CEA (within 48 h) after nondisabling stroke as the index event have an increased periprocedural risk as compared to those who had transient ischemic attack (TIA) as the index event. Further prospective studies and clinical trials studying this question with separate groups classified as per the index event are required to shed more light on the subject. The current literature points to a changing paradigm towards early carotid surgery, specifically targeted within 48 h if the index event is TIA, and within 7 d if the index event is stroke.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amey R Savardekar
- Department of Neurosurgery, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, Louisiana
| | - Vinayak Narayan
- Department of Neurosurgery, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, Louisiana
| | - Devi P Patra
- Department of Neurosurgery, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, Louisiana
| | - Robert F Spetzler
- Department of Neurosurgery, Barrow Neurological Institute, St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, Phoenix, Arizona
| | - Hai Sun
- Department of Neurosurgery, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, Louisiana
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Ijäs P, Aro E, Eriksson H, Vikatmaa P, Soinne L, Venermo M. Prior Intravenous Stroke Thrombolysis Does Not Increase Complications of Carotid Endarterectomy. Stroke 2018; 49:1843-1849. [DOI: 10.1161/strokeaha.118.021517] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Petra Ijäs
- From the Department of Neurology (P.I., H.E., L.S.)
- Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Clinicum, University of Helsinki, Finland (P.I., L.S.)
| | - Ellinoora Aro
- Department of Vascular Surgery (E.A., P.V., M.V.), Helsinki University Hospital, Finland
| | | | - Pirkka Vikatmaa
- Department of Vascular Surgery (E.A., P.V., M.V.), Helsinki University Hospital, Finland
| | - Lauri Soinne
- From the Department of Neurology (P.I., H.E., L.S.)
- Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Clinicum, University of Helsinki, Finland (P.I., L.S.)
| | - Maarit Venermo
- Department of Vascular Surgery (E.A., P.V., M.V.), Helsinki University Hospital, Finland
| |
Collapse
|