Urgent carotid endarterectomy to prevent recurrence and improve neurologic outcome in mild-to-moderate acute neurologic events

Sex as a Predictor of Outcomes for Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis: A Comparative Analysis between CAS and CEA

PURPOSE

Reporting gender-related outcomes for symptomatic carotid lesion revascularization after both endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) procedures in an unselected group of patients treated by Italian Vascular Specialists.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on patients presenting with recently symptomatic carotid stenosis treated by CAS and by CEA. The primary endpoint was the 30 days any stroke occurrence rate; secondary endpoints were technical success, occurrence of transient ischemic attack (TIA), acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and death. Demographic, clinical and procedural data were all noted in order to identify the outcome's determining factor.

RESULTS

A total of 265 patients (193 males and 72 females) were enrolled, and of these 134 (50.5%) underwent CEA and 131 CAS (49.5%). At 30 days, the overall new stroke rate was 3.4% (one fatal), and no TIA, AMI or deaths were observed. Among strokes, seven major and two minor strokes were reported, with six after CEA and three after CAS (p = 0.32; OR: 2; CI95%: 0.48-8.17). The timing of revascularization has been found to be slightly associated with new stroke occurrence: seven out nine strokes were observed in patients treated within 14 days from symptom onset (5.5% vs. 1.4%; p = 0.08, OR: 3.8, CI95%: 0.77-18.56). Lastly, female patients presented a significantly higher risk of post-operative stroke compared to male patients: 6.9% vs. 2.1% (p: 0.05; OR: 3.52; CI95%: 0.91-13.52).

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience seems to suggest that both CEA and CAS provide safe and effective results in treating patients presenting with symptomatic carotid stenosis. Regardless of the type of revascularization, female sex is an independent risk factor for stroke recurrence after treatment.

Outcomes in acute carotid-related stroke eligible for mechanical reperfusion: SAFEGUARD-STROKE Registry

BACKGROUND

Carotid-related strokes (CRS) are largely unresponsive to intravenous thrombolysis and are often large and disabling. Little is known about contemporary CRS referral pathways and proportion of eligible patients who receive emergency mechanical reperfusion (EMR).

METHODS

Referral pathways, serial imaging, treatment data, and neurologic outcomes were evaluated in consecutive CRS patients presenting over 18 months in catchment area of a major carotid disease referral center with proximal-protected CAS expertise, on-site neurology, and stroke thrombectomy capability (Acute Stroke of CArotid Artery Bifurcation Origin Treated With Use oF the MicronEt-covered CGUARD Stent - SAFEGUARD-STROKE Registry; companion to SAFEGUARD-STROKE Study NCT05195658).

RESULTS

Of 101 EMR-eligible patients (31% i.v.-thrombolyzed, 39.5% women, age 39-89 years, 94.1% ASPECTS 9-10, 90.1% pre-stroke mRS 0-1), 57 (56.4%) were EMR-referred. Referrals were either endovascular (Comprehensive Stroke Centre, CSC, 21.0%; Stroke Thrombectomy-Capable CAS Centre, STCC, 70.2%) or to vascular surgery (VS, 1.8%), with >1 referral attempt in 7.0% patients (CSC/VS or VS/CSC or CSC/VS/STCC). Baseline clinical and imaging characteristics were not different between EMR-treated and EMR-untreated patients. EMR was delivered to 42.6% eligible patients (emergency carotid surgery 0%; STCC rejections 0%). On multivariable analysis, non-tandem CRS was a predictor of not getting referred for EMR (OR 0.36; 95%CI 0.14-0.93, P=0.03). Ninety-day neurologic status was profoundly better in EMR-treated patients; mRS 0-2 (83.7% vs. 34.5%); mRS 3-5 (11.6% vs. 53.4%), mRS 6 (4.6% vs. 12.1%); P<0.001 for all.

CONCLUSIONS

EMR-treatment substantially improves CRS neurologic outcomes but only a minority of EMR-eligible patients receive EMR. To increase the likelihood of brain-saving treatment, EMR-eligible stroke referral and management pathways, including those for CSC/VS-rejected patients, should involve stroke thrombectomy-capable centres with endovascular carotid treatment expertise.

Brazilian Angiology and Vascular Surgery Society Guidelines for the treatment of extracranial cerebrovascular disease

Extracranial cerebrovascular disease has been the subject of intense research throughout the world, and is of paramount importance for vascular surgeons. This guideline, written by the Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery (SBACV), supersedes the 2015 guideline. Non-atherosclerotic carotid artery diseases were not included in this document. The purpose of this guideline is to bring together the most robust evidence in this area in order to help specialists in the treatment decision-making process. The AGREE II methodology and the European Society of Cardiology system were used for recommendations and levels of evidence. The recommendations were graded from I to III, and levels of evidence were classified as A, B, or C. This guideline is divided into 11 chapters dealing with the various aspects of extracranial cerebrovascular disease: diagnosis, treatments and complications, based on up-to-date knowledge and the recommendations proposed by SBACV.

Evaluating a Novel EEG-Based Index for Stroke Detection Under Anesthesia During Mechanical Thrombectomy

BACKGROUND

The rapid identification of acute stroke (AS) during and after anesthesia might lead to early interventions and improved outcomes. We investigated a novel 2-channel electroencephalogram (EEG)-based marker for stroke detection-the lateral interconnection ratio (LIR)-in AS patients having endovascular thrombectomy (EVT) with general anesthesia (GA) or sedation. The LIR in 2 reference groups of patients without postoperative neurological complications was used for comparison.

METHODS

The National Institutes of Health stroke scale score was assessed before and after thrombectomy in 100 patients having EVT with GA or sedation. The EEG was monitored during and for 4 hours following EVT in the AS group and during surgery in the 2 reference groups. We compared: (1) LIR between AS and reference groups; (2) LIR and stroke dynamics (clinical improvement or deterioration after EVT assessed by the National Institutes of Health stroke scale score); (3) the impact of stroke site (anterior vs. posterior circulation) and anesthesia type (GA vs. sedation) on the LIR.

RESULTS

Median (interquartile range) LIR was lower in patients with AS compared with reference patients (0.09, 0.05 to 0.16 vs. 0.39, 0.24 to 0.52, respectively; P <0.000002), and LIR increased in AS patients whose clinical status recovered after EVT compared with nonrecovered patients (0.20, 0.12 to 0.29 vs. 0.09, 0.05 to 0.11, respectively; P <0.007). The LIR might be more sensitive to anterior circulation stroke but is not impacted by anesthesia type.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrated the utility of using AS patients undergoing EVT as a platform for assessing a novel EEG marker for the identification of stroke during anesthesia. Further, large-scale studies in AS patients during EVT and in patients undergoing different surgeries and anesthesia are required to validate the LIR.

Safety of Carotid Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Stenosis by Age: Meta-Analysis With Individual Patient Data

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty whether elderly patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis have higher rates of adverse events following carotid endarterectomy. In trials, recurrent stroke risk on medical therapy alone increased with age, whereas operative stroke risk was not related. Few octogenarians were included in trials and there has been no systematic analysis of all study types. We aimed to evaluate the safety of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic elderly patients, particularly in octogenarians.

METHODS

We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies (from January 1, 1980 through March 1, 2022) reporting post carotid endarterectomy risk of stroke, myocardial infarction, and death in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis. We included observational studies and interventional arms of randomized trials if the outcome rates (or the raw data to calculate these) were provided. Individual patient data from 4 prospective cohorts enabled multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Of 47 studies (107 587 patients), risk of perioperative stroke was 2.04% (1.94-2.14) in octogenarians (390 strokes/19 101 patients) and 1.85% (1.75-1.95) in nonoctogenarians (1395/75 537); P=0.046. Perioperative death was 1.09% (0.94-1.25) in octogenarians (203/18 702) and 0.53% (0.48-0.59) in nonoctogenarians (392/73 327); P<0.001. Per 5-year age increment, a linear increase in perioperative stroke, myocardial infarction, and death were observed; P=0.04 to 0.002. However, during the last 3 decades, perioperative stroke±death has declined significantly in octogenarians (7.78% [5.58-10.55] before year 2000 to 2.80% [2.56-3.04] after 2010); P<0.001. In Individual patient data multivariate-analysis (5111 patients), age ≥85 years was independently associated with perioperative stroke (P<0.001) and death (P=0.005). Yet, survival was similar for octogenarians versus nonoctogenarians at 1-year (95.0% [93.2-96.5] versus 97.5% [96.4-98.6]; P=0.08), as was 5-year stroke risk (11.93% [9.98-14.16]) versus 12.78% [11.65-13.61]; P=0.24).

CONCLUSIONS

We found a modest increase in perioperative risk with age in symptomatic patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy. As stroke risk increases with age when on medical therapy alone, our findings support selective urgent intervention in symptomatic elderly patients.

Guideline on carotid surgery for stroke prevention: updates from the Italian Society of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. A trend towards personalized medicine

BACKGROUND

This guideline (GL) on carotid surgery as updating of "Stroke: Italian guidelines for Prevention and Treatment" of the ISO-SPREAD Italian Stroke Organization-Group, has recently been published in the National Guideline System and shared with the Italian Society of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (SICVE) and other Scientific Societies and Patient's Association.

METHODS

GRADE-SIGN version, AGREE quality of reporting checklist. Clinical questions formulated according to the PICO model. Recommendations developed based on clinical questions by a multidisciplinary experts' panel and patients' representatives. Systematic reviews performed for each PICO question. Considered judgements filled by assessing the evidence level, direction, and strength of the recommendations.

RESULTS

The panel provided indications and recommendations for appropriate, comprehensive, and individualized management of patients with carotid stenosis. Diagnostic and therapeutic processes of the best medical therapy, carotid endarterectomy (CEA), carotid stenting (CAS) according to the evidences and the judged opinions were included. Symptomatic carotid stenosis in elective and emergency, asymptomatic carotid stenosis, association with ischemic heart disease, preoperative diagnostics, types of anesthesia, monitoring in case of CEA, CEA techniques, comparison between CEA and CAS, post-surgical carotid restenosis, and medical therapy are the main topics, even with analysis of uncertainty areas for risk-benefit assessments in the individual patient (personalized medicine [PM]).

CONCLUSIONS

This GL updates on the main recommendations for the most appropriate diagnostic and medical-surgical management of patients with atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis to prevent ischemic stroke. This GL also provides useful elements for the application of PM in good clinical practice.

NIHSS score at admission can predict functional outcomes in patients with ischemic stroke undergoing carotid endarterectomy

OBJECTIVE

The aim of present study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score in patients undergoing acute CEA, and to assess clinical and morphological factors that could predict worse outcomes.

METHODS

The data of 183 consecutive patients who have undergone CEA after ischemic stroke was analyzed from January 2015 to January 2021. Patients were divided into two groups using the NIHSS cut off point of 4. Functional dependence was assessed on hospital discharge and 90 days after.

RESULTS

In total, 102 patients (55.7%) had a minor stroke (Group A: NIHSS ≤ 4), whereas 81 patients (44.3%) had a moderate-major stroke (Group B: NIHSS > 4). Group A and group B showed significant differences in their intracranial anatomic features: presence of incomplete Circle of Willis (7.8% vs 17.3%; p=.05), volume of Cerebral ischemic lesion volume ≥4000 mm³ (5.9 % vs 24.7%; p=<.001), and high ASPECTS of 8 to 10 (75.5% vs 44.4%; p=<.001). The overall rate of combined perioperative stroke/myocardial infarction/death was 1.1%, with no strokes recorded during the waiting time to carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Patients in group A had a lower rate of functional dependence at discharge (4.9% vs. 35.8%; p = <.001) and at 90 days after index stroke event (2.5% vs. 19.6%; p = <.001) versus those in group B. Using multivariate binary logistic regression, admission NIHSS>4 was significantly associated with higher odds of functional dependence at discharge (OR= 7.9, 95%CI= 2.7-18.5, p = <.001) and at 90 days (OR= 10.4, 95%CI= 2.7-19.3, p = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

NIHSS>4 at admission will increase the risk of having higher mRS scores both at hospital discharge and at 90 days after index stroke event. acute CEA was safe and feasible in patients with ischemic stroke, even if they had previously undergone intravenous thrombolysis.

FACTORS AFFECTING THE OUTCOME OF SYMPTOMATIC CAROTID STENOSIS SURGICAL TREATMENT IN A SINGLE CENTER SERIES

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to evaluate the role of preoperative ischemic brain lesion (IBL) volume, assessed by Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance brain imaging (DW-MRI) with RAPID® processing, and surgery timing in predicting post-operative neurological outcomes in symptomatic carotid stenosis (SCS) patients treated with carotid endarterectomy (CEA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients with SCS who underwent CEA between January 2010 and June 2020 were considered. IBLs ipsilateral to the stenosis were identified in the preoperative magnetic resonance brain (MRI). The volume was quantified in mL and correlated with 30-day rates of stroke and stroke/death by χ2 and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

RESULTS

134 patients were surgically treated for SCS during the entire study period. CEA procedures were defined as emergent, urgent, or elective if performed within 48 hours, between 48 hours and 14 days, or after 14 days from symptoms onset, respectively. Cumulative new ipsilateral stroke rate was 4,5%, with a statistically higher neurological complications in emergent patients compared to urgent and elective patients (10,6%, 1,47% and 0% respectively, p 0,039). ROC curve analysis showed a volume of 10 mL was predictive of postoperative stroke with 100% sensitivity and 80% specificity. A IBL volume >10mL was an independent risk factor for postoperative stroke. Infact, the perioperative neurological complication rate was significantly different in high-IBL volume patients (>10 mL) compared with low-IBL volume patients (<10 mL) (p 0,003) CONCLUSIONS: : The present study suggest that the optimal timing for CEA is between 48 hours and 14 days. Furthermore, the present study suggests that the presence of the IBL, by itself, is not definitively related with an unsatisfactory neurological outcome. However, an IBL higher than 10 mL should be as a reliable threshold value adverse neurological result in SCS patients.

SOCIETY FOR VASCULAR SURGERY CLINICAL PRACTICE GUIDELINES FOR MANAGEMENT OF EXTRACRANIAL CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASE

Management of carotid bifurcation stenosis in stroke prevention has been the subject of extensive investigations, including multiple randomized controlled trials. The proper treatment of patients with carotid bifurcation disease is of major interest to vascular surgeons and other vascular specialists. In 2011, the Society for Vascular Surgery published guidelines for treatment of carotid artery disease. At the time, several randomized trials, comparing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS), were published. Since that publication, several studies and a few systematic reviews comparing CEA and CAS have been published, and the role of medical management has been re-emphasized. The current publication updates and expands the 2011 guidelines with specific emphasis on five areas: is carotid endarterectomy recommended over maximal medical therapy in low risk patients; is carotid endarterectomy recommended over trans-femoral carotid artery stenting in low surgical risk patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis of >50%; timing of carotid Intervention in patients presenting with acute stroke; screening for carotid artery stenosis in asymptomatic patients; and optimal sequence for intervention in patients with combined carotid and coronary artery disease. A separate implementation document will address other important clinical issues in extracranial cerebrovascular disease. Recommendations are made using the GRADE (Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach, as has been done with other Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines. The committee recommends CEA as the first-line treatment for symptomatic low risk surgical patients with stenosis of 50% to 99% and asymptomatic patients with stenosis of 70% to 99%. The perioperative risk of stroke and death in asymptomatic patients must be <3% to ensure benefit for the patient. In patients with recent stable stroke (modified Rankin 0-2), carotid revascularization is considered appropriate in symptomatic patients with greater than 50% stenosis and is recommended and performed as soon as the patient is neurologically stable after 48 hours but definitely before 14 days of onset of symptoms. In the general population, screening for clinically asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis in patients without cerebrovascular symptoms or significant risk factors for carotid artery disease is not recommended. In selected asymptomatic patients who are at increased risk for carotid stenosis, we suggest screening for clinically asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis as long as the patients would potentially be fit for and willing to consider carotid intervention if significant stenosis is discovered. In patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis 50-99%, who require both CEA and CABG, we suggest CEA before or concomitant with CABG to potentially reduce the risk of stroke and stroke/death. The sequencing of the intervention depends on clinical presentation and institutional experience.

Safety and Efficacy of Early Carotid Endarterectomy in Patients with Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis

DESIGN

A systematic document retrieval of studies published in the past 10 years reporting periprocedural stroke/mortality/MI after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) related to the time between CEA and qualifying neurological symptoms. The application database has "PubMed, EMbase and Cochrane databases." RevMan5.3 software provided by the Cochrane collaboration was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A systematic literature search was conducted in databases. A total of 10 articles were included in this study. They were divided into early CEA and delayed CEA with operation within 48 h, 1 w, or 2 w after onset of neurological symptoms. Incidence of the postoperative stroke in patients undergoing delayed CEA (≥48 h) was significantly higher than patients with delayed CEA (<48 h) (OR = 2.14, 95% CI: 1.43-3.21, P = 0.0002). The postoperative mortality of patients after delayed CEA (≥48 h) was significantly higher than patients after early CEA (<48 h) (OR = 1.35, 95% CI: 1.06-1.71, P = 0.02). The risk of postoperative mortality of patients treated with delayed CEA (≥7 d) was significantly higher than patients after the early CEA group (<7 d) (OR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.21-2.32, P = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Early CEA is safe and effective for a part of patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis, but a comprehensive preoperative evaluation of patients with carotid stenosis must be performed.

CEA vs. stent in patients with acute strokes: are they equally effective?

INTRODUCTION

Stroke is the 3rd leading cause of death worldwide with 15 million strokes annually. Extracranial carotid stenosis contributes to major stroke morbidity and mortality as a significant etiology of ischemic strokes. For acute stroke, in addition to optimal medical management, patients may be candidates for carotid endarterectomy and/or carotid stenting for secondary stroke reduction. This paper set out to review the data currently available regarding equivalency of the two intervention options.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A comprehensive literature review was performed through PubMed and other sources using the key words carotid endarterectomy, carotid artery stent, acute stroke, symptomatic carotid stenosis, flow reversal, TCAR. Studies which solely evaluated patients with asymptomatic disease were ineligible for the study.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Review of landmark trials such as NASCET and CREST in addition to more recent studies demonstrates the effectiveness of surgical management with carotid endarterectomy of acute stroke. Carotid stenting has also been shown to have acceptable outcomes in certain patient populations.

CONCLUSIONS

Carotid endarterectomy continues to demonstrate effectiveness and safety for management of acute stroke, while carotid stenting has limitations. Carotid artery stenting has been shown to be non-inferior in some patient populations, but more recent and future technologic developments may expand the potential acceptable patient selection criteria.

Timing of Carotid Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis: A Snapshot of Current Trends and Systematic Review of Literature on Changing Paradigm towards Early Surgery

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.

Long-term morbidity and mortality in patients without early complications after stroke or transient ischemic attack

BACKGROUND

Secondary prevention after stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA) has focused on high early risk of recurrence, but survivors of stroke can have substantial long-term morbidity and mortality. We quantified long-term morbidity and mortality for patients who had no early complications after stroke or TIA and community-based controls.

METHODS

This longitudinal case-control study included all ambulatory or hospitalized patients with stroke or TIA (discharged from regional stroke centres in Ontario from 2003 to 2013) who survived for 90 days without recurrent stroke, myocardial infarction, all-cause admission to hospital, admission to an institution or death. Cases and controls were matched on age, sex and geographic location. The primary composite outcome was death, stroke, myocardial infarction, or admission to long-term or continuing care. We calculated 1-, 3- and 5-year rates of composite and individual outcomes and used cause-specific Cox regression to estimate long-term hazards for cases versus controls and for patients with stroke versus those with TIA.

RESULTS

Among patients who were initially stable after stroke or TIA (n = 26 366), the hazard of the primary outcome was more than double at 1 year (hazard ratio [HR] 2.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.3-2.5), 3 years (HR 2.2, 95% CI 2.1-2.3) and 5 years (HR 2.1, 95% CI 2.1-2.2). Hazard was highest for recurrent stroke at 1 year (HR 6.8, 95% CI 6.1-7.5), continuing to 5 years (HR 5.1, 95% CI 4.8-5.5), and for admission to an institution (HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.9-2.2). Survivors of stroke had higher mortality and morbidity, but 31.5% (1789/5677) of patients with TIA experienced an adverse event within 5 years.

INTERPRETATION

Patients who survive stroke or TIA without early complications are typically discharged from secondary stroke prevention services. However, these patients remain at substantial long-term risk, particularly for recurrent stroke and admission to an institution. Novel approaches to prevention, potentially embedded in community or primary care, are required for long-term management of these initially stable but high-risk patients.

Clinical Comparison of Outcomes of Early versus Delayed Carotid Artery Stenting for Symptomatic Cerebral Watershed Infarction due to Stenosis of the Proximal Internal Carotid Artery

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of early versus delayed carotid artery stenting (CAS) for symptomatic cerebral watershed infarction (sCWI) patients due to stenosis of the proximal internal carotid artery. We retrospectively collected clinical data of those who underwent early or delayed CAS from March 2011 to April 2014. The time of early CAS and delayed CAS was within a week of symptom onset and after four weeks from symptom onset. Clinical data such as second stroke, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NHISS) score, and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score and periprocedural complications were collected. The rate of second stroke in early CAS group is lower when compared to that of delayed CAS group. There was no significant difference regarding periprocedural complications in both groups. There was a significant difference regarding mean NHISS score 90 days after CAS in two groups. Early CAS group had a significant better good outcome (mRS score ≤ 2) than delayed CAS group. We suggest early CAS for sCWI due to severe proximal internal carotid artery stenosis as it provides lower rate of second stroke, comparable periprocedural complications, and better functional outcomes compared to that of delayed CAS.

Amaurosis fugax - delay between symptoms and surgery by specialty

Purpose

To describe the time course of management of patients with amaurosis fugax and analyze differences in management by different specialties.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with amaurosis fugax and subjected to carotid ultrasound in 2004–2010 at the Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden (n=302) were included in this retrospective cohort study, and data were collected from medical records.

Results

The prevalence of significant carotid stenosis was 18.9%, and 14.2% were subjected to carotid endarterectomy. A trend of longer delay for surgery was noted for patients first consulting a general practitioner (P=0.069) as compared to hospital-based specialties. For 46.3% of the patients, an ophthalmologist was their first medical contact. No significant difference in time interval to endarterectomy was seen between ophthalmologists and neurologists/internists. Only 31.8% of the patients with significant carotid stenosis had carotid endarterectomy within 2 weeks from the debut of symptoms, and this proportion was smaller for patients residing outside the Gothenburg city area (P=0.038).

Conclusion

Initially consulting an ophthalmologist does not delay the time to ultrasound or carotid endarterectomy. The overall time from symptoms to surgery is longer than recommended for a majority of the patients, especially for patients from rural areas and for patients initially consulting a general practitioner.

Recent advances in carotid angioplasty and stenting

Atherosclerotic carotid stenosis accounts for about 15% of ischemic strokes. Carotid endarterectomy reduces the risk of stroke in patients with severe carotid stenosis. Carotid artery stenting has emerged as a potentially less invasive alternative to carotid endarterectomy. However, randomized clinical trials in patients with symptomatic stenosis have shown that carotid artery stenting is associated with a higher risk of peri-procedural stroke compared with carotid endarterectomy. Carotid artery stenting is associated with a lower risk of peri-procedural myocardial infarction and local complications (cranial nerve palsies, access site hematoma) and appears to be as durable as carotid endarterectomy in terms of long-term protection against ipsilateral stroke and risk of restenosis. The main risk factors for peri-procedural stroke in patients treated with carotid artery stenting are age >70 years and high burden of white-matter lesions on brain imaging. Patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis receiving modern medical treatment have a low risk (<1%/year) of ipsilateral stroke and it is uncertain whether the benefit of revascularization still justifies the procedural risk of stroke or death. In particular, the small excess of procedural risk of stroke associated with carotid artery stenting (compared with carotid endarterectomy) may offset the small benefit (if any) of carotid endarterectomy versus medical therapy in unselected patients. Randomized clinical trials are ongoing to solve this issue.

Immediate versus delayed treatment for recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis

BACKGROUND

The timing of surgery for recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis remains controversial. Early cerebral revascularization may prevent a disabling or fatal ischemic recurrence, but it may also increase the risk of hemorrhagic transformation, or of dislodging a thrombus. This review examined the randomized controlled evidence that addressed whether the increased risk of recurrent events outweighed the increased benefit of an earlier intervention.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the risks and benefits of performing very early cerebral revascularization (within two days) compared with delayed treatment (after two days) for people with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register in January 2016, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1948 to 26 January 2016), EMBASE (1974 to 26 January 2016), LILACS (1982 to 26 January 2016), and trial registers (from inception to 26 January 2016). We also handsearched conference proceedings and journals, and searched reference lists. There were no language restrictions. We contacted colleagues and pharmaceutical companies to identify further studies and unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All completed, truly randomized trials (RCT) that compared very early cerebral revascularization (within two days) with delayed treatment (after two days) for people with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently selected trials for inclusion according to the above criteria, assessed risk of bias for each trial, and performed data extraction. We utilized an intention-to-treat analysis strategy.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified one RCT that involved 40 participants, and addressed the timing of surgery for people with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. It compared very early surgery with surgery performed after 14 days of the last symptomatic event. The overall quality of the evidence was very low, due to the small number of participants from only one trial, and missing outcome data. We found no statistically significant difference between the effects of very early or delayed surgery in reducing the combined risk of stroke and death within 30 days of surgery (risk ratio (RR) 3.32; confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 29.23; very low-quality evidence), or the combined risk of perioperative death and stroke (RR 0.47; CI 0.14 to 1.58; very low-quality evidence). To date, no results are available to confirm the optimal timing for surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no high-quality evidence available to support either very early or delayed cerebral revascularization after a recent ischemic stroke. Hence, further randomized trials to identify which patients should undergo very urgent revascularization are needed. Future studies should stratify participants by age group, sex, grade of ischemia, and degree of stenosis. Currently, there is one ongoing RCT that is examining the timing of cerebral revascularization.

Summary of Evidence on Early Carotid Intervention for Recently Symptomatic Stenosis Based on Meta-Analysis of Current Risks

Background and Purpose—

This study aimed to assess the evidence on the periprocedural (<30 days) risks of carotid intervention in relation to timing of procedure in patients with recently symptomatic carotid stenosis.

Methods—

A systematic literature review of studies published in the past 8 years reporting periprocedural stroke/death after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) related to the time between qualifying neurological symptoms and intervention was performed. Pooled estimates of periprocedural risk for patients treated within 0 to 48 hours, 0 to 7 days, and 0 to 15 days were derived with proportional meta-analyses and reported separately for patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack as index events.

Results—

Of 47 studies included, 35 were on CEA, 7 on CAS, and 5 included both procedures. The pooled risk of periprocedural stroke was 3.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6–4.3) after CEA and 4.8% (95% CI, 2.5–7.8) after CAS performed <15 days; stroke/death rates were 3.8% and 6.9% after CEA and CAS, respectively. Pooled periprocedural stroke risk was 3.3% (95% CI, 2.1–4.6) after CEA and 4.8% (95% CI, 2.5–7.8) after CAS when performed within 0 to 7 days. In hyperacute surgery (<48 hours), periprocedural stroke risk after CEA was 5.3% (95% CI, 2.8–8.4) but with relevant risk differences among patients treated after transient ischemic attack (2.7%; 95% CI, 0.5–6.9) or stroke (8.0%; 95% CI, 4.6–12.2) as index.

Conclusions—

CEA within 15 days from stroke/transient ischemic attack can be performed with periprocedural stroke risk <3.5%. CAS within the same period may carry a stroke risk of 4.8%. Similar periprocedural risks occur after CEA and CAS performed earlier, within 0 to 7 days. Carotid revascularization can be safely performed within the first week (0–7 days) after symptom onset.

Carotid Endarterectomy: Current Concepts and Practice Patterns

Background Stroke is the number one cause of disability and third leading cause of death among adults in the United States. A major cause of stroke is carotid artery stenosis (CAS) caused by atherosclerotic plaques. Randomized trials have varying results regarding the equivalence and perioperative complication rates of stents versus carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in the management of CAS. Objectives We review the evidence for the current management of CAS and describe the current concepts and practice patterns of CEA. Methods A literature search was conducted using PubMed to identify relevant studies regarding CEA and stenting for the management of CAS. Results The introduction of CAS has led to a decrease in the percentage of CEA and an increase in the number of CAS procedures performed in the context of all revascularization procedures. However, the efficacy of stents in patients with symptomatic CAS remains unclear because of varying results among randomized trials, but the perioperative complication rates exceed those found after CEA. Conclusions Vascular surgeons are uniquely positioned to treat carotid artery disease through medical therapy, CEA, and stenting. Although data from randomized trials differ, it is important for surgeons to make clinical decisions based on the patient. We believe that CAS can be adopted with low complication rate in a selected subgroup of patients, but CEA should remain the standard of care. This current evidence should be incorporated into practice of the modern vascular surgeon.

Debate: Whether carotid endarterectomy is safer than stenting in the hyperacute period after onset of symptoms

The carotid artery has been a regular battleground for debates regarding many issues, including appropriate management of symptomatic and asymptomatic lesions, the conduct, timing, and safety of such interventions, and now, whether endarterectomy or stenting is safer in the hyperacute period. Our discussants agree that, as a prophylactic procedure, a carotid intervention should occur early after index symptoms to prevent as many strokes as possible. However, which intervention is best?

Complex interventional treatment in a patient with atrial fibrillation and stroke caused by large carotid artery thrombus: a case report

Background

The treatment option for acute ischaemic stroke depends on the duration of symptoms, the dynamics of neurological condition changes, the aetiology, type of stroke, as well as the results of angiographic and neuroimaging tests.

Case presentation

A 60-year-old male patient presented with progressive left hemisphere stroke caused by extensive cardiogenic embolism of the common carotid artery and a thrombus closing the internal carotid artery from its ostium to the level of its intracranial division. The complex revascularisation therapy involving surgical embolectomy of the common carotid artery, thrombectomy of the internal carotid artery and intra-arterial thrombolysis has led to the improvement of arterial patency and has countered the progression of acute cerebral ischaemia.

Conclusion

Emergency carotid embolectomy together with thrombectomy and local thrombolytic rt-PA treatment may be a reasonable rescue therapy for carefully selected patients with large-vessel acute stroke. Further research is needed to establish the advantages and safety of surgical thrombectomy in patients with acute embolic occlusion of the carotid artery and ineffectiveness of or contraindications for systemic thrombolytic treatment.

Thirty-day outcome of delayed versus early management of symptomatic carotid stenosis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of early (<15 days) versus delayed carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in symptomatic patients.

METHODS

All CEA procedures performed for symptomatic carotid stenosis between January 2006 and May 2010 were retrospectively reviewed. Postoperative mortality (within 30 days), stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI) rates were analyzed in the early and delayed CEA groups.

RESULTS

During the study period, 149 patients were included. Carotid revascularization was performed within 15 days after symptom onset in 62 (41.6%) patients and longer than 15 days after symptom onset in 87 (58.4%) patients. The mean time lapse between onset of neurological symptoms and surgery was 9.3 days (range 1-15) in the early surgery group and 47.9 days (range 16-157) in the delayed surgery group. Thirty-day combined stroke and death rates were, respectively, 1.7% and 3.5% in the early and the delayed surgery groups. Thirty-day combined stroke, death, and MI rates were, respectively, 1.7% and 5.9% in the early and the delayed surgery groups.

CONCLUSION

During the study period, the reduction of the symptom-to-knife time in application to the carotid revascularization guidelines did not impact our outcomes suggesting that early CEA achieves 30-day mortality and morbidity rates at least equivalent to those of delayed CEA.

Delay between symptoms and surgery for carotid artery stenosis: modification of our practice

BACKGROUND

Recent data from the literature concerning symptomatic carotid stenosis show that the long-term benefits of surgery are greater when the surgery is performed soon after the neurologic event, ideally within 2 weeks. Since 2009, following recommendations, we decided to perform surgery as quick as possible. The aim of the study was to determine whether this approach increased postoperative morbimortality and the way it could change our practice.

METHODS

Using a prospective database containing a consecutive and continuous series of 1,500 carotid endarterectomies performed between 2003 and 2012, we extracted the records concerning the 417 symptomatic carotid stenoses (27.8%). We compared the 30-day and long-term outcome in 3 groups of patients: those operated within 2 weeks of the neurologic event (early surgery group [ESG], n = 158, 37.9%), those operated between 16 days and 6 weeks after the event (deferred surgery group [DSG], n = 79, 18.9%), and those operated more than 6 weeks after the event (late surgery group [LSG], n = 180, 43.2%). In the second part, to assess the new management beginning 2009, patients were divided in 2 periods 2003-2008 (period A) and 2009-2012 (period B) and we compared the 2 period's descriptive data and outcome. The primary outcome was the 30-day combined stroke and death rate. Secondary end points were follow-up freedoms from mortality and stroke.

RESULTS

The mean time between symptom onset and surgery was 7.7 ± 3.8 days for the ESG, 28.3 ± 8.6 days for the DSG, and 89.4 ± 36.7 days for the LSG. In the 3 groups, the types of symptoms leading to the indication for carotid surgery were comparable, with a stroke in 221 cases (53.0%), a transient ischemic attack in 146 cases (35.40%), and amaurosis fugax in 50 cases (12.0%). The groups were comparable in terms of comorbidities. The overall 30-day stroke rate was 1.4% (6 cases), the 30-day death rate was 1.7% (7 cases), and the combined stroke and death rate was 3.4% (3.2% in the ESG, 5.1% in the DSG, and 2.8% in the LSG [P = 0.808]). Survival rates at 24, 48, and 60 months were, respectively, 95%, 78%, and 78% in ESG, 86%, 81%, and 81% in DSG, and 91%, 83%, and 74% in LSG (P = 0.78). Freedom from stroke at 60 months showed to be, respectively, 97% in ESG, 96% in DSG, and 91% in LSG (P = 0.32). During the period A (2003-2008), we had taken care of 217 symptomatic carotid artery stenosis patients (22.3% of stenosis) and during the period B (2009-2012), 200 symptomatic stenosis (37.9% of stenosis). During the period A, an early surgery (<15 days) had place in 31 cases (14.3%), and during the period B, in 127 cases (63.5%). The 30-day stroke and death rate was of 3.7% during the period A and of 3.0% during the period B (P = 0.455). The 24-month survival and stroke-free survival rates were comparable between the 2 periods.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, surgery for symptomatic carotid stenosis can be performed early without increasing the rate of postoperative and long-term outcome. We have modified our practice, performing more and more early surgery for symptomatic stenosis without any impact on the outcome.

Delays in Carotid Endarterectomy: The Process is the Problem

Background:

Current recommendations for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for symptomatic carotid stenosis state benefit is greatest when performed within two weeks of symptoms. However, only a minority of cases are operated on within this guideline, and no systematic examinations of reasons for these delays exist.

Methods:

All CEA cases performed at our institution by vascular surgery for symptomatic carotid stenosis after neurologist referral in 2008-2009 were reviewed. Dates of symptom onset, initial presentation, referral to and evaluation by neurology and vascular surgery, vascular imaging, and CEA were collected, and the length of time between each analysed. Reasons for delays were noted where available.

Results:

Of 36 included patients, 34 had CEA more than two weeks after symptom onset. Median time to CEA from onset was 76 days (IQR, 38-105 days). Longest intervals were between surgeon assessment and CEA (14 days; IQR, 9-21 days), neurology referral and neurologist assessment (9 days; IQR, 2-26 days), vascular imaging and referral to vascular surgery (9 days; IQR, 2-35 days) and vascular surgery referral and assessment (8 days; IQR, 6-15 days). Few patients (44.1%) had reasons for delays identified; of these, process-related delays were related to delayed vascular imaging, delayed referral by primary care physicians, or multiple conflicting referrals.

Conclusions:

There are significant delays between symptom onset and CEA in patients referred for CEA, with delay highest between specialist referral and evaluation. Strategies to reduce these delays may be effective in increasing the proportion of procedures performed within two weeks of symptom onset.

Risk of very early recurrent cerebrovascular events in symptomatic carotid artery stenosis

Object

The risk of recurrence of cerebrovascular events within the first 72 hours of admission in patients hospitalized with symptomatic carotid artery (CA) stenoses and the risks and benefits of emergency CA intervention within the first hours after the onset of symptoms are not well known. Therefore, the authors aimed to assess 1) the ipsilateral recurrence rate within 72 hours of admission, in the period from 72 hours to 7 days, and after 7 days in patients presenting with nondisabling stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), or amaurosis fugax (AF), and with an ipsilateral symptomatic CA stenosis of 50% or more, and 2) the risk of stroke in CA interventions within 48 hours of admission versus the risk in interventions performed after 48 hours.

Methods

Ninety-four patients were included in this study. These patients were admitted to hospital within 48 hours of a nondisabling stroke, TIA, or AF resulting from a symptomatic CA stenosis of 50% or more. The patients underwent carotid endarterectomy (85 patients) or CA stenting (9 patients). At baseline, the cardiovascular risk factors of the patients, the degree of symptomatic CA stenosis, and the type of secondary preventive treatment were assessed. The in-hospital recurrence rate of stroke, TIA, or AF ipsilateral to the symptomatic CA stenosis was determined for the first 72 hours after admission, from 72 hours to 7 days, and after 7 days. Procedure-related cerebrovascular events were also recorded.

Results

The median time from symptom onset to CA intervention was 5 days (interquartile range 3.00–9.25 days). Twenty-one patients (22.3%) underwent CA intervention within 48 hours after being admitted. Overall, 15 recurrent cerebrovascular events were observed in 12 patients (12.8%) in the period between admission and CA intervention: 3 strokes (2 strokes in progress and 1 stroke) (3.2%), 5 TIAs (5.3%), and 1 AF (1.1%) occurred within the first 72 hours (total 9.6%) of admission; 1 TIA (1.1%) occurred between 72 hours and 7 days, and 5 TIAs (5.3%) occurred after more than 7 days. The corresponding actuarial cerebrovascular recurrence rates were 11.4% (within 72 hours of admission), 2.4% (between 72 hours and 7 days), and 7.9% (after 7 days). Among baseline characteristics, no predictive factors for cerebrovascular recurrence were identified.

Procedure-related cerebrovascular events occurred at a rate of 4.3% (3 strokes and 1 TIA), and procedures performed within the first 48 hours and procedures performed after 48 hours had a similar frequency of these events (4.5% vs 4.1%, respectively; p = 0.896).

Conclusions

The in-hospital recurrence of cerebrovascular events was quite low, but all recurrent strokes occurred within 72 hours. The risk of stroke associated with a CA intervention performed within the first 48 hours was not increased compared with that for later interventions. This raises the question of the optimal timing of CA intervention in symptomatic CA stenosis. To answer this question, more data are needed, preferably from large randomized trials.

Outcomes of urgent carotid endarterectomy for stable and unstable acute neurologic deficits

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to assess the outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) performed in an urgent setting on acutely symptomatic patients selected through a very simple protocol.

METHODS

From January 2002 to January 2012, 193 symptomatic patients underwent CEA. Of these, 90 presented with acute symptoms, and after a congruous carotid stenosis was identified, underwent urgent operations (group 1): 27 patients had transient ischemic attack (group 1A), 52 patients had mild to moderate stroke (group 1B), and 11 patients had stroke in evolution (group 1C). The remaining 103 patients with a nonrecent neurologic deficit were treated by elective surgery in the same period (group 2). End points were 30-day neurologic morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

The median delay of urgent CEA (U-CEA) from deficit onset was 48 hours (interquartile range, 13-117 hours). Groups 1 and 2 were comparable in demographics. Acute patients showed a higher rate of stroke at presentation (70% vs 37%; P = .001) and of history of coronary artery disease (30% vs 13.5%; P = .007). Acute patients sustained six postoperative strokes (6.6%). Neurologic outcomes were correlated to clinical presentation: no strokes occurred in group 1A patients, and 5.8% group 1B patients and 27.3% group 1C patients had postoperative stroke (P < .01). Postoperative mortality was 4.4% for U-CEA: one fatal myocardial infarction, one intracranial hemorrhage, and two thromboembolic strokes. Elective patients sustained four postoperative strokes (3.9%), with one death (0.9%) as a consequence of hyperperfusion cerebral edema. U-CEAs performed ≤48 hours from symptom onset had a lower postoperative stroke rate than those performed >48 hours (4.4% vs 8.8%; P = .3). Among patients presenting with a stroke (group 1B), the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) assessment at discharge showed improvement in 79% (although only 25% had ≥4 points in reduction), stability in 17%, and deterioration in 4%. Patients with moderate stroke were slightly better in NIHSS improvement than those with mild stroke (median NIHSS variation at discharge, -3 vs -1; P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results with U-CEA confirm that this population has a higher risk profile compared with elective surgery. The type of acute presentation is correlated with perioperative risk. U-CEA was safe when performed on patients presenting with transient ischemic attack. An acceptable complication rate was achieved for patients with minor to moderate strokes. The poorest outcomes occurred in patients presenting with stroke in evolution: U-CEA in these patients should be offered with extreme caution, although we are aware that a conservative treatment may not grant a better prognosis.

Neurologic and functional long-term outcome after carotid endarterectomy

BACKGROUND

The aim of this research was to assess the neurologic status of patients a year after endarterectomy with the use of National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and the degree of disability using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and to examine the patients' subjective evaluation of their health.

METHODS

One hundred two patients with symptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis who underwent endarterectomy and attended a 1-year follow-up examination were enrolled in the study. The material comprised 72 (70.6%) men and 30 (29.4%) women. Before the surgery, the patients' neurologic status was assessed according to the NIHSS, and their functional status was rated with the mRS. Additionally, the patients were asked to assess their life quality on a 10-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

The mean NIHSS score before the operation was 2.76 points (SD 2.47), whereas a year after it was 2.05 points (SD 1.84) (P < .0001). The NIHSS scores that improved significantly a year after endarterectomy were level of consciousness-questions and commands, motor leg, and sensory (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The patients' neurologic status assessed with the NIHSS improved significantly 1 year after carotid endarterectomy mostly because of the improvement in their verbal and motor communication ability, physical condition and agility, and reduction in sensory disturbances. The observed changes in the neurologic status were reflected in the functional status and subjective life quality assessment, which appeared to be significantly better a year after the surgical treatment.

Early versus delayed carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients

BACKGROUND

Delayed carotid endarterectomy (CEA) after a stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) is associated with risks of recurrent neurologic symptoms. In an effort to preserve cerebral function, urgent early CEA has been recommended in many circumstances. We analyzed outcomes of different time intervals in early CEA in comparison with delayed treatment.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective chart review from a single university hospital tertiary care center between April 1999 and November 2010 revealed 312 patients who underwent CEA following stroke or TIA. Of these 312 patients, 69 received their CEA within 30 days of symptom onset and 243 received their CEA after 30 days from symptom onset. The early CEA cohort was further stratified according to the timing of surgery: group A (27 patients), within 7 days; group B (17), between 8 and 14 days; group C (12), between 15 and 21 days; and group D (12), between 22 and 30 days. Demographic data as well as 30-day (mortality, stroke, TIA, and myocardial infarction) and long-term (all-cause mortality and stroke) adverse outcome rates were analyzed for each group. These were also analyzed for the entire early CEA cohort and compared against the delayed CEA group.

RESULTS

Demographics and comorbid conditions were similar between groups. For 30-day outcomes, there were no deaths, 1 stroke (1.4%), 0 TIAs, and 0 myocardial infarctions in the early CEA cohort; in the delayed CEA cohort, there were 4 (1.6%), 4 (1.6%), 2 (0.8%), and 2 (0.8%) patients with these outcomes, respectively (P > .05 for all comparisons). Over the long term, the early group had one ipsilateral stroke at 17 months and the delayed group had two ipsilateral strokes at 3 and 12 months. For long-term outcomes, there were 16 deaths in the early CEA cohort (21%) and 74 deaths in the delayed CEA cohort (30%, P > .05). Mean follow-up times were 4.5 years in the early CEA cohort and 5.8 years in the delayed CEA cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no differences in 30-day and long-term adverse outcome rates between the early and delayed CEA cohorts. In symptomatic carotid stenosis patients without evidence of intracerebral hemorrhage, carotid occlusion, or permanent neurologic deficits early carotid endarterectomy can be safely performed and is preferred over delaying operative treatment.

Urgent Carotid Surgery: Is It Still out of Debate?

Patients with symptomatic tight carotid stenosis have an increased short-time risk of stroke and an increased long-term risk of ischaemic vascular events compared with the general population. The aim of this study is to assess the safety, efficacy, and limitations of urgent CEA or CAS, in patients with carotid stenosis greater than 70% and clinically characterized by recurrent TIA or brain damage following a stroke (<2.5 cm). This study involved 28 patients divided into two groups. Group A consisted of sixteen patients who had undergone CEA, and group B consisted of twelve patients who had undergone CAS. Primary endpoints were mortality, neurological morbidity (by NIHSS) and postoperative hemorrhagic cerebral conversion, at 30 days. Ten patients (62.5%) of group A experienced an improvement in their initial neurological deficit while in 4 cases (26%) the deficit remained stable. Two cases of neurologic mortality are presented. At 1 month, 9 patients (75%) of group B experienced an improvement in their initial neurological deficit while 3 patients (25%) had a neurological impairment. Urgent or deferred surgical or endovascular treatment have a satisfactory outcome considering the profile in very high-risk patient population. Otherwise in selected patients CEA seems to be preferred to CAS.

Carotid embolectomy and endarterectomy for symptomatic complete occlusion of the carotid artery as a rescue therapy in acute ischemic stroke

Emergency endarterectomy of an occluded internal carotid artery (ICA) has not been investigated as an option of rescue therapy for severe acute ischemic stroke in the era of intravenous (IV) thrombolysis treatment neither as a primary treatment nor after failed IV thrombolysis. Data from the pre-IV thrombolysis era are conflicting and therefore emergency endarterectomy has not been recommended. The number of patients reaching the emergency room within the IV thrombolysis time window has vastly grown due to advanced acute stroke treatment protocols. The efficacy of mechanical thrombectomy as a primary or add-on to IV thrombolysis therapy option is being actively investigated. We herein report 2 cases of acute ischemic stroke with computerized tomography (CT) angiography-documented occlusion of an ICA that were treated with emergency carotid endarterectomy and embolectomy to restore cerebral blood flow. Both cases presented with severe stroke symptoms and signs not responding to IV thrombolysis and showed severe CT-perfusion deficits mainly representing ischemic penumbra. Blood flow was surgically restored after 5 h of symptom onset. Both patients achieved a favorable outcome. We conclude that timely surgical approach of acute ICA occlusion after failed thrombolysis as a rescue therapy may be a viable option in well-selected patients.