1
|
Shennib H, Huerta V. Retropharyngeal carotid artery stenosis; potential for minimizing operative complications utilizing transcarotid artery stent revascularization. J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech 2024; 10:101630. [PMID: 39483723 PMCID: PMC11525444 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvscit.2024.101630] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2024] [Accepted: 08/23/2024] [Indexed: 11/03/2024] Open
Abstract
Retropharyngeal carotid artery occlusive disease presents a formidable challenge for surgeons due to its anatomic location and increased potential for complications. Conventional treatments, including open revascularization and transfemoral stenting, often face limitations. Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) has offered a promising alternative, integrating a hybrid surgical and endovascular approach. We present a case of an elderly patient with severe symptomatic stenosis of a retropharyngeal carotid artery treated with TCAR. We review the potential injuries reported with the use of transfemoral stenting and endarterectomy in this setting and suggest that TCAR may be a safer modality for its treatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hani Shennib
- Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Arizona Heart Hospital, Phoenix, AZ
| | - Victor Huerta
- Department of Surgery, Midwestern University, Glendale, AZ
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Vaddavalli VV, Shekhar S, Jiang L, Chait JD, Ramakrishna H. Transcarotid Artery Revascularization Versus Carotid Endarterectomy: Analysis of Outcomes. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2024; 38:2471-2476. [PMID: 38880675 DOI: 10.1053/j.jvca.2024.05.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/08/2024] [Accepted: 05/10/2024] [Indexed: 06/18/2024]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Shashank Shekhar
- Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH
| | - Lai Jiang
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Jesse D Chait
- Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Harish Ramakrishna
- Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Straus S, Barodi B, Zarrintan S, Willie-Permor D, Vootukuru N, Malas M. A Contemporary Evaluation of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services High-risk Indicators for Carotid Endarterectomy. Ann Surg 2024; 280:444-451. [PMID: 38887941 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0000000000006397] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/20/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Compare stroke/death outcomes across carotid endarterectomy (CEA), transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR), and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) using Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) high-risk criterion. BACKGROUND Existing literature has revealed inconsistencies with CMS risk guidelines. With recent approval for TCAR and TFCAS in standard-risk patients, an updated analysis of guidelines is needed. METHODS Data from the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) (2016-2023) on CEA, TFCAS, or TCAR patients were used. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting to compare in-hospital stroke/death rates across procedures for high-risk criteria: contralateral occlusion (CLO), prior CEA, CAS, radiation, neck surgery, moderate to severe CHF, severe COPD (on home O 2 ), unstable angina, recent MI (<6 mo), and age (≥75 years-old). RESULTS A total of 199,050 patients were analyzed, of whom 122,737 (62%) patients underwent CEA, 50,095 (25%) TCAR, and 26,218 (13%) TFCAS. TCAR had lower odds of stroke/death compared with CEA in patients with CLO [aOR=0.73 (95% CI: 0.55-0.98], P =0.035] and radiation [aOR=0.44 (95% CI: 0.23-0.82), P =0.010]. Contrary to CMS criteria, CEA patients did not have higher stroke/death in patients with prior CEA, CAS, neck surgery, moderate to severe CHF, severe COPD, unstable angina, recent MI, or age (≥75) compared with TCAR and TFCAS. CONCLUSIONS While CMS high-risk criteria have traditionally been recognized as contraindications for CEA, our study reveals inconsistencies-with CEA performing similarly to TCAR and significantly better than TFCAS in patients with prior CEA, moderate to severe CHF, recent MI, or age (≥75). As a result, the definition of high-risk criteria may warrant reconsideration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sabrina Straus
- Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular & Endovascular Surgery, Center for Learning and Excellence in Vascular and Endovascular Research (CLEVER), UC San Diego (UCSD), San Diego, CA
| | - Batol Barodi
- Central Michigan University College of Medicine, Mount Pleasant, MI
| | - Sina Zarrintan
- Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular & Endovascular Surgery, Center for Learning and Excellence in Vascular and Endovascular Research (CLEVER), UC San Diego (UCSD), San Diego, CA
| | - Daniel Willie-Permor
- Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular & Endovascular Surgery, Center for Learning and Excellence in Vascular and Endovascular Research (CLEVER), UC San Diego (UCSD), San Diego, CA
| | | | - Mahmoud Malas
- Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular & Endovascular Surgery, Center for Learning and Excellence in Vascular and Endovascular Research (CLEVER), UC San Diego (UCSD), San Diego, CA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Abdelkarim A, Hamouda M, Malas MB. What Is the Best Technique for Treating Carotid Disease? Adv Surg 2024; 58:161-189. [PMID: 39089775 DOI: 10.1016/j.yasu.2024.04.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/04/2024]
Abstract
This is a comprehensive review of carotid artery revascularization techniques: Carotid Endarterectomy (CEA), Transfemoral Carotid Artery Stenting (TFCAS), and Transcarotid Artery Revascularization (TCAR). CEA is the gold standard and is particularly effective in elderly and high-risk patients. TFCAS, introduced as a less invasive alternative, poses increased periprocedural stroke risks. TCAR, which combines minimally invasive benefits with CEA's neuroprotection principles, emerges as a safer option for high-risk patients, showing comparable results to CEA and better outcomes than TFCAS. The decision-making process for carotid revascularization is complex and influenced by the patient's medical comorbidities and anatomic factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ahmed Abdelkarim
- Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, UC San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA; Center for Learning and Excellence in Vascular & Endovascular Research (CLEVER), UC San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA; Altman Center for Clinical and Translational Research, 9452 Medical Center Drive - LL2W 502A, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA
| | - Mohammed Hamouda
- Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, UC San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA; Center for Learning and Excellence in Vascular & Endovascular Research (CLEVER), UC San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA; Altman Center for Clinical and Translational Research, 9452 Medical Center Drive - LL2W 502A, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA
| | - Mahmoud B Malas
- Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, UC San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA; Center for Learning and Excellence in Vascular & Endovascular Research (CLEVER), UC San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA; Altman Center for Clinical and Translational Research, 9452 Medical Center Drive - LL2W 502A, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Lee KB, Tanenbaum MT, Wang A, Tsai S, Modrall JG, Timaran CH, Kirkwood ML, Ramanan B. Impact of head and neck radiation on long-term outcomes after carotid revascularization. J Vasc Surg 2024; 80:422-430. [PMID: 38570175 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2024.03.441] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/30/2024] [Revised: 03/21/2024] [Accepted: 03/25/2024] [Indexed: 04/05/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE Radiation-induced carotid artery stenosis (RICS) is a well-described phenomenon seen after head and neck cancer radiation. Previously published literature suggests that, compared with atherosclerotic disease, RICS may result in worse long-term outcomes and early restenosis. This study aims to evaluate the effect of radiation on long-term outcomes after various carotid revascularization techniques using a multi-center registry database. METHODS Patients in the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) registry for carotid artery intervention (carotid endarterectomy [CEA]; transfemoral carotid artery stenting [CAS]; transcarotid artery revascularization [TCAR]), who are 65 years or older were included in the study. VQI Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network (VISION) Medicare-linked database was used to obtain long-term procedure-specific outcomes. Primary endpoints were 3-year death, stroke, and reintervention. We performed propensity matching between patients with prior radiation and those without. Kaplan-Meier analysis and a multivariate logistic regression model were used to analyze the outcome variables. RESULTS A total of 56,472 patients had undergone carotid revascularization (CEA, n = 48,307; TCAR, n = 4593; CAS, n = 3572), 1244 patients with prior radiation and 54,925 patients without prior radiation. The prior radiation group was more likely to be male (71.9% vs 60.3%; P < .01), to receive a stent (47.5% vs 13.5%; P < .01), and to be on P2Y12 inhibitor (55.2% vs 38.3%; P < .01). Propensity matching was performed on 1223 patients (CEA, n = 655; TCAR, n = 292; CAS, n = 287). There were no significant differences in 30-day outcomes for death, stroke, or major adverse cardiovascular events for all three procedures. The prior radiation group had higher rates of cranial nerve injury (3.7% vs 1.8%; P = .04) and 90-day readmission (23.5% vs 18.3%; P = .01) after CEA. For long-term outcomes, prior radiation significantly increased mortality risk for CEA and CAS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.38-2.27 and HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.02-2.36, respectively). The 3-year risk of stroke for CEA in radiated patients was also significantly higher (HR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.03-2.09) compared with non-radiated patients. Prior radiation did not significantly affect death and stroke in patients undergoing TCAR. Prior radiation also did not impact the rates of short and long-term reintervention after CEA, CAS, or TCAR. CONCLUSIONS Prior head and neck radiation significantly increases the risk for mortality and stroke for CEA and the risk for mortality after CAS. Long-term outcomes for TCAR are not significantly affected by prior radiation. TCAR may be the preferred treatment modality for patients with radiation-induced carotid stenosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- K Benjamin Lee
- Division of Vascular Diseases and Surgery, Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH
| | - Mira T Tanenbaum
- Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Angela Wang
- Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Shirling Tsai
- Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Dallas VA Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - J Gregory Modrall
- Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Dallas VA Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Carlos H Timaran
- Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Melissa L Kirkwood
- Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX
| | - Bala Ramanan
- Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX; Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Dallas VA Medical Center, Dallas, TX.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Vaddavalli VV, Moore EJ, DeMartino RR. Carotid artery replacement with superficial femoral artery in a patient with recurrent radiation-induced carotid artery stenosis. J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech 2024; 10:101488. [PMID: 38666005 PMCID: PMC11043845 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvscit.2024.101488] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2024] [Accepted: 03/07/2024] [Indexed: 04/28/2024] Open
Abstract
A 58-year-old man presented with a right hemispheric transient ischemic attack from recurrent common carotid artery (CCA) in-stent restenosis. He had undergone prior neck radiation for carcinoma of the right tonsil and subsequent right carotid endarterectomy (10 years prior) and right CCA stenting (5 years prior), all for symptomatic radiation-induced stenosis. We performed CCA reconstruction using a transposed superficial femoral artery and pectoralis major myocutaneous flap coverage. Early stenosis of the proximal graft required angioplasty and stent grafting. However, at 1.5 years postoperatively, he has no further issues and a patent graft. This case highlights the options available for complex radiation-induced lesions of the carotid vessels.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Eric J. Moore
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Forman J, Ricotta JJ, Ricotta JJ. "TCAR or nothing": the only options for some complex carotid stenosis. J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech 2024; 10:101404. [PMID: 38357654 PMCID: PMC10864852 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvscit.2023.101404] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2023] [Accepted: 11/16/2023] [Indexed: 02/16/2024] Open
Abstract
Transcervical carotid artery revascularization has emerged as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy and transfemoral carotid artery stenting. We present four cases for which we believe transcervical carotid artery revascularization was the only option to treat the lesions. Each case presented with specific technical challenges that were overcome by intraoperative planning that allowed for safe deployment of the Enroute stent (Silk Road Medical) with resolution of each patient's stenosis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jake Forman
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Florida Atlantic University Charles E. Schmidt School of Medicine, Boca Raton, FL
| | - John J. Ricotta
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Florida Atlantic University Charles E. Schmidt School of Medicine, Boca Raton, FL
| | - Joseph J. Ricotta
- Department of Vascular Surgery, Florida Atlantic University Charles E. Schmidt School of Medicine, Boca Raton, FL
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Zhu J, Rao A, Berger K, Kibrik P, Ting W, Han D, Phair J, Tadros R, Marin M, Faries P. Neck radiation is not associated with increased risk of perioperative adverse events after transcarotid artery revascularization or transfemoral carotid artery stenting. J Vasc Surg 2024; 79:71-80.e1. [PMID: 37678641 DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2023.08.129] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2023] [Revised: 08/19/2023] [Accepted: 08/31/2023] [Indexed: 09/09/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE It is unclear whether patients with prior neck radiation therapy (RT) are at high risk for carotid artery stenting (CAS). We aimed to delineate 30-day perioperative and 3-year long-term outcomes in patients treated for radiation-induced stenotic lesions by the transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) or transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) approach to determine comparative risk and to ascertain the optimal intervention in this cohort. METHODS Data were extracted from the Vascular Quality Initiative CAS registry for patients with prior neck radiation who had undergone either TCAR or TFCAS. The Student t-test and the χ2 test were used to compare baseline patient characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox Hazard Proportional analysis were used to compare perioperative and long-term differences between patients with and without prior neck radiation following TCAR and TFCAS. Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to determine the incidence of 3-year adverse events. RESULTS A total of 72,656 patients (TCAR, 40,879; TFCAS, 31,777) were included in the analysis. Of these, 4151 patients had a history of neck radiation. Patients with a history of neck radiation were more likely to be younger, white, and have fewer comorbidities than patients with no neck radiation history. After adjustment for confounding factors, there was no difference in relative risk of 30-day perioperative stroke (P = .11), death (P = .36), or myocardial infarction (MI) (P = .61) between TCAR patients with or without a history of neck radiation. The odds of stroke/death (P = .10) and stroke/death/MI (P = .07) were also not statistically significant. In patients with prior neck radiation, TCAR had lower odds for in-hospital stroke/death/MI (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-0.99; P = .05) and access site complications than TFCAS. At year 3, patients with prior neck radiation had an increased hazard for mortality after TCAR (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02-1.51; P = .04) and TFCAS (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.12-1.58; P = .001). Patients with prior neck radiation also experienced an increased hazard for reintervention after TCAR (HR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.45-3.20; P < .001) and TFCAS (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.02-2.73; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS Patients with prior neck radiation had a similar relative risk of 30-day perioperative adverse events as patients with no neck radiation after adjustment for baseline demographics and disease characteristics. In these patients, TCAR was associated with reduced odds of perioperative stroke/death/MI as compared with TFCAS. However, patients with prior neck radiation were at increased risk for 3-year mortality and reintervention.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jerry Zhu
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
| | - Ajit Rao
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY.
| | - Kelsey Berger
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
| | - Pavel Kibrik
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
| | - Windsor Ting
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
| | - Daniel Han
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
| | - John Phair
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
| | - Rami Tadros
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
| | - Michael Marin
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
| | - Peter Faries
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Zarrintan S, Malas MB. What Is the Role of Transcarotid Artery Revascularization? Adv Surg 2023; 57:115-140. [PMID: 37536848 DOI: 10.1016/j.yasu.2023.04.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 08/05/2023]
Abstract
Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is the gold-standard method of carotid revascularization in symptomatic patients with ≥50% and in asymptomatic patients with ≥70% stenosis. Transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) has been associated with higher perioperative stroke rates compared to CEA in several studies. On the other hand, transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) has outperformed TFCAS in patients who are considered high risk for surgery. There is increasing data that supports TCAR as a safe and efficient technique with outcomes similar to those of CEA, but additional level-one studies are necessary to evaluate the long-term outcomes of TCAR in high- and standard-risk patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sina Zarrintan
- Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, UC San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA; Center for Learning and Excellence in Vascular & Endovascular Research (CLEVER), UC San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA; Altman Center for Clinical and Translational Research, 9452 Medical Center Drive - LL2W 502A, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA
| | - Mahmoud B Malas
- Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, UC San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA; Center for Learning and Excellence in Vascular & Endovascular Research (CLEVER), UC San Diego, San Diego, CA, USA; Altman Center for Clinical and Translational Research, 9452 Medical Center Drive - LL2W 502A, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Kang J, Woo SY, Yang SS, Park YJ, Kim DI, Jeon P, Kim GM, Kim YW. Treatment results of carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting for patients with radiation-induced carotid stenosis. Ann Surg Treat Res 2022; 103:112-118. [PMID: 36017138 PMCID: PMC9365643 DOI: 10.4174/astr.2022.103.2.112] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/14/2022] [Revised: 06/24/2022] [Accepted: 07/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose Exposure to ionizing radiation over the head and neck accelerates atherosclerotic changes in the carotid arteries. Owing to the characteristics of radiation-induced carotid stenosis (RICS), the results regarding the optimal revascularization method for RICS vary. This study compared treatment outcomes between carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) in RICS. Methods This was a single-center retrospective review of consecutive patients who underwent CEA or CAS for carotid stenosis. RICS was defined as carotid stenosis (>50%) with the prior neck irradiation for cancer treatment on either side. For the analyses, demographics, comorbid conditions, carotid lesion characteristics based on imaging studies, surgical complications, neurologic outcomes, and mortality during the follow-up period were reviewed. To compare CEA and CAS results in RICS, a 1:1 propensity score matching was applied. Results Between November 1994 and June 2021, 43 patients with RICS and 2,407 patients with non-RICS underwent carotid revascularization with CEA or CAS. RICS had fewer atherosclerotic risk factors and more frequent severe carotid stenosis and contralateral carotid occlusions than non-RICS. CAS was more commonly performed than CEA (22.9% vs. 77.1%) for RICS due to more frequent unfavorable carotid anatomy (0 vs. 16.2%). Procedure-related complications were more common in the CEA than in the CAS. However, there was no significant difference in neurologic outcomes and restenosis rates between CEA and CAS in RICS. Conclusion Considering its lesion characteristics and cumulative incidence, RICS requires more attention than non-RICS. Although CAS has broader indications for RICS, CEA has shown acceptable results if selectively performed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jihee Kang
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Inha University Hospital, Inha University School of Medicine, Incheon, Korea
| | - Shin-Young Woo
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Heart Vascular Stroke Institute, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Shin-Seok Yang
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Heart Vascular Stroke Institute, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Yang-Jin Park
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Heart Vascular Stroke Institute, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Dong-Ik Kim
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Heart Vascular Stroke Institute, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Pyoung Jeon
- Department of Radiology, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Gyeong-Moon Kim
- Department of Neurology, Heart Vascular Stroke Institute, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Young-Wook Kim
- Division of Vascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Kangbuk Samsung Hospital, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Gloviczki P. Journal of Vascular Surgery – March 2022 Audiovisual Summary. J Vasc Surg 2022. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2022.01.075] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/19/2022]
|