Carotid artery revascularization through a radiated field

Risk, prevention, screening and management of carotid artery stenosis in head & neck cancer patients-An evidence based review

Our review aims to clarify the incidence of carotid artery stenosis, risks of development, screening, management, and primary prevention strategies documented in the literature after radiation therapy for head and neck cancers. The high prevalence of carotid stenosis after radiation therapy for head and neck cancers has made surveillance and risk stratification critical. In addition to general cardiovascular risk factors such as smoking, diabetes, and dyslipidemia, risk factors for carotid artery stenosis after head and neck radiation included total plaque score, radiotherapy use and dosage, length of time after radiotherapy, and age greater than 50. Cancer subtype, namely nasopharyngeal cancer, may be correlated with increased risk as well, though contrasting results have been found. Interestingly, however, no significant relationship has been found between radiotherapy dose and stroke risk. Surgical management of post-radiation carotid stenosis is similar to that of stenosis unrelated to radiation, with carotid endarterectomy considered to be the gold standard treatment and carotid artery stenting being an acceptable, less-invasive alternative. Medical management of these patients has not been well-studied, but antiplatelet therapy, statins, and blood pressure control may be beneficial. The mainstay of screening for radiation-induced stenosis has been Doppler ultrasound, with measurement of changes in the intima-media thickness being a primary marker of disease development. A literature review was carried out using the MeSH terms "Carotid Artery Stenosis," "Head and Neck Neoplasms," and "Radiotherapy."

Impact of head and neck radiation on long-term outcomes after carotid revascularization

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.

Treatment results of carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting for patients with radiation-induced carotid stenosis

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.

Higher Risk for Reintervention in Patients after Stenting for Radiation-Induced Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis: A Single-Center Analysis and Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to review short- and long-term outcomes of all carotid artery stenting (CAS) in patients with radiation-induced (RI) internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis compared with patients with atherosclerotic stenosis (AS).

METHODS

We performed a single-center, multisite case-control study of transfemoral carotid artery intervention in patients stented for RI or AS. Cases of stented RI carotid arteries were identified using a CAS database covering January 2000 to December 2019. These patients were randomly matched 2:1 with stented patients because of AS by age, sex, and year of CAS. A conditional logistic regression model was performed to estimate the odds of reintervention in the RI group. Finally, a systematic review was performed to assess the outcomes of RI stenosis treated with CAS.

RESULTS

There were 120 CAS in 113 patients because of RI ICA stenosis. Eighty-nine patients (78.8%) were male, and 68 patients (60.2%) were symptomatic. The reasons for radiation included most commonly treatment for diverse malignancies of the head and neck in 109 patients (96.5%). The mean radiation dose was 58.9 ± 15.6 Gy, and the time from radiation to CAS was 175.3 ± 140.4 months. Symptoms included 31 transient ischemic attacks (TIAs), 21 strokes (7 acute and 14 subacute), and 17 amaurosis fugax. The mean National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale in acute strokes was 8.7 ± 11.2. In asymptomatic patients, the indication for CAS was high-grade stenosis determined by duplex ultrasound. All CAS were successfully completed. Reinterventions were more frequent in the RI ICA stenosis cohort compared with the AS cohort (10.1% vs. 1.4%). Reinterventions occurred in 14 vessels, and causes for reintervention were restenosis in 12 followed by TIA/stroke in two vessels. On conditional regression modeling, patients with RI ICA stenosis were at a higher risk for reintervention (odds ratio = 7.1, 95% confidence interval = 2.1-32.8; P = 0.004). The mean follow-up was 33.7 ± 36.9 months, and the mortality across groups was no different (P = 0.12).

CONCLUSIONS

In our single-center, multisite cohort study, patients who underwent CAS for RI ICA stenosis experienced a higher rate of restenosis and a higher number of reinterventions compared with CAS for AS. Although CAS is safe and effective for this RI ICA stenosis cohort, further data are needed to reduce the risk of restenosis, and close patient surveillance is warranted. In our systematic review, CAS was considered an excellent alternative option for the treatment of patients with RI ICA stenosis. However, careful patient selection is warranted because of the increased risk of restenosis on long-term follow-up.

Clinical outcomes of radiation-induced carotid stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Clinical outcomes of radiation-induced carotid stenosis are still unclear. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis is needed to evaluate the short- and long-term outcomes after interventions to treat radiation-induced carotid stenosis.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched from 1 January 2000 for relevant RCTs and observational studies which reported outcomes after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) for carotid stenosis induced by radiation. Risk of bias were assessed through different scales according to study design. I² statistic were used to evaluate the heterogeneity, and meta-regression were performed to investigate the source of heterogeneity. Visual inspection of funnel plots was used to judge publication bias.

RESULTS

A total of 26 studies with 1002 patients were included. CEA was performed in 364 patients and CAS in 638 patients. The overall estimated rate of short-term stroke was 0.19% (95% CI: 0-0.90%), and the rate of long-term stroke was 2.68 % (95% CI: 1.19-4.57%). The rate of cranial nerve injury in CEA group was significantly higher than that in CAS group [risk ratio (RR): 6.03, 95% CI: 1.63-22.22, P = .007]. The univariate regression analysis showed that the risk of stroke in CAS group were significantly higher than CEA group in both short- and long-term [incidence rate ratio (IRR): 3.62, 95% CI: 1.21-10.85, P = 0.22; IRR: 2.95, 95% CI: 1.02-8.59, P = .046, respectively].

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review provided the worldwide profile of outcome of treatment for radiation-induced carotid stenosis, and also found that CEA can yield better results for these patients than CAS. Nonetheless, as large-scale studies have not yet been conducted, and there is a definite need for further studies in the future.

Surgical repair of radiation-induced carotid stenosis

OBJECTIVE

Carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting are both valid therapeutic options for the treatment of radiation-induced carotid stenosis (RICS). The second has the advantage of being less invasive, although it seems to result in more restenosis than the first. Meanwhile, progress in radiation therapy and head and neck surgery has significantly increased the survival of these patients. As a result, treatment of RICS should be considered from a long-term perspective. This works presents perioperative and follow-up outcomes of surgical treatment of RICS.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study included all patients who underwent carotid endarterectomy for RICS from January 1998 to June 2017. Clinical and duplex ultrasound examination-based follow-up was performed postoperatively, at 1 month, 6 months, 12 months, and yearly thereafter. Kaplan-Meier curves were used for survival plots based on a log-rank test. Any abnormal finding led to angio-computed tomography scan and specialized neurovascular examination.

RESULTS

Between 1998 and 2017, 128 patients (162 lesions) were treated. The median interval between radiation therapy and surgery was 16 years. Forty-five patients (35%) were symptomatic. The eversion technique was performed in 79 cases (49%), and the patch was favored in 24 cases (15%), prosthetic bypass graft in 51 cases (31%), and a venous bypass graft in 8 cases (5%). Two postoperative deaths (1.5%) (one secondary to massive stroke) were noted. The primary end point of early postoperative cerebrovascular event was 2.5%. Two cervical hematomas (1.2%) required surgical revision and seven cases of permanent cranial nerve injury were recorded. The median follow-up was 29 months (range, 2-199 months). There were no additional strokes. The 3-year primary patency rate was 96% and the 3-year freedom from neurologic event was 98%.

CONCLUSIONS

Open surgical treatment of RICS lesions is a safe and durable option. Our results suggest that the outcomes of such treatment are good and in particular that rates of cerebrovascular event and restenosis are low and that cranial nerve injury should not be a concern. As a result, we consider that open surgery for RICS lesions should be offered as a first-line treatment. However, comparative data are mandated to address this issue.

A carotid bifurcation pseudoaneurysm treated endovascularly in a patient with irradiated neck

A carotid artery pseudoaneurysm in an irradiated neck is a rare entity with possible devastating results and management should be multidisciplinary. We present a successful endovascular treatment of a late carotid artery pseudoaneurysm following patch endarterectomy and cervical radiotherapy.

[Radiation-induced carotid stenosis: A personnalized approach]

INTRODUCTION

Surgical treatment of radio-induced carotid stenosis (RICS) is challenging and burdened by an elevated risk of local complications. Carotid artery stenting (CAS) may be a suitable alternative. The best approach is yet to be defined. We reviewed the results of both techniques following selection based on better-suitability characteristics (anatomic and clinical).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 38 patients treated for 43 RICS from a group of 1230 patients who had carotid interventions between 2008 and 2015 (5 bilateral). Primary endpoints were morbidity and mortality at 30 days (transient ischemic attack, stroke, myocardial infarction, or death). Secondary endpoints were technical success, wound complications, cranial nerve injury (CNI), restenosis (≥50%) and recurrent symptoms.

RESULTS

RICS was symptomatic in 6 patients in the OR group and 3 in the CAS group. Lesions in the OR group were longer (P=0.02) and more calcified (P=0.08). Technical success rate was 100%. Cranial nerve injury rate was 14.2% (3/21). All injuries were completely resolved within several weeks. In the CAS group, technical success rate was 95% (21/22) with the one failure due to a residual stenosis exceeding 30%. Periprocedural stroke rates were 0% and 4.5% in the OR and CAS groups respectively (0/21 vs 1/22, P=0.32). There were no early deaths. Mean follow-up was 19.1 months (3-75). The restenosis rate was 9.5% (2/21) in the OR group and 9% (2/22) in the CAS group.

CONCLUSION

Our results do not support a preferred treatment strategy. The choice of treatment should be considered on an individual basis.

Vascular Reconstruction for Radiation-induced Bilateral Internal Carotid Artery Occlusion and Unilateral External Carotid Artery Stenosis by a Combination of Surgical and Endovascular Method: Case Report

We present a case of a 63-year-old male presenting with right hemiparesis and diagnosed as cerebral infarction. He had a previous history of left pharyngeal carcinoma, which was treated by radial dissection and radiation therapy 10 years before. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) showed multiple cerebral infarction in the bilateral cerebral hemisphere, predominantly on the left. Cerebral angiography showed occlusion of bilateral internal carotid arteries and severe stenosis at the orifice of the left external carotid artery (ECA). Single photon emission tomography (SPECT) showed reduced cerebral blood flow and decreased cerebral vascular reserve in the bilateral anterior cerebral artery and left middle cerebral artery territories. He was successfully treated by a combination of carotid stenting for the left ECA and left superficial temporal artery-middle cerebral artery (STA-MCA) anastomosis. He did not have further ischemic symptom for more than 2 years. Radiation-induced carotid vasculopathy often involves multiple arteries and treatment is often complex and difficult. Safer and less invasive treatment strategy should be considered using both endovascular and direct surgery.

The indications of carotid artery stenting in symptomatic patients may need to be reconsidered

According to the 2011 and the 2014 updated American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Guidelines, carotid artery stenting (CAS) is indicated as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for the management of symptomatic carotid patients. According to these recommendations, CAS is preferred to CEA in symptomatic patients with specific technical, anatomic, or physiological characteristics that render these individuals at "high risk" for surgery (e.g., contralateral carotid occlusion, previous neck irradiation, recurrent carotid stenosis, and so forth). This article presents emerging data suggesting that most of these criteria do not comprise contraindications for CEA. In fact, CEA is associated with similar (or even better) outcomes compared with CAS in many such "high-risk" patients. Based on these results, the indications of CAS in symptomatic patients may need to be reconsidered.

Carotid artery stenting has increased risk of external carotid artery occlusion compared with carotid endarterectomy

OBJECTIVE

The external carotid artery (ECA) can be an important source of cerebral blood flow in cases of high-grade internal carotid artery stenosis or occlusion. However, the treatment of the ECA is fundamentally different between carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS). CEA is routinely associated with endarterectomy of the ECA, whereas CAS excludes the ECA from direct flow. We hypothesize that these differences make ECA occlusion more common after CAS. Further, the impact of CAS on blood flow into the ECA is interesting because the flow from the stent into the ECA is altered in a way that may promote local inflammation and may influence in-stent restenosis (ISR). Thus, our objective was to use our institutional database to identify whether CAS increased the rate of ECA occlusion and, if it did, whether ECA occlusion was associated with ISR.

METHODS

Patients undergoing CAS or CEA from February 2007 to February 2012 were identified from our institutional carotid therapy database. Preoperative and postoperative images of patients who followed up in our institution were included in the analysis of ECA occlusion and rates of ISR.

RESULTS

There were 210 (67%) CAS patients and 207 (60%) CEA patients included in this analysis. Despite CAS patients being younger (68 vs 70 years), having shorter follow-up (12.5 vs 56.2 months), and being more likely to take clopidogrel (97% vs 35%), they had an increased rate of ECA occlusion (3.8%) compared with CEA patients (0.4%). CAS patients who went on to ECA occlusion had an increased incidence of prior neck irradiation (50% vs 15%; P = .03), but we did not identify an association of ECA occlusion with ISR >50%.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas prior publications have identified increased rates of external carotid stenosis, this is the first demonstration of increased ECA occlusion after CAS. However, ECA occlusion is uncommon (∼4%) and did not have an association with ISR >50%. Future work modeling ECA flow patterns before and after CAS will be used to further test this interaction.

Risk of fatal cerebrovascular accidents after external beam radiation therapy for early-stage glottic laryngeal cancer

BACKGROUND

This study compared the risk of fatal cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs) in patients with early-stage glottic laryngeal cancer receiving surgery or external beam radiation therapy (EBRT).

METHODS

Using a competing risks survival analysis, we compared the risk of death because of CVA among patients with early-stage glottic laryngeal cancer receiving surgery or EBRT in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.

RESULTS

The cumulative incidence of fatal CVA at 15 years was higher in patients receiving EBRT (2.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.3% to 3.4%) compared to surgery (1.5%; 95% CI, 0.8% to 2.3%; p = .024). In multivariable competing risks regression models, EBRT remained associated with an increased risk of fatal CVA compared to surgery (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.75; 95% CI, 1.04-2.96; p = .037).

CONCLUSION

Treatment for early-stage glottic laryngeal cancer with EBRT was associated with a small increase in the risk of late fatal CVA events relative to surgery.

Cardiovascular complications of radiation therapy for thoracic malignancies: the role for non-invasive imaging for detection of cardiovascular disease

Radiation exposure to the thorax is associated with substantial risk for the subsequent development of cardiovascular disease. Thus, the increasing role of radiation therapy in the contemporary treatment of cancer, combined with improving survival rates of patients undergoing this therapy, contributes to a growing population at risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Associated cardiovascular injuries include pericardial disease, coronary artery disease, valvular disease, conduction disease, cardiomyopathy, and medium and large vessel vasculopathy-any of which can occur at varying intervals following irradiation. Higher radiation doses, younger age at the time of irradiation, longer intervals from the time of radiation, and coexisting cardiovascular risk factors all predispose to these injuries. The true incidence of radiation-related cardiovascular disease remains uncertain due to lack of large multicentre studies with a sufficient duration of cardiovascular follow-up. There are currently no consensus guidelines available to inform the optimal approach to cardiovascular surveillance of recipients of thoracic radiation. Therefore, we review the cardiovascular consequences of radiation therapy and focus on the potential role of non-invasive cardiovascular imaging in the assessment and management of radiation-related cardiovascular disease. In doing so, we highlight characteristics that can be used to identify individuals at risk for developing post-radiation cardiovascular disease and propose an imaging-based algorithm for their clinical surveillance.

Arterite actínica de artéria subclávia: relato de caso e revisão de literatura

Diversas são as complicações possíveis da radioterapia na adjuvância do tratamento de neoplasias. Lesões actínicas de artéria subclávia em pacientes submetidos a este tipo de tratamento para neoplasia de mama são complicações conhecidas, porém com poucos relatos de casos publicados. No presente relato, descrevemos um caso de oclusão de artéria subclávia direita em paciente submetida à radioterapia para tratamento de neoplasia de mama, tratada com a revascularização convencional, com interposição de enxerto de politetrafluoretileno (PTFE). Na revisão da literatura realizada, foram encontrados doze casos descritos que evidenciaram diferentes opções terapêuticas. Concluímos que a arterite actínica de artéria subclávia é uma doença incomum, entretanto sua hipótese deve ser aventada em todos os pacientes com isquemia de membro superior já submetidos a tratamento de radioterapia.

Risk prediction for adverse events after carotid artery stenting in higher surgical risk patients

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The goal of carotid artery stenting is to decrease the risk of stroke or other adverse events from carotid artery disease. Choosing a treatment strategy requires patient-specific information regarding periprocedural risk of adverse neurologic events. The aim of this study was to predict individual patient risk after carotid artery stenting in patients at higher risk for carotid endarterectomy.

METHODS

Subjects enrolled in the Stenting and Angioplasty with Protection in Patients at High-Risk for Endarterectomy (SAPPHIRE) worldwide study underwent carotid artery stenting with distal protection. Only patients with at least 1 anatomic or comorbid factor associated with elevated surgical risk were included. Preprocedural factors were used to develop a model and integer-based risk score predicting stroke or death within 30 days. The model was calibrated and internally validated using bootstrap resampling.

RESULTS

Ten thousand one hundred eighty-six patients were included in the analysis. The overall rate of stroke or death was 3.6% at 30 days after carotid artery stenting. Independent predictors of adverse outcomes were increased age (P=0.006), history of stroke (P<0.001), history of transient ischemic attack presentation (P=0.001), recent (<4 weeks) myocardial infarction (P=0.006), dialysis treatment (P=0.007), need for cardiac surgery in addition to carotid revascularization (P=0.005), a right-sided carotid stenosis (P=0.006), a longer carotid plaque (P=0.012), the presence of a Type II or III aortic arch (P=0.035), and a tortuous carotid arterial system (P=0.004). The optimism-adjusted C-statistic was 0.691.

CONCLUSIONS

Commonly collected clinical and anatomic variables can identify patients at high and low risk for stroke or death after carotid artery stenting.

Periprocedural outcomes after surgical revascularization and stenting for postradiotherapy carotid stenosis

BACKGROUND

Treatment of head and neck malignancy commonly involves radiotherapy, which is associated with the development of carotid artery stenosis. There is little evidence to guide clinicians on how to intervene in significant postradiotherapy carotid stenosis. This systematic review collated data pertaining to perioperative outcomes of carotid artery surgery and carotid stenting in postradiotherapy carotid stenosis to aid the clinical decision-making process.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature, adhering to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2009 guidelines, was performed. We screened 575 articles related to carotid artery surgery or stenting in postradiotherapy carotid stenosis, from which 21 studies were included for quantitative analysis. The primary outcome was stroke or death ≤ 30 days of the procedure. Secondary outcomes included cranial nerve injury, restenosis, stroke, and death at >30 days.

RESULTS

Nine publications recorded 211 surgical procedures in 179 patients. In symptomatic patients, the 30-day mortality rate was 2.6% and the stroke or death rate was 2.7%. In asymptomatic patients, the 30-day mortality rate was 0% and the stroke or death rate was 1.1%. Permanent cranial nerve palsy was experienced by 0.6% of patients. Twelve publications recorded 510 carotid artery stenting procedures in 482 patients. In symptomatic patients, the 30-day mortality rate was 5.1%, and the stroke or death rate was 5.1%. In asymptomatic patients, the 30-day mortality rate was 1.4%, and the stroke or death rate was 2.1%. There was no statistically significant difference in 30-day stroke or death rate between surgical revascularization and carotid artery stenting in all (odds ratio [OR], 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.17-1.70; P = .43), symptomatic (OR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.14-1.98; P = .38), or asymptomatic patients (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.06-5.42; P = .99).

CONCLUSIONS

The published outcomes from high-volume centers demonstrate that surgical revascularization and stenting are both technically feasible in postradiotherapy carotid stenosis and have similar safety profiles to nonirradiated necks. Radiation should therefore not be considered a contraindication to surgical intervention.

Article Commentary: Late Outcomes of Carotid Artery Stenting: A Critical Review

The role of carotid artery stenting (CAS) as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy for the treatment of extracranial carotid occlusive disease for stroke prevention continues to evolve. Although technical and device refinements aimed at making CAS safer continue to this day, safety as measured by 30-day and 1-year outcomes has been the primary recipient of regulatory and practice attention. Relatively less emphasis has been placed on the incidence of recurrent stenosis after CAS and the efficacy of CAS in late stroke prevention. Data on late outcomes of CAS, including factors of potential influence, have been emerging and are addressed in this review.

Ischemic stroke and transient ischemic attack after head and neck radiotherapy: a review

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Cerebrovascular disease can complicate head and neck radiotherapy and result in transient ischemic attack and ischemic stroke. Although the incidence of radiation vasculopathy is predicted to rise with improvements in median cancer survival, the pathogenesis, natural history, and management of the disease are ill defined.

METHODS

We examined studies on the epidemiology, imaging, pathogenesis, and management of medium- and large-artery intra- and extra-cranial disease after head and neck radiotherapy. Controlled prospective trials and larger retrospective trials from the last 30 years were prioritized.

RESULTS

The relative risk of transient ischemic attack or ischemic stroke is at least doubled by head and neck radiotherapy. Chronic radiation vasculopathy affecting medium and large intra- and extra-cranial arteries is characterized by increasing rates of hemodynamically significant stenosis with time from radiotherapy. Disease expression is the likely consequence of the combined radiation insult to the intima-media (accelerating atherosclerosis) and to the adventitia (injuring the vasa vasorum). Optimal medical treatment is not established. Carotid endarterectomy is confounded by the need to operate across scarred tissue planes, whereas carotid stenting procedures have resulted in high restenosis rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Head and neck radiotherapy significantly increases the risk of transient ischemic attack and ischemic stroke. Evidence-based guidelines for the management of asymptomatic and symptomatic (medium- and large-artery) radiation vasculopathy are lacking. Long-term prospective studies remain a priority, as the incidence of the problem is anticipated to rise with improvements in postradiotherapy patient survival.

Carotid artery stent placement

In the past 3 years, there have been significant developments in the field of carotid revascularization, including: 1) the results of a large primary stroke prevention trial; 2) the emergence of novel platforms for emboli protection; 3) improved characterization of the high-risk carotid artery stent (CAS) patient; 4) completion of several very large post-market surveillance (PMS) trials of CAS in high-surgical-risk patients; and 5) the completion of 4 large randomized controlled trials comparing CAS with carotid endarterectomy in average-risk patients. The purpose of this review is to update the current status of revascularization therapies to reduce stroke in patients with extracranial carotid artery disease with a focus on the most recent developments regarding the role of CAS.

Neurotoxicity of radiation therapy

Direct or incidental exposure of the nervous system to therapeutic irradiation carries the risk of symptomatic neurologic injury. Central nervous system toxicity from radiation includes focal cerebral necrosis, neurocognitive deficits, and less commonly cerebrovascular disease, myelopathy, or the occurrence of a radiation-induced neoplasm. Brachial or lumbosacral plexopathy are the most common syndromes of radiation toxicity affecting the peripheral nervous system. This article focuses on the clinical features, diagnosis, and management options for patients with radiation neurotoxicity.

Outcome of carotid artery stenting for radiation-induced stenosis

PURPOSE

Patients who have been irradiated at the neck have an increased risk of symptomatic stenosis of the carotid artery during follow-up. Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) can be a preferable alternative treatment to carotid endarterectomy, which is associated with increased operative risks in these patients.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We performed a prospective cohort study of 24 previously irradiated patients who underwent CAS for symptomatic carotid stenosis. We assessed periprocedural and nonprocedural events including transient ischemic attack (TIA), nondisabling stroke, disabling stoke, and death. Patency rates were evaluated on duplex ultrasound scans. Restenosis was defined as a stenosis of >50% at the stent location.

RESULTS

Periprocedural TIA rate was 8%, and periprocedural stroke (nondisabling) occurred in 4% of patients. After a mean follow-up of 3.3 years (range, 0.3-11.0 years), only one ipsilateral incident event (TIA) had occurred (4%). In 12% of patients, a contralateral incident event was present: one TIA (4%) and two strokes (12%, two disabling strokes). Restenosis was apparent in 17%, 33%, and 42% at 3, 12, and 24 months, respectively, although none of the patients with restenosed vessels became symptomatic. The length of the irradiation to CAS interval proved the only significant risk factor for restenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of CAS for radiation-induced carotid stenosis are favorable in terms of recurrence of cerebrovascular events at the CAS site.

Radiation-associated carotid artery atherosclerosis: case report and review of contemporaneous literature

Radiation therapy (RT) is a component of the treatment of patients with head and neck malignancies. This therapy may damage the nearby carotid arteries, thereby initiating or accelerating the atherosclerotic process (atheroma formation). Dentists treating patients who have been irradiated should examine the patient's panoramic radiograph for evidence of atheroma-like calcifications, which appear 1.5 to 2.5 cm posterior and inferior to the angle of the mandible. Patients with evidence of such lesions should be referred to their primary care physician with the suggestion that an ultrasound examination of the carotid arteries is indicated.

Stroke and cancer: a review

Stroke is a disabling disease and can add to the burden of patients already suffering from cancer. Several major mechanisms of stroke exist in cancer patients, which can be directly tumour related, because of coagulation disorders, infections, and therapy related. Stroke can also occur as the first sign of cancer, or lead to its detection. The classical literature suggests that stroke occurs more frequently in cancer patients than in the average population. More recent studies report a very similar incidence between cancer and non-cancer patients. However, there are several cancer-specific types and causes of stroke in cancer patients, which need to be considered in each patient. This review classifies stroke into ischaemic, haemorrhagic, cerebral venous thrombosis and other rarer types of cerebrovascular disease. Its aim is to identify the types of stroke most frequently associated with cancer, and give a practical view on the most common and most specific types of stroke. The diagnosis of the cause of stroke in cancer patients is crucial for treatment and prevention. Management of different stroke types will be briefly discussed.

Prosthetic carotid bypass grafts for atherosclerotic lesions: a prospective study of 198 consecutive cases

OBJECTIVES

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is the standard treatment for atherosclerotic lesions involving the carotid bifurcation. However, CEA can be challenging under some conditions. The goal of this study was to determine the outcome and durability of prosthetic carotid bypass grafting (PCB) with polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) grafts as an alternative to CEA.

METHODS

This is a prospective series of 198 consecutive patients with PCB, representing 12.4% of 1595 patients with a carotid reconstruction procedure performed in our department between September 1986 and December 2006. Qualifying event was stroke in 67 patients (34%) and transient ischaemic attack (TIA) in 45 (23%), and 86 patients (43%) were asymptomatic. Primary indications for PCB were extensive atherosclerotic lesions (n=71; 36%), carotid stenosis associated with kinking (n=49; 25%), recurrent stenosis (n=47; 23%), stenosis after radiation therapy (n=18; 9%) and technical failure of CEA (n=13; 7%), with excessive arterial wall thinning and perforation after endarterectomy (n=10) or intimal flap on completion digital angiography (n=3).

RESULTS

The combined stroke and death rate at 30 days were 0.5% (one stroke). Median follow-up was 9.5 years (interquartile range (IQR): 6.2-18.3 years). At 10 years, primary patency was 97.9+/-3.4%. Six PCBs (3.0%) became occluded during follow-up; one patient had a restenosis greater than 50% and 18 patients (9.1%) had a restenosis of less than 50%. Five patients had an ipsilateral stroke (one postoperative stroke, one at 103 days with a patent PCB and three related to occlusion of the PCB at 4, 13 and 15 years after the procedure). At 10 years, cumulative stroke-free survival was 98.4+/-3.2%, and cumulative survival was 78.8+/-7.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

PCB is a safe surgical alternative and is durable, with a low incidence of graft restenosis, when CEA seems hazardous.

Management of stroke in cancer

Cerebrovascular disorders, including brain infarction, brain hemorrhage, and cerebral venous thrombosis, can occur as an early sign of cancer, but typically occur late in the clinical course. These disorders are due to a variety of pathogenic mechanisms, including coagulation disorders associated with the cancer, invasion or compression of vessels from tumor in or adjacent to the brain, and the adverse effects of cancer therapy. The appropriate therapy for these cerebrovascular disorders is empiric in most instances, because as yet there are no prospective treatment trials for them. A review of the existing literature reveals that improvement in patient quality of life and prevention of further cerebrovascular events can be obtained in some clinical situations.

Premature carotid artery disease in long-term survivors of childhood cancer treated with neck irradiation: a series of 5 cases

BACKGROUND

Follow-up studies find an increase in stroke and carotid artery disease incidence in adult cancer patients treated with neck irradiation. These radiation-related late effects are now being detected in young adult survivors of childhood cancer.

OBSERVATIONS

This report includes 5 pediatric cancer survivors, ages 23 to 40, who presented with advanced carotid artery stenosis 17 to 36 years after receiving neck irradiation. Radiation doses ranged from 3900 to 7350 cGy. Three of the 5 experienced a stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalence and risk factors associated with premature carotid artery disease after neck irradiation need to be investigated in childhood cancer survivors.

Radiation arteritis: A contraindication to carotid stenting?

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) for high-risk anatomic lesions is accepted practice. Neck irradiation and radiotherapy-induced arteritis are common indications. The clinical outcomes of CAS for radiation arteritis have been poorly defined.

METHODS

A prospective database of patients undergoing CAS at a tertiary referral academic medical center was maintained from 1999 to 2006. Patients undergoing primary carotid artery stenting for significant atherosclerotic (ASOD) and radiotherapy (XRT)-induced occlusive disease were analyzed. Life-table analyses were performed to assess time-dependent outcomes. Cox proportional hazard analysis or Fisher's exact test was performed to identify factors associated with outcomes. Data are presented as the mean +/- SEM unless otherwise indicated.

RESULTS

During the study period, 150 patients underwent primary CAS, 75% with embolic protection. Fifty-eight percent were symptomatic. One hundred twenty-seven (85%) were treated for ASOD, and 23 (15%) had XRT. The 30-day all-cause mortality rate was 1% for ASOD and 0% for XRT (P = NS); overall survival at 3 years was equivalent. There was no significant difference in major adverse event rates as defined by the Stenting and Angioplasty with Protection in Patients at High Risk for Endarterectomy (SAPPHIRE) trial between the groups. The 3-year neurologic event-free rate was 85% for ASOD and 87% for XRT (P = NS). Late asymptomatic occlusions were seen only in XRT patients. The 3-year freedom from restenosis rate was significantly worse for the XRT group, at 20%, vs 74% for the ASOD group (P < .05). Likewise, the 3-year patency rate was also worse for the XRT group, at 91%, vs 100% for ASOD by Kaplan-Meier analysis (P < .05). No factor was predictive of occlusion or stenosis by Cox proportional hazards analysis.

CONCLUSION

CAS for radiation arteritis has poor long-term anatomic outcome and can present with late asymptomatic occlusions. These findings suggest that these patients require closer postoperative surveillance and raise the question of whether CAS is appropriate for carotid occlusive lesions caused by radiation arteritis.

Regional or general anesthesia for carotid endarterectomy? Evidence from published prospective and retrospective studies

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy under regional or general anesthesia for any new neurologic impairment, stroke, stroke and/or death, death, and myocardial infarction.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis.

SETTING

A search of the National Library of Medicine of the United States PUBMED from 1966 up to June 11, 2005, with the following key words: "carotid surgery or endarterectomy and regional anesthesia."

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Forty-eight studies (14 prospective and 34 retrospective) were analyzed. The optimal information size was achieved only when all studies were analyzed together (prospective and retrospective). Regional anesthesia reduced the rate of any new neurologic impairment (odds ratio = 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.48-0.75; p < 0.00001), stroke (0.54 [0.43-0.68], p < 0.00001), stroke and/or death (0.62 [0.49-0.78], p < 0.0001), death (0.65 [0.48-0.87], p = 0.004), and myocardial infarction (0.50 [0.36-0.70], p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

The number of patients included in randomized controlled trials or even in prospective studies is too low to allow any conclusions on the differences in outcome between the 2 anesthetic techniques. Better outcomes are suggested when results from retrospective studies are added.

Cervical carotid revascularization: the case for carotid angioplasty with stenting

Carotid artery angioplasty with or without stent placement has evolved as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy, particularly for those patients in whom carotid endarterectomy is associated with a higher risk of complications. This article summarizes the selection criteria for participation in and the results of several carotid intervention trials, reviews the relative indications and limitations for both surgical and endovascular revascularization approaches, and describes the technique for and results associated with carotid stenting. The discussion is presented from the vantage of neurosurgeons who are experienced in both revascularization approaches.

Impact of carotid artery stent trials on the education and training of vascular surgeons

Clinical trials directed at evaluating the efficacy and safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) have accelerated development of didactic and technical training programs for both newly trained and experienced vascular surgeons. This report reviews the current status of guidelines for CAS and the evolution of related educational programs necessary to impart the clinical, cognitive, and technical skills required for the optimal care of patients with this new technology.

Carotid stenting with distal protection in high surgical risk patients: The BEACH trial 30 day results

BACKGROUND

The BEACH trial evaluated the outcomes of carotid artery stent placement with distal emboli protection, using the Carotid Wallstent and the FilterWire EX/EZ(TM), in patients at high surgical risk for carotid endarterectomy (CEA).

METHODS

We enrolled 747 patients at high surgical risk for CEA due to prespecified anatomical criteria and/or medical comorbidities. The trial included both symptomatic (>50% carotid artery stenosis) as well as asymptomatic (>80% carotid artery stenosis) high surgical risk patients. Three groups of patients were included in the trial. The Roll-in (R) group (n = 189/747, [25%]) included up to nine patients per site for familiarization of the device and protocol; the Pivotal (P) group (n = 480/747, [65%]) was intended for presentation to the FDA for consideration of device approval; and a Bilateral (B) registry group (n = 78/747, [10%]) was included because of the need to treat patients with bilateral carotid artery disease. In the 480 Pivotal patients, anatomic criteria represented the most frequent high-risk surgical category for enrollment (58.8%), followed by prior CEA (34.2%), multivessel (>or=2) coronary artery disease (21.7%), and contralateral carotid occlusion (18.1%).

RESULTS

The technical success rate for stent deployment and FilterWire EX/EZ deployment and retrieval was 98.2%. The mean postprocedure angiographic diameter stenosis in the Pivotal group was reduced to 10.8%, while the overall procedure success rate (<50% residual diameter stenosis) after stent deployment was 98%. The 30 day composite major adverse event (MAE) rate for the entire cohort of 747 patients (i.e. inclusive of all 3 groups) was 5.8% (all death = 1.5%, all stroke = 4.4%, and all myocardial infarction (MI) = 1.0%). In subgroup analysis, there was no significant difference in the MAE rate between the three groups (P = 5.8%, R = 6.9%, B = 2.6%, P = 0.42).

CONCLUSION

The similarity in periprocedural event rates for the Pivotal and Roll-in groups suggests a flat learning curve for experienced operators using this carotid stent system. The similarity in event rates for the Bilateral group, when compared with the Roll-in and Pivotal groups, suggests that staged sequential treatment of bilateral stenoses may be performed at the same risk as for unilateral lesions. The 30-day safety of this stent and distal emboli protection system is encouraging and compares favorably with other carotid stent trials in high surgical risk patients.