Outcomes of Carotid Revascularization in the Treatment of Restenosis After Prior Carotid Endarterectomy

Author:

Elsayed Nadin1,Ramakrishnan Ganesh2,Naazie Isaac1,Sheth Sharvil3,Malas Mahmoud B.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University of California San Diego, La Jolla (N.E., I.N., M.B.M.).

2. Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University, Philadelphia, PA (G.R.).

3. Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, St Luke’s University Health Network, Bethlehem, PA (S.S.).

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Restenosis after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is associated with an increased risk of ipsilateral stroke. The optimal procedural modality for this indication has yet to be determined. Here, we evaluate the in-hospital outcomes of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR), redo-CEA, and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) in a large contemporary cohort of patients who underwent treatment for restenosis after CEA. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients in the vascular quality initiative database who underwent TCAR, redo-CEA, or TFCAS after ipsilateral CEA between September 2016 and April 2020. Patients with prior ipsilateral CAS were excluded from this analysis. In-hospital outcomes following TCAR versus CEA and TCAR versus TFCAS were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results: A total of 4425 patients were available for this analysis. There were 963 (21.8%) redo-CEA, 1786 (40.4%) TFCAS, and 1676 (37.9%) TCAR. TCAR was associated with lower odds of in-hospital stroke/death (odds ratio [OR], 0.41 [95% CI, 0.24–0.70], P =0.021), stroke (OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.23–0.93], P =0.03), myocardial infarction (MI; OR, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.14–0.73], P =0.007), stroke/transient ischemic attack (OR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.24–0.74], P =0.002), and stroke/death/MI (OR, 0.41 [95% CI, 0.24–0.70], P =0.001) when compared with redo-CEA. There was no significant difference in the odds of death between the 2 groups (OR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.28–3.5], P =0.995). TCAR was also associated with lower odds of stroke/transient ischemic attack (OR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.18–0.74], P =0.005) when compared with TFCAS. There was no significant difference in the odds of stroke, death, MI, stroke/death, or stroke/death/MI between TCAR and TFCAS. Conclusions: TCAR was associated with significantly lower odds of in-hospital stroke, MI, stroke/transient ischemic attack, stroke/death, and stroke/death/MI when compared with redo-CEA and lower odds of in-hospital stroke/transient ischemic attack when compared with TFCAS. Additional long-term studies are warranted to establish the role of TCAR for the treatment of restenosis after CEA.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Advanced and Specialized Nursing,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Neurology (clinical)

Reference47 articles.

1. Restenosis after carotid artery stenting and endarterectomy: a secondary analysis of CREST, a randomised controlled trial

2. The Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial (CREST): stenting versus carotid endarterectomy for carotid disease.;Mantese VA;Stroke,2010

3. Restenosis after carotid endarterectomy in a multicenter regional registry

4. Recurrent carotid stenosis after carotid endarterectomy.;Lattimer CR;Br J Surg,1997

5. Incidence of recurrent or residual stenosis after carotid endarterectomy

Cited by 13 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3