Background: To compare the outcomes of patients who were submitted to partial carotid endarterectomy (P-CEA) to those of patients who underwent standard conventional CEA with patch closure (C-CEA) and eversion CEA (E-CEA) for a significant carotid stenosis. Methods: Data of patients who consecutively underwent CEA from January 2014 to December 2018 for a significant carotid stenosis were retrospectively collected. Primary outcomes included mortality and the occurrence of neurologic and cardiologic complications, both at 30 days and during follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the occurrence of perioperative local complications (i.e. cranial nerve injuries, hematomas) and restenosis during follow-up. P values < 0.5 were considered statistically significant. Results: Three-hundred twenty-seven patients (241 males, 74%) underwent CEA for carotid stenosis (28.6% symptomatic). P-CEA was performed in 202 patients (61.8%), while C-CEA and E-CEA were performed in 103 and 22 cases respectively. At 30 days, neurologic complications were not significantly different among the 3 groups (2.8% in the group of C-CEA, 2.4% after P-CEA and 0% in E-CEA patients, P = 0.81), neither during follow-up. Perioperative local complications also were not significantly different among the 3 groups (P = 0.16). Conclusions: P-CEA had similar outcomes if compared to C-CEA and to E-CEA in terms of perioperative mortality, occurrence of neurologic and cardiologic complications, and occurrence of local complications. Also, in the long-term, P-CEA, C-CEA, and E-CEA were burdened by similar rates of mortality, neurologic, and cardiologic complications and restenosis.

Partial Eversion Carotid Endarterectomy versus Conventional Techniques for Significant Carotid Stenosis / D. Mazzaccaro, P. Righini, M. Giannetta, A. Modafferi, G. Malacrida, G. Nano. - In: ANNALS OF VASCULAR SURGERY. - ISSN 1615-5947. - 93:(2023 Jul), pp. 252-260. [10.1016/j.avsg.2023.01.041]

Partial Eversion Carotid Endarterectomy versus Conventional Techniques for Significant Carotid Stenosis

D. Mazzaccaro
Primo
;
M. Giannetta;G. Nano
Ultimo
2023

Abstract

Background: To compare the outcomes of patients who were submitted to partial carotid endarterectomy (P-CEA) to those of patients who underwent standard conventional CEA with patch closure (C-CEA) and eversion CEA (E-CEA) for a significant carotid stenosis. Methods: Data of patients who consecutively underwent CEA from January 2014 to December 2018 for a significant carotid stenosis were retrospectively collected. Primary outcomes included mortality and the occurrence of neurologic and cardiologic complications, both at 30 days and during follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the occurrence of perioperative local complications (i.e. cranial nerve injuries, hematomas) and restenosis during follow-up. P values < 0.5 were considered statistically significant. Results: Three-hundred twenty-seven patients (241 males, 74%) underwent CEA for carotid stenosis (28.6% symptomatic). P-CEA was performed in 202 patients (61.8%), while C-CEA and E-CEA were performed in 103 and 22 cases respectively. At 30 days, neurologic complications were not significantly different among the 3 groups (2.8% in the group of C-CEA, 2.4% after P-CEA and 0% in E-CEA patients, P = 0.81), neither during follow-up. Perioperative local complications also were not significantly different among the 3 groups (P = 0.16). Conclusions: P-CEA had similar outcomes if compared to C-CEA and to E-CEA in terms of perioperative mortality, occurrence of neurologic and cardiologic complications, and occurrence of local complications. Also, in the long-term, P-CEA, C-CEA, and E-CEA were burdened by similar rates of mortality, neurologic, and cardiologic complications and restenosis.
Settore MED/22 - Chirurgia Vascolare
lug-2023
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
1-s2.0-S0890509623000559-main.pdf

accesso riservato

Tipologia: Publisher's version/PDF
Dimensione 1.23 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
1.23 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/982748
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact