Anatolian journal of cardiology · 2024
Cartoid Near Occlusion: Time to Re-think Endarectomy?
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
İner Hasan, Gökalp Orhan, Yürekli İsmail, Eygi Börtecin, Kandemir Çağrı, Tellioğlu Tahsin Murat, Yılık Levent, Gürbüz Ali
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: Carotid near occlusion (CNO) treatment is still controversial. In the discussion of surgical revascularization of these patients, periprocedural complications and technical failure should be considered in addition to the long-term results. We examined the efficacy and safety of surgical treatment in CNO and non-CNO patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA).
METHODS: Data from 152 patients (118 male and 34 female) who underwent isolated CEA between January 2018 and June 2020 without critical contralateral lesions were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into 2 groups: CNO (n = 52) and non-CNO (n = 100). The groups were compared regarding postoperative transient ischemic attack (TIA), ipsilateral ischemic stroke, and mortality.
RESULTS: The success rate of the procedure was 100% in the CNO group and 99% in the Non-CNO group. In the Non-CNO group, 1 patient had ipsilateral ischemic stroke on postoperative day 0, and this patient was treated with carotid artery stenting. While the number of patients who died in the non-CNO group was 3 (3%) overall, the exitus rate was 1 (1.9%) in the CNO group (P >.05). In the CNO group, retinal TIA was observed in 1 patient (1.9%), ischemic stroke in 2 patients (3.8%), and TIA in 1 patient (1.9%). In the non-CNO group; Retinal TIA was observed in 1 patient (1.0%), ischemic stroke in 2 patients (2.0%), and TIA in 2 patients (2.0%). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of postoperative neurologic complications and primary endpoints at 12-month follow-up (P >.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Carotid endarterectomy is a safe, feasible, and advantageous procedure in selected CNO patients, as in non-CNO carotid artery patients. Therefore, we recommend a surgical approach to prevent neurological events in CNO patients.
METHODS: Data from 152 patients (118 male and 34 female) who underwent isolated CEA between January 2018 and June 2020 without critical contralateral lesions were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into 2 groups: CNO (n = 52) and non-CNO (n = 100). The groups were compared regarding postoperative transient ischemic attack (TIA), ipsilateral ischemic stroke, and mortality.
RESULTS: The success rate of the procedure was 100% in the CNO group and 99% in the Non-CNO group. In the Non-CNO group, 1 patient had ipsilateral ischemic stroke on postoperative day 0, and this patient was treated with carotid artery stenting. While the number of patients who died in the non-CNO group was 3 (3%) overall, the exitus rate was 1 (1.9%) in the CNO group (P >.05). In the CNO group, retinal TIA was observed in 1 patient (1.9%), ischemic stroke in 2 patients (3.8%), and TIA in 1 patient (1.9%). In the non-CNO group; Retinal TIA was observed in 1 patient (1.0%), ischemic stroke in 2 patients (2.0%), and TIA in 2 patients (2.0%). There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of postoperative neurologic complications and primary endpoints at 12-month follow-up (P >.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Carotid endarterectomy is a safe, feasible, and advantageous procedure in selected CNO patients, as in non-CNO carotid artery patients. Therefore, we recommend a surgical approach to prevent neurological events in CNO patients.