Transcervical Versus Transfemoral Approach in Carotid Stenting Real World Experience in a Community Hospital.

INTRODUCTION

Peri-procedural embolic events are the Achilles' heel of carotid stenting. To overcome this complication, transcervical access to the carotid artery was introduced. In this study we describe our "our life" experience with the transcervical approach in a community hospital.

MATERIAL AND

METHODS

All carotid stent procedures between January 2010 and December 2020 were included in this retrospective analysis. The transcervical approach was compared to the transfemoral approach. In both procedures open-cell, closed-cell design and hybrid stents were used. In-hospital stroke was the primary outcome measure.

RESULTS

A total of 340 procedures were performed, in 184 patients the transfemoral approach was used and in 156 patients the transcervical approach was used. In 12 patients (3.5%) an in-hospital stroke was diagnosed, 4 in the transfemoral group (2.2%) and 8 in the transcervical group (5.1%) (P = 0.14). In the multivariate analyses a symptomatic lesion was associated with in-hospital stroke. Neither type of access nor cell design was associated with increased risk of in-hospital stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to previous studies, we could not confirm the advantages of the transcervical approach. However, conclusions should be carefully drawn, since this study is retrospective and was performed with multiple surgeon and different kind of stents.