Eversion versus conventional carotid endarterectomy: a prospective study.

OBJECTIVES

To analyse comparatively eversion and conventional CEA for later association with restenosis, perioperative stroke/death and ipsilateral cerebrovascular events (early, late, disabling and non-disabling).

DESIGN

Prospective non-randomised clinical study.

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

A total of 469 patients underwent 514 procedures; 274 (53%) eversion CEA and 240 (47%) conventional CEA. Perioperative monitoring was carried out by clinical evaluation under local anaesthesia or by transcranial Doppler under general anaesthesia. Follow-up was carried out by clinical evaluation and Duplex scanning.

RESULTS

Clamping time was significantly shorter in the eversion group (25.5 +/- 7.4 vs. 28.3 +/- 10.1 min; p = 0.0001; CI delta 4.40/1.12). The perioperative disabling stroke/death rate was 0.7% for eversion vs. 1.2% for conventional CEA, p = 0.6; odds ratio (OR), 0.58. There were two early carotid occlusions (within 30 days) in both groups. According to life-table analysis, after 3 years the probability of > 50% carotid restenosis was significantly lower in the eversion group (2.2% vs. 6.9%, p = 0.03; relative risk reduction 67%). There were no significant differences between the two groups relative to new cerebrovascular events (92% in both groups, p = 0.6). Using multivariate analysis (Cox regression), eversion CEA, and to a lesser extent standard CEA with patch, appeared to protect the vessel from restenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The eversion technique was associated with reduced clamping time and probability of restenosis. However, because of the nature of a non-randomised study, the present analysis should be confirmed by a multicentre randomised trial.