To patch or not to patch: is that the real question? The role of hemodynamics in carotid endarterectomy. Illustrative cases.

Tatiana Abou-Mrad, Laura Stone McGuire, Laurel Morgan Miller Marsh, Juan Cebral, Fady T Charbel
{"title":"To patch or not to patch: is that the real question? The role of hemodynamics in carotid endarterectomy. Illustrative cases.","authors":"Tatiana Abou-Mrad, Laura Stone McGuire, Laurel Morgan Miller Marsh, Juan Cebral, Fady T Charbel","doi":"10.3171/CASE24840","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The utilizationof patches in carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for carotid artery stenosis remains controversial, with conflicting evidence regarding postoperative outcomes. This report accentuates this discourse with two selected representative cases with divergent outcomes.</p><p><strong>Observations: </strong>Computational fluid dynamics analyses of pre- and post-CEA hemodynamics revealed distinct hemodynamic profiles between the two patients. In the nonpatched internal carotid artery (ICA), the vessel retained a cylindrical shape, exhibiting swirling blood flow and higher wall shear stress (WSS)-patterns typical of healthy vasculature. The patched ICA adopted a bulbous shape, akin to the anatomical carotid bulb, and displayed lower WSS and noncoherent disturbed blood flow, which are features associated with atherosclerosis, endothelial dysfunction, and cellular damage.</p><p><strong>Lessons: </strong>This study suggests that the question may not be \"To patch or not to patch?\" but rather \"Is the restoration of the anatomical bulb shape beneficial or deleterious?\" It sheds light on the hemodynamic implications of this procedure and provides insight into the ongoing debate surrounding CEA. Using a patch might not necessarily result in improved flow or more favorable outcomes; thus, restoration of the carotid bulb configuration postendarterectomy might not optimize the hemodynamic profile for patients, but rather, a simple tubular shape, without a patch, might offer the best solution. https://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/CASE24840.</p>","PeriodicalId":94098,"journal":{"name":"Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons","volume":"9 14","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3171/CASE24840","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The utilizationof patches in carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for carotid artery stenosis remains controversial, with conflicting evidence regarding postoperative outcomes. This report accentuates this discourse with two selected representative cases with divergent outcomes.

Observations: Computational fluid dynamics analyses of pre- and post-CEA hemodynamics revealed distinct hemodynamic profiles between the two patients. In the nonpatched internal carotid artery (ICA), the vessel retained a cylindrical shape, exhibiting swirling blood flow and higher wall shear stress (WSS)-patterns typical of healthy vasculature. The patched ICA adopted a bulbous shape, akin to the anatomical carotid bulb, and displayed lower WSS and noncoherent disturbed blood flow, which are features associated with atherosclerosis, endothelial dysfunction, and cellular damage.

Lessons: This study suggests that the question may not be "To patch or not to patch?" but rather "Is the restoration of the anatomical bulb shape beneficial or deleterious?" It sheds light on the hemodynamic implications of this procedure and provides insight into the ongoing debate surrounding CEA. Using a patch might not necessarily result in improved flow or more favorable outcomes; thus, restoration of the carotid bulb configuration postendarterectomy might not optimize the hemodynamic profile for patients, but rather, a simple tubular shape, without a patch, might offer the best solution. https://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/CASE24840.

打补丁还是不打补丁:这是真正的问题吗?血流动力学在颈动脉内膜切除术中的作用。说明情况。
背景:在颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)中使用贴片治疗颈动脉狭窄仍然存在争议,关于术后结果的证据相互矛盾。本报告通过两个具有不同结果的代表性案例来强调这一论述。观察:cea前后血流动力学的计算流体动力学分析揭示了两例患者之间不同的血流动力学特征。在未修补的颈内动脉(ICA)中,血管保持圆柱形,表现出旋转血流和较高的壁剪切应力(WSS)-健康血管的典型模式。修补后的ICA呈球根状,类似于解剖上的颈动脉球根,显示较低的WSS和不连贯的血流紊乱,这些特征与动脉粥样硬化、内皮功能障碍和细胞损伤有关。经验教训:这项研究表明,问题可能不是“补还是不补?”而是“恢复解剖学上的球茎形状是有益的还是有害的?”它揭示了该手术的血流动力学意义,并为围绕CEA的持续争论提供了见解。使用贴片不一定能改善血流或获得更有利的结果;因此,动脉内膜切除术后恢复颈动脉球状结构可能不能优化患者的血流动力学特征,相反,一个简单的管状形状,没有贴片,可能是最好的解决方案。https://thejns.org/doi/10.3171/CASE24840。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信