Ten-Year Experience With Primary Repair and Selective Patch Angioplasty in Carotid Endarterectomy.

IF 0.7
Maysam Shehab, Tzipi Hornik-Lurie, Esra Abu Much, Victor Bilman, Jeries Awwad, Adi R Bachar, Simone Fajer
{"title":"Ten-Year Experience With Primary Repair and Selective Patch Angioplasty in Carotid Endarterectomy.","authors":"Maysam Shehab, Tzipi Hornik-Lurie, Esra Abu Much, Victor Bilman, Jeries Awwad, Adi R Bachar, Simone Fajer","doi":"10.1177/15385744251360825","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>IntroductionCarotid endarterectomy (CEA) is a cornerstone in stroke prevention for patients with carotid stenosis, with closure techniques including primary, patch angioplasty, and eversion. The aim of this paper is to present a 10-year analysis of outcomes in patients undergoing primary repair and selective patch angioplasty in CEA.MethodsA retrospective, single-center study including all consecutive patients undergoing elective CEA at our institution between 2014 and 2023. The Primary outcomes were technical success and 30-day overall survival, ipsilateral ischemic stroke, reintervention, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rates. The secondary outcomes were >30-day ipsilateral ischemic stroke, reintervention and primary patency. All outcomes were analyzed in relation to the carotid closure technique (primary closure, patch angioplasty, or eversion). A Generalized Linear Mixed Model (GLMM) was used to assess the association between closure technique and both early and late outcomes. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to analyze follow-up outcomes depending on the closure technique.ResultsA total of 625 CEA procedures were performed on 577 patients [mean age: 71 ± 9 years; 30.7% female], comprising 87.4% primary repairs, 10.4% patch angioplasty, and 2.2% eversion CEA. Technical success was achieved in (n = 615, 98.4%) of the procedures, with no significant difference between repair types (<i>P</i> value .947). The mean follow-up duration was 60 ± 38.45 months. Early (<30-day) ipsilateral stroke and reintervention did not differ significantly across carotid repair groups. GLMM analysis showed that congestive heart failure (CHF) was a significant predictor of increased risk for stroke and MACE (OR: 8.870, CI 95% 2.046-38.451, <i>P</i> = .005) (OR: 7.037, CI 95% 1.902-26.038, <i>P</i> = .005), respectively. Regional anesthesia significantly lowered the risks of stroke (OR: 0.216, CI 95% .065-.721, <i>P</i> = .014) and MACE (OR: 0.380, CI 95% .158-.914, <i>P</i> = .032). Long-term (>30-day) ipsilateral stroke and 2-year primary patency were comparable across the groups. GLMM analysis of >30-day stroke revealed no statistically significant differences between patch and primary CEA (OR: 1.947, 95% CI: .321-11.819, <i>P</i> = .363). Neither age >80 years (<i>n</i> = 94, 15%) nor female sex (<i>n</i> = 177, 30.7%) were significantly associated with increased stroke risk (age: OR 0.524, 95% CI: 0.021-7.013, <i>P</i> = .415; sex: OR 0.524, 95% CI: 0.087-3.152, <i>P</i> = .370). The analysis of 2-year patency outcomes revealed no significant associations between patch vs primary CEA, sex, or age greater than 80 years. KM analysis revealed 3-year survival rates of 93% for primary repair, 99% for patch angioplasty, and 90% for eversion (<i>P</i> = .5). Stroke-free survival at 3 years was 95%, 94%, and 100%, respectively (<i>P</i> = .3).ConclusionNo significant differences were observed in early or late stroke, mortality, or 2-year patency on adjusted analysis. KM analysis showed favourable 3-year freedom from ipsilateral stroke in the primary repair group. These results suggest that primary repair is a safe option in anatomically suitable patients and support a selective, patient-tailored approach to carotid artery closure, rather than a uniform strategy for all cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":94265,"journal":{"name":"Vascular and endovascular surgery","volume":" ","pages":"15385744251360825"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vascular and endovascular surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15385744251360825","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

IntroductionCarotid endarterectomy (CEA) is a cornerstone in stroke prevention for patients with carotid stenosis, with closure techniques including primary, patch angioplasty, and eversion. The aim of this paper is to present a 10-year analysis of outcomes in patients undergoing primary repair and selective patch angioplasty in CEA.MethodsA retrospective, single-center study including all consecutive patients undergoing elective CEA at our institution between 2014 and 2023. The Primary outcomes were technical success and 30-day overall survival, ipsilateral ischemic stroke, reintervention, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rates. The secondary outcomes were >30-day ipsilateral ischemic stroke, reintervention and primary patency. All outcomes were analyzed in relation to the carotid closure technique (primary closure, patch angioplasty, or eversion). A Generalized Linear Mixed Model (GLMM) was used to assess the association between closure technique and both early and late outcomes. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to analyze follow-up outcomes depending on the closure technique.ResultsA total of 625 CEA procedures were performed on 577 patients [mean age: 71 ± 9 years; 30.7% female], comprising 87.4% primary repairs, 10.4% patch angioplasty, and 2.2% eversion CEA. Technical success was achieved in (n = 615, 98.4%) of the procedures, with no significant difference between repair types (P value .947). The mean follow-up duration was 60 ± 38.45 months. Early (<30-day) ipsilateral stroke and reintervention did not differ significantly across carotid repair groups. GLMM analysis showed that congestive heart failure (CHF) was a significant predictor of increased risk for stroke and MACE (OR: 8.870, CI 95% 2.046-38.451, P = .005) (OR: 7.037, CI 95% 1.902-26.038, P = .005), respectively. Regional anesthesia significantly lowered the risks of stroke (OR: 0.216, CI 95% .065-.721, P = .014) and MACE (OR: 0.380, CI 95% .158-.914, P = .032). Long-term (>30-day) ipsilateral stroke and 2-year primary patency were comparable across the groups. GLMM analysis of >30-day stroke revealed no statistically significant differences between patch and primary CEA (OR: 1.947, 95% CI: .321-11.819, P = .363). Neither age >80 years (n = 94, 15%) nor female sex (n = 177, 30.7%) were significantly associated with increased stroke risk (age: OR 0.524, 95% CI: 0.021-7.013, P = .415; sex: OR 0.524, 95% CI: 0.087-3.152, P = .370). The analysis of 2-year patency outcomes revealed no significant associations between patch vs primary CEA, sex, or age greater than 80 years. KM analysis revealed 3-year survival rates of 93% for primary repair, 99% for patch angioplasty, and 90% for eversion (P = .5). Stroke-free survival at 3 years was 95%, 94%, and 100%, respectively (P = .3).ConclusionNo significant differences were observed in early or late stroke, mortality, or 2-year patency on adjusted analysis. KM analysis showed favourable 3-year freedom from ipsilateral stroke in the primary repair group. These results suggest that primary repair is a safe option in anatomically suitable patients and support a selective, patient-tailored approach to carotid artery closure, rather than a uniform strategy for all cases.

颈动脉内膜切除术中初级修复和选择性补片成形术的十年经验。
颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)是颈动脉狭窄患者卒中预防的基石,其关闭技术包括原发性、贴片血管成形术和外翻。本文的目的是对CEA患者进行初级修复和选择性贴片血管成形术的10年结果进行分析。方法回顾性、单中心研究,纳入我院2014 - 2023年间所有连续接受选择性CEA的患者。主要结果是技术成功和30天总生存、同侧缺血性卒中、再干预和主要心脏不良事件(MACE)率。次要结果为30天同侧缺血性卒中、再干预和原发性通畅。分析所有结果与颈动脉闭合技术(初次闭合、血管修补术或外翻)的关系。使用广义线性混合模型(GLMM)评估闭合技术与早期和晚期预后之间的关系。Kaplan-Meier估计用于分析随访结果,取决于闭合技术。结果577例患者共行CEA 625次手术,平均年龄71±9岁;30.7%女性],包括87.4%的初级修复,10.4%的贴片血管成形术和2.2%的外翻CEA。技术成功率(n = 615, 98.4%),修复类型之间无显著差异(P值为0.947)。平均随访时间60±38.45个月。早期(P = 0.005) (OR: 7.037, CI 95% 1.902-26.038, P = 0.005)。区域麻醉显著降低卒中风险(OR: 0.216, CI 95%: 0.065)。721, P = 0.014)和MACE (OR: 0.380, CI 95%。914, p = .032)。长期同侧卒中(bbb30天)和2年原发性通畅在两组间具有可比性。GLMM分析显示,贴片CEA与原发CEA之间无统计学差异(OR: 1.947, 95% CI: . 221 -11.819, P = .363)。年龄0 ~ 80岁(n = 94, 15%)和女性(n = 177, 30.7%)与卒中风险增加均无显著相关性(年龄:OR 0.524, 95% CI: 0.021-7.013, P = 0.415;性别:OR 0.524, 95% CI: 0.087-3.152, P = 0.370)。对2年通畅结果的分析显示,贴片与原发CEA、性别或年龄大于80岁之间无显著关联。KM分析显示,初次修复的3年生存率为93%,补片血管成形术为99%,外翻为90% (P = 0.5)。3年无卒中生存率分别为95%、94%和0% (P = 0.3)。结论经校正分析,两组在卒中早期或晚期、死亡率、2年通畅度方面无显著差异。KM分析显示,初级修复组3年无同侧卒中。这些结果表明,在解剖结构合适的患者中,初级修复是一种安全的选择,并支持有选择性的、针对患者的颈动脉闭合方法,而不是对所有病例采用统一的策略。
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
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信