Outcomes of Arteriotomy Closure Technique for Carotid Endarterectomy: Bovine Pericardial Patch Closure versus Primary Closure

Introduction The aim of our study was to compare the primary closure (PRC) and patch angioplasty closure (PAC) of carotid artery following carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Methods Data of patients who underwent CEA in the period from January 2005 to June 2020 were reviewed through files. Demographic characteristics, information about the operation, and postoperative follow-up outcomes of the patients were compared. Results Of the 144 CEA cases included in the study, PRC and PAC were applied to 62 (43.7%) and 82 (56.3%) patients, respectively, for the carotid artery closure. Duration of surgery and carotid artery clamping time were not different between the PRC and PAC groups (106.73±17.13 minutes vs. 110.48±20.67 minutes, P=0.635; 24.25±11.56 minutes vs. 25.19±8.99 minutes, P=0.351, respectively). Postoperative respiratory impairment was more common in the PRC group (P=0.012); however, nerve injuries (P=0.254), surgical wound hematomas (P=0.605), surgical site infections (P=0.679), and mortality (P=0.812) were not significantly different between the groups. During the mean patient follow-up time of 26.13±19.32 months, restenosis was more common in the PRC group than in the PAC group (n=26, 41.9% vs. n=4, 4.9%, respectively; P=0.003). Frequencies of stroke (n=4, 2.8% vs. n=2, 2.4%, respectively; P=0.679), transient ischemic attacks (n=2, 1.4% vs. n=0, 0%, respectively; P=0.431), and mortality (n=4, 6.5% vs. n=4, 4.9%, respectively; P=0.580) were not significantly different between the PRC and PAC groups. Conclusion We are of the opinion that the PAC method is effective and safe for carotid artery closure in patients undergoing CEA.