-
- Bernadette J Goudreau, Linda J Wang, Christopher A Latz, Mark F Conrad, Carlin A Williams, Margaret C Tracci, John A Kern, and W Darrin Clouse.
- Divisions of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA.
- J. Am. Coll. Surg. 2021 Apr 1; 232 (4): 629635629-635.
BackgroundAdditive risks of combining supra-aortic trunk surgical reconstruction (SAT) with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for associated carotid bifurcation and great vessel disease management are not well defined. This study sought to define risk of combining SAT with CEA.Study DesignIsolated CEA (ICEA) and CEA+SAT (from 2005 to 2015) were identified from NSQIP, excluding nonocclusive indications. CEA+SAT were compared with ICEA as well as a propensity-matched ICEA cohort. Primary outcomes included 30-day stroke, death, and composite (SD). Outcomes were then weighted by symptomatic status. Univariate and logistic regression analyses were performed.ResultsPatients included 79,477 ICEA and 270 CEA+SAT. SAT reconstructions included 19 (7%) aorto-carotid bypasses, 21 (8%) carotid-subclavian transpositions, 85 (31%) carotid-carotid bypasses, and 145 (54%) carotid-subclavian bypasses. There was no difference in 30-day mortality (vs CEA+SAT 1.5% vs ICEA 0.7% p = 0.12). CEA+SAT had higher rates of stroke (3.7% vs 1.6%, p = 0.005) and stroke and death (SD) (4.8% vs 2.1%, p = 0.001). Predictors of SD included CEA+SAT (odds ratio [OR] 5.2, 95% CI 1.03-26.3, p = 0.046) and symptomatic status (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.1-3.2, p = 0.02). After propensity matching, CEA+SAT continued to have higher rates of stroke (3.4% vs 0.4%, p = 0.01) and SD (4.5% vs 1.5%, p = 0.04), with similar mortality (1.5% vs 1.1%, p = 0.70). No differences were noted in primary endpoints in asymptomatic patients. In symptomatic patients, CEA+SAT carried significantly higher stroke (5.6% vs 2.1%, p = 0.04) and SD risk (7.0% vs 2.8%, p = 0.03).ConclusionsCEA+SAT confers increased risk of stroke and SD over ICEA. Symptomatic status and concomitant procedure contribute to this risk. Management should be considered within the context of lesion characteristics, patient longevity, and individual operative risk profile.Copyright © 2020 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.