-
- Clinton D Protack, Andrew M Bakken, Jiaqiong Xu, Wael A Saad, Alan B Lumsden, and Mark G Davies.
- Methodist DeBakey Heart and Vascular Center, Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
- J. Vasc. Surg. 2009 May 1;49(5):1172-80.e1; discussion 1180.
BackgroundMetabolic syndrome (MetS) is rapidly increasing in prevalence and is associated with carotid plaque development and is a risk factor for stroke. The aim of this study is to describe the outcomes for patients with MetS after carotid revascularization (carotid endarterectomy [CEA] and carotid stenting [CAS]).MethodsA database of patients undergoing carotid revascularization for primary atherosclerotic lesions was queried from 1996 to 2006. MetS was defined as the presence of >or=3 of the following criteria: blood pressure >or=130 mm Hg/>or=90 mm Hg; Triglycerides >or=150 mg/dL; high-density lipoproteins (HDL)
or=110 mg/dL; or Body Mass Index (BMI) >or=30 kg/m(2). Multivariate and Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to outcomes. The average follow-up period was 4.5 years. A major adverse event (MAE) was defined as the occurrence of stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), or death.ResultsA total of 921 patients (mean age: 71 +/- 10 years; 64% male) underwent 750 CEAs and 171 CAS. Thirty-one percent were identified as having MetS, 48% were asymptomatic, 87% had hypertension, 27% had hyperlipidemia, 32% were considered diabetic, and 14% had chronic renal insufficiency. The morbidity and mortality rates for all patients were 16.9% and 1.1%, respectively. The 30-day combined stroke/death rate was 3.6%. The 30-day MAE rates were: 6.7% vs 3.3% for MetS vs No-MetS (P = .02). The 90-day MAE rates were 8.7% vs 4.9% for MetS vs No-MetS (P = .03). MetS patients were more likely to experience a complication than No-MetS patients (23% vs 14%, P = .001). By Kaplan-Meier analysis, there was no difference between MetS and No-MetS patients with respect to patency, restenosis, re-intervention, or survival, but a difference existed for freedom from stroke, MI, and MAE. The difference between stroke rates was maintained between MetS and No-MetS, when subgrouped by those with and without symptoms. For patients with diabetes mellitus (DM), those with MetS had a 68% and 410% higher risk of developing an MAE and MI, respectively. However, for patients without diabetes, MetS was not significantly associated with MAE, stroke, or MI. No factors were found to be significantly associated with risk of stroke in all cases (in all patients, patients with diabetes, and patients without diabetes).ConclusionMetS is prevalent among patients undergoing carotid revascularization. MetS patients are at a greater risk for perioperative morbidity as well as stroke, MI, and MAE during follow-up when compared to patients without MetS. Long-term stroke prevention is poor in the presence of MetS. MetS should be considered a significant risk factor for patients undergoing carotid revascularization. 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.
.