Carotid artery stenting: Influence of experience and cerebrovascular risk factors on outcome

AimTo evaluate technical success, complications and the influence of the learning curve on outcome in carotid artery stenting (CAS) performed in patients not suitable for surgery.Patients and methodsOne hundred and nine procedures of protected carotid stenting in 103 high risk patients were performed. All patients presented at least one factor that potentially increased the surgical risk of carotid endoarterectomy (CEA), according to SAPPHIRE criteria. Neurologic complications were quantified by the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) and were evaluated by median Rankin Scale (mRS). To evaluate the influence of experience of the operator to perform CAS, we retrospectively analyzed periprocedural and neurological complications of the first 50 procedures compared with that of the following 59 interventions.ResultsTechnical success rate was 98%. Neurological periprocedural complications were revealed in 4.5% of patients. In-hospital and 30-days neurological complications rate was 7.6 and 2.6% respectively. Periprocedural neurological complications rate was lower in the last procedures performed, according to a higher confidence of the operators.ConclusionsCAS may be performed as an alternative of CEA for the treatment of severe carotid obstructive disease in patients not suitable for surgery. The learning curve positively influence complications rate.     

Timing of Complications during Carotid Artery Stenting. How Can they Be Predicted ?

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is becoming increasingly common for the treatment of carotid stenosis. Accumulating data, but not randomised data, suggest that CAS has promising efficacy in preventing stroke with an acceptable rate of procedure-related complications when compared to carotid endarterectomy (CEA). However, CAS procedures can carry a risk of non-negligible complications such as cerebral embolization, cerebral hemorrhage, severe hypotension and bradycardia. These may occur after the first 24 hours. Lessons may be learned from the timing of occurrence of CAS adverse events. The most severe neurological complications are generally due to embolism and occur intraprocedurally especially during catheter, wire or sheath manipulation in the aortic arch and common carotid. These strokes, obviously, cannot be prevented by using cerebral protection devices and enhance the importance of an appropriate learning curve that includes proper material choice, patient selection, good technique and the skill of “know when to quit”.     

Outcomes of carotid stenting in patients with fibromuscular dysplasia

ObjectiveFibromuscular dysplasia (FMD) is a noninflammatory arterial disease that affects the extracranial carotid arteries in young patients. The ideal treatment of FMD has continued to be debated, and the role of carotid artery stenting (CAS) is controversial. The aim of the present study was to assess the feasibility and outcomes of CAS for patients with FMD.MethodsA retrospective analysis of patients who had undergone CAS was performed using the Vascular Quality Initiative database from December 2012 to May 2021. Patients who had undergone CAS for atherosclerosis and FMD were included and matched 1:1 by age, gender, and clinical presentation. The demographics, clinical parameters, and procedural data were analyzed. The end points included postoperative stroke and transient ischemic attack (TIA), and adverse events (perioperative and 1-year mortality, neurologic changes, access site complications, hematoma or bleeding, infection, congestive heart failure, arrhythmia, myocardial infarction, reperfusion symptoms), and hospital length of stay.ResultsAfter matching, 55 patients had undergone CAS for FMD (mean age, 58.7 ± 14 years; 62% women; 69% White; mean body mass index, 28 ± 6 kg/m²). Most of these procedures (69%) were elective. The FMD group had had a lower rate of hypertension (55% vs 82%; P = .002), smoking (35% vs 80%; P < .001), diabetes (13% vs 45%; P < .001), and coronary artery disease (9% vs 45%; P < .001) compared with the non-FMD group. In the FMD group, prior TIA and stroke was identified in 39 (71%) and 31 (57%) patients, respectively. The mean interval from a prior stroke or TIA to the index surgery was 160 days. Additionally, 23 patients (42%) had had anatomically high lesions above the level of the second cervical vertebra. In the FMD group, the transfemoral approach was used for 43 patients (78%), with distal embolic protection used for 40 patients (93%). Flow reversal was used for nine patients (23%). Most cases were performed with local anesthesia (58%). Three patients (6%) in the FMD group had had access site complications that were managed nonoperatively. No differences were found between the FMD and non-FMD groups in perioperative stroke, TIA, or 30-day mortality. The length of stay was similar between the two groups, and the 1-year survival was 100% for both groups. All the patients in the FMD group were discharged without neurologic complications, and 50 patients (91%) were receiving dual antiplatelet therapy. The median follow-up was 328 days (interquartile range, 1-732 days) with no mortality or reinterventions during follow-up.ConclusionsCAS for FMD is a feasible and safe procedure with favorable technical success, a low incidence of neurologic complications, and good clinical outcomes at 1 year of follow-up.     

Aortic arch anomalies are associated with increased risk of neurological events in carotid stent procedures.

OBJECTIVE: To establish the risk of carotid artery stent (CAS) complications in patients with aortic arch anomalies. METHODS: In a prospective series of patients submitted to CAS, all cases with arch anomalies were compared with cases with normal arch anatomy (type I, II and III) in order to assess the impact of anatomic characteristics on technical and clinical outcome. Outcome was evaluated in term of neurological complications and technical success. RESULTS: Of 214 consecutive patients undergoing CAS, 189 (88.3%) had normal arch anatomy and 25 (11.7%) arch anomalies. The arch abnormalities included common origin of brachiocephalic trunk and left common carotid artery in 22 cases (10.2%), separate origin of right subclavian and common carotid in 2 cases (0.9%) and left common carotid agenesis with separate arch origin of internal and external carotid in 1 case (0.5%). The two groups were not different in term of epidemiology and preoperative clinical and morphological characteristics. Technical failure occurred overall in 26 cases (12%) and neurological complication in 14 cases (6.5%). All symptoms were temporary. Technical failure was higher in the arch anomaly group; however the difference did not reach statistical significance (89.6% vs 76.4%, P=0.1). Neurological complications occurred more frequently in the arch anomaly group (20% vs 5.3%, P=0.039). Type of arch was the only variable independently associated with neurological complications (OR=2.01, p=0.026). CONCLUSION: Aortic arch anomalies are not infrequent and are associated with increased risk of neurological complications. The indication for CAS should be carefully evaluated in these cases.     

Measurement and impact of proximal and distal tortuosity in carotid stenting procedures

BACKGROUND: Proximal and distal carotid tortuosity is considered of paramount importance in carotid artery stenting (CAS) procedures. Specifically, distal internal carotid coiling or kinking is thought to interfere with proper distal protection devices, thus contraindicating CAS. The type of the aortic arch is also considered a key factor in CAS success; however, no standardized method of evaluation of these indicators is available in the literature. We have evaluated the impact of arch angulation and proximal and distal tortuosity in a series of CAS procedures. METHODS: In patients undergoing CAS, arch angulation and tortuosity of both common and distal internal carotid arteries were evaluated prospectively by calculating the sum of all angles diverging from the ideal straight axis, considering a 90 degrees ideal angle for the origin from the arch (tortuosity index, TI). All procedures were through a transfemoral approach and with distal protection. Results were correlated with technical procedural success (residual stenosis <30%) and neurologic complication by Student t test. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify independent predictors of results. RESULTS: In a group of 298 CAS procedures, the mean proximal TI was 111.9 degrees +/- 96.77 degrees and the mean distal TI was 123.4 degrees +/- 117.47 degrees . Technical success was obtained in 272 patients (91.2%). Causes for the 26 technical failures were incapacity to obtain stable proximal access in 25 (96.1%), and uncrossable stenosis in one (3.9%). Neurologic protection was achieved with distal filters in all cases. Neurologic complications occurred in 23 patients (7.7%), consisting of 16 transient ischemic attacks and seven minor strokes. The proximal TI was significantly greater in the 26 cases of technical failure (158.4 degrees +/- 102.2 degrees vs 107.6 degrees +/- 95.3 degrees , P = .01). The distal TI was not different in the two groups (89 degrees +/- 99.1 degrees vs 126.5 degrees +/- 118.6 degrees , P = .11). Similarly, the proximal TI was significantly greater in neurologic complications (162.8 degrees +/- 111.8 degrees vs 107.6 degrees +/- 18.2 degrees , P = .03); the distal TI was not different in the two groups (112.6 degrees +/- 110.1 degrees vs 124.3 degrees +/- 96.1 degrees , P = .5) By logistic regression analysis, a proximal TI >150 was an independent predictor of both neurologic complications and technical failure. Age was also independently associated with technical failure. Appropriate distal filter placement was possible in all cases with a crossable stenosis, irrespective of the internal carotid TI. CONCLUSIONS: The proximal TI is significantly associated with both technical success and neurologic complications after CAS, whereas the distal TI did not influence either outcome. The presence of distal kinking or coiling should not be considered a contraindication to CAS.     

高危颈动脉狭窄患者内膜剥脱术和支架术的对比分析

目的对比颈动脉内膜剥脱术（carotid endarterectomy,CEA）与颈动脉支架置入术（carotid artery stenting,CAS）在治疗高危颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄中的作用。方法对58例颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄患者进行回顾性对照研究。其中32例为CEA组;26例为CAS组。术后30d、6个月、1年均进行颈部B超、CTA复查或DSA和神经系统检查。初级观察终点设定为术后30d内发生死亡、卒中事件、心血管不良事件,或随访6个月内的死亡或同侧卒中事件;次级观察终点为与CEA或CAS相关的并发症,或1年内的重度再狭窄。比较2组术后治疗的效果。结果CEA组有3例达到初级观察终点,发生率为9.4%;CAS组有4例达到初级观察点,累积发生率为15.4%（χ2=0.086,P=0.769）。CEA组有4例达到次级观察终点,发生率为12.5%;CAS组有4例达到次级观察终点,发生率为15.4%（χ2=0.000,P=1.000）。结论CAS在治疗高危颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄时,在安全性和有效性方面与CEA是相同的。     

A comparison of carotid artery stenting with neuroprotection versus carotid endarterectomy under local anesthesia

BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) reduce the risk of stroke in patients with high-grade carotid artery stenosis. Despite the known impact of type of anesthesia on outcome after CEA, none of the current studies comparing CEA with CAS addresses the effect of anesthetic choice on perioperative events. In this study, we compare our results of distally protected CAS versus CEA under local anesthesia. METHODS: Clinical data of 345 patients who underwent 372 procedures for carotid artery occlusive disease over a 36-month were retrospectively collected for this analysis. Distal embolic protection was used in CAS procedures. All procedures, both CEA (n = 221, 59%) and CAS (N = 152, 41%), were performed under local anesthesia. The primary outcome measure was aggregate 30-day major ipsilateral stroke and/or death. Follow-up serial Duplex ultrasound examinations were performed. RESULTS: Both patient cohorts were similar in terms of demographic and risk factors, with the exception of a higher incidence of coronary artery disease in the CAS group (59% versus 30%, P <.05). The 30-day stroke and death rates were 3.2% (CAS) and 3.7% (CEA) (P = not significant). Cranial nerve injury only occurred in the CEA patients (2.3%). Perioperative hemodynamic instability was more common among patients in the CAS group (11.9% versus 4.1%, P <.05). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous carotid stenting with neuroprotection provides comparable clinical success to CEA performed under local anesthetic. Further studies are warranted to validate the long-term efficacy of CAS and to elucidate patient selection criteria for endovascular carotid revascularization.     

Early complications and endoleaks after endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: Report of a multicenter study

Objective: The aim of this study was the identification of risk factors for adverse events and the assessment of the early success rate in 1554 patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) who underwent treatment with endovascular technique between January 1994 and March 1999. For this purpose, the clinical and procedural data were correlated with observed complications and endoleaks. Methods: The data were collected from 56 European centers and submitted to a central registry. Patient characteristics, aortoiliac anatomic features, operative technical details, types of devices used, and experience of the teams of physicians were correlated with the occurrence of complications and endoleaks. The technical success rate was assessed according to the Society for Vascular Surgery/International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter, guidelines. For the assessment of correlations between risk factors and adverse events, a multivariate logistic regression analysis was used. Results: The operative complications were grouped into three categories: failure to complete the procedure (39 patients, of which 27 underwent a conversion to an open AAA repair; 2.5%); device-related or procedure-related complications (149 patients; 10%); and arterial complications (51 patients; 3%). The most important risk factors for failure to complete the procedure included an aneurysm diameter of 60 mm or more and the need for adjuvant procedures. The factors that predicted device-related and arterial complications were the experience of the team with endovascular AAA treatment and the need for adjuvant procedures. Forty patients (2.6%) died within 30 days after operation. American Society of Anesthesiologists III and IV operative risk classification results predicted higher mortality rates than did American Society of Anesthesiologists operative risk classification I and II results. The patients who underwent operation in 1994, the first year documented in this registry, and those who required adjuvant procedures also had an increased risk of perioperative death. The incidence rate of systemic complications within the first 30 days (279 patients; 18%) was higher in patients aged 75 years or more, in patients with an impaired cardiac status, and in patients considered unfit for an open procedure. An endoleak was detected at the completion of the procedure in 16% of the cases and was still present after 1 month in 9%. The risk factors for primary endoleaks were female gender and age of 75 years and older. The observed technical success rate in this patient series was 72%. Conclusion: The learning curve of the doctors and the need for adjuvant procedures were independent risk factors of operative device-related and arterial complications. The importance of proper instruction during an institution's initial phase with this treatment is emphasized by these observations. Although the endovascular management of AAAs is less stressful than open surgery, systemic complications were still the most common adverse events during the first postoperative month. These complications were associated with several patient-related factors, including advanced age, impaired cardiac status, and poor general medical condition. These observations may be a guide for improved patient selection for endovascular AAA repair. (J Vasc Surg 2000;31:134-46.)     

Follow-up results of carotid angioplasty with stenting as assessed by duplex ultrasound surveillance

BACKGROUND: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has become an alternative modality to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for the treatment of carotid occlusive disease. We report a retrospective review of our institution's experience with CAS versus CEA. METHODS: Postprocedure surveillance duplex, recurrent symptoms, postprocedure strokes, progression of lesions, and rates of re-operation were analyzed in 46 patients who underwent CAS and 48 patients who underwent CEA. The mean length of follow-up evaluation was 13 months. All CAS procedures included neuroprotection devices. RESULTS: Statistically significant differences in progression to critical restenosis (2% vs 2%, P = 1.0), rate of subsequent symptoms or stroke (2% vs 10%, P = .1), or rate of re-interventions were not observed between CAS and CEA groups (2% vs 4%, P = .98). Total mortality (0% vs 2%, P = .33), and the occurrence of major adverse events (2% vs 10%, P = .18) also were not significantly different in the CAS compared with the CEA patients. The average rate of increase in internal carotid velocity at 6 to 12 months (-1% vs 1.1%, P = NS) and 12 to 24 months (-5% vs -6.5%, P = NS) also were equivalent. CONCLUSIONS: Our observed results indicate that CAS may be performed with comparable clinical outcomes and durability of repair comparable with CEA.     

Risk factors associated with microembolization after carotid intervention

BackgroundMicroembolization after carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been documented and may confer risk for neurocognitive impairment. Patients undergoing stenting are known to be at higher risk for microembolization. In this prospective cohort study, we compare the microembolization rates for patients undergoing CAS and CEA and perioperative characteristics that may be associated with microembolization.MethodsPatients undergoing CAS and CEA were prospectively recruited under local institutional review board approval from an academic medical center. All patients also received 3T brain magnetic resonance imaging with a diffusion-weighted imaging sequence preoperatively and within 24 hours postoperatively to identify procedure-related new embolic lesions. Preoperative, postoperative, procedural factors, and plaque characteristics were collected. Factors were tested for statistical significance with logistic regression.ResultsA total of 202 patients were enrolled in the study. There were 107 patients who underwent CAS and 95 underwent CEA. Patients undergoing CAS were more likely to have microemboli than patients undergoing CEA (78% vs 27%; P < .0001). For patients undergoing CAS, patency of the external carotid artery (odds ratio [OR], 11.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-117.6; P = .04), lesion calcification (OR, 5.68; 95% CI, 1.12-28.79; P = .04), and lesion length (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.08-1.01; P = .05) were all found to be independent risk factors for perioperative embolization. These factors did not confer increased risk to patients undergoing CEA.ConclusionsPatients undergoing CAS are at higher risk for perioperative embolization. The risk for perioperative embolization is related to the length of the lesion and calcification. Identifying the preoperative risk factors may help to guide patient selection and, thereby, reduce embolization-related neurocognitive impairment.     

颈动脉内膜剥脱术和颈动脉支架的前瞻性随机对照研究

目的 评价颈动脉内膜剥脱术和颈动脉支架治疗颈动脉狭窄的近期和中期临床效果.方法 前瞻性单中心随机对照研究,自2004年5月至2006年12月,将同意入组的40例有症状(狭窄程度>50%)和无症状(狭窄程度>70%)颈动脉狭窄患者随机分为两组,即颈动脉内膜剥脱术组(CEA)和颈动脉支架组(CAS).一期观察终点是术后30 d内出现严重脑梗死或死亡;二期观察终点是各种手术并发症、急性脑缺血发作、偏瘫、急性心肌梗死和术后18个月内的脑卒中、死亡和再狭窄等,同时回顾性分析两组总的住院费用.结果 CEA和CAS两组患者术前一般资料、临床症状、伴随疾病等因素均无差异.CEA组20例23支颈动脉手术(3例分别行双侧CEA),术中应用转流管9条(39.1%),颈动脉补片12条(52.2%);CAS组20例23支颈动脉支架(3例行双侧CAS),应用脑保护装置21个(91.3%).CEA和CAS两组术后30 d内神经系统并发症(4.3%对8.7%,P=0.46)、急性心肌梗死(4.3%对0,P=0.31)和伤口血肿(8.7%对0,P=0.14)等差异均无统计学意义,至术后18个月无短暂性脑缺血发作和再狭窄病例.CEA和CAS两组平均住院费用分别为(16 450.95±6188.76)和(70 130.15±11 999.02)元人民币,差异有统计学意义(P<0.01).结论 CEA和CAS术后30 d和术后18个月的并发症、病死率和临床疗效无明显差异,但CAS的住院花费明显高于CEA.     

Mentor-initiated approach in laparoscopic radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of a mentor-initiated program for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by analyzing its effect on the learning curve. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The mentor performed 16 procedures (group I) and the trainee, assisted by the mentor, 12 (group II). The next 16 procedures were performed by the trainee without the mentor (group III). The patient groups were comparable in terms of age, serum prostate specific antigen concentration, Gleason score, and clinical stage. The operating time, blood loss, complications, and outcomes were evaluated. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA with the multiple-comparisons test with Bonferroni correction and the Kruskal-Wallis test, when appropriate. RESULTS: There was a statistical difference in the mean operating time in groups I and II (271 and 381 minutes, respectively; P < 0.001) and in groups I and III (271 and 386 minutes, respectively; P < 0.001), but the difference between groups II and III was not significant (P > 0.05). The mean estimated blood loss was similar in all groups (362, 395, and 434 mL, respectively; P = 0.86). The mean postoperative day 1 decrease in hemoglobin was similar in the three groups (0.65, 0.66, and 0.66 mg/dL, respectively; P = 1.00). No patient required open conversion. Postoperative complication rates were the same in groups I and III (6.25%). The mean catheterization time was longer in group III (6, 7, and 12 days; P < 0.001). The mean hospital stays (9, 8, and 8 days; P = 0.28) were similar. Stage pT(3)-pT(4a) disease was found in 75%, 41.6%, and 75% of the specimens in groups I to III, respectively. There was no statistical difference in positive-margin rates in the three groups (43.8%, 33.3%, and 37.5%; P = 0.85). CONCLUSIONS: A mentored program allows safe introduction of laparoscopic radical prostatectomy into surgical practice. Nevertheless, during the learning curve, longer operating and catheterization times have to be expected.     

In-stent Restenosis After Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting: A Challenge for the Vascular Surgeon

PURPOSE: This study aims to review the incidence of in-stent restenosis (ISR), the factors which determine restenosis, and to evaluate the use of various endovascular techniques for the management of ISR following carotid artery stenting (CAS). METHODS: Four hundred and seven patients (334 men, mean age 63 years, range 46-86, median 65 years) were treated with CAS between December 2000 and March 2004. Three hundred and seventy-two (89%) patients had at least one ultrasound evaluation performed 6 months after procedure (range 6-40). Recurrent stenosis >80% detected with duplex ultrasound scans were further evaluated by angiography and treated with repeat endovascular procedure. RESULTS: CAS was performed successfully in all cases with a Carotid WallStent (Boston Scientific) using a cerebral protection device (filter). Perioperative complications included four (0.9%) minor and two (0.4%) major strokes these latter two patients died at 5 and 12 days after the operation. No other deaths occurred. A total of 15 carotid arteries (3.6%) in 14 patients had ISR. All ISR were treated with a repeat endovascular procedure: three balloon angioplasty alone, eight angioplasty and secondary stenting, four angioplasty with cutting balloon. Postsurgical restenosis was confirmed to be the only predictive factor for the development of in-stent restenosis (OR 14.5, 95% CI 2.3-113.4, p=0.005). Endovascular treatment of ISR achieved technical success without periprocedurale complications and the absence of significant restenosis over a median follow up time of 12.4 months (range 3.5-30.7). CONCLUSION: Our experience with a large cohort of CAS showed an encouragingly low incidence of ISR (3.6%) and successful treatment by repeat endovascular intervention. We recommend attempting all endovascular possibilities before performing stent removal.     

Results of carotid angioplasty and stenting are equivalent for critical versus high-grade lesions in patients deemed high risk for carotid endarterectomy

Background

To examine outcomes of carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) in patients with critical carotid stenosis who are deemed high risk for carotid endarterectomy.

Methods

Medical records were retrospectively analyzed for patients undergoing CAS between September 2002 and March 2011 at a single institution. Patients were classified as having either critical (≥90%) or high-grade (70%–89%) carotid stenosis based on angiography. The primary composite end point was stroke, myocardial infarction, or death from any cause during the periprocedural period or any ipsilateral stroke during the follow-up period.

Results

A total of 245 patients underwent 257 CAS procedures during the study period. Fifty-one percentage (n = 130) of cases involved critical stenosis (66.2% male; mean age, 71 ± 10 y), with the remaining group (n = 127) involving high-grade stenosis (67.7% male; mean age, 71 ± 9 y). Symptomatic carotid disease was present in 25% of the critical stenosis and 31% of the high-grade stenosis groups (P = 0.33). Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was more commonly found in the high-grade stenosis group (20% versus 8%, P = 0.01). No difference was observed between the groups relative to other baseline demographic characteristics, presence of contralateral carotid occlusion, stent diameter or length, maximum balloon diameter or length, use of embolic protection device, or procedural duration. Technical success was achieved in all cases. There was no difference in the need to predilate before the introduction of the filter or stent based on the degree of stenosis. We found no difference in the primary composite end point between the high-grade or critical stenosis groups (7.1% versus 7.7%, P = 0.74), or there were no differences between the individual components of the composite end point. Mid-term survival was similar between the two groups at a mean follow-up period of 2.4 y.

Conclusions

Despite concerns regarding the potential for increased neurologic complications, our data demonstrate that patients with high-grade and critical stenosis are able to safely undergo CAS and achieve similar periprocedural outcomes and mid-term prognosis.     

Timing of complications during carotid artery stenting. How can they be predicted?

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is becoming increasingly common for the treatment of carotid stenosis. Accumulating data, but not randomised data, suggest that CAS has promising efficacy in preventing stroke with an acceptable rate of procedure-related complications when compared to carotid endarterectomy (CEA). However, CAS procedures can carry a risk of non-negligible complications such as cerebral embolization, cerebral hemorrhage, severe hypotension and bradycardia. These may occur after the first 24 hours. Lessons may be learned from the timing of occurrence of CAS adverse events. The most severe neurological complications are generally due to embolism and occur intraprocedurally especially during catheter, wire or sheath manipulation in the aortic arch and common carotid. These strokes, obviously, cannot be prevented by using cerebral protection devices and enhance the importance of an appropriate learning curve that includes proper material choice, patient selection, good technique and the skill of "know when to quit".     

Comparison of nonneurological events in high-risk patients treated by carotid angioplasty versus endarterectomy

OBJECTIVE: To compare results of carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in high cardiac risk patients. METHODS: Patients ineligible for carotid revascularization by North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial/Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study criteria were treated with CAS (n = 11) or CEA (n = 10). RESULTS: Significant numbers had cardiac (CAS 72%, CEA 60%; P = 0.66) and hypertensive (CAS 82%, CEA 80%; P = 0.64) risk factors. Adverse hemodynamic events were more frequent in the CAS group (CAS 73%, CEA 20%; P = 0.03). Major complications were noted in 1 patient in each group (CAS, myocardial infarction; CEA, death). Postoperative stay was similar (CAS 2.1 +/- 1.4, CEA 1.8 +/- 1.1 days; P = 0.60). However, 4 in the CAS group were readmitted within 1 month (congestive heart failure 2, myocardial infarction 1, rest pain 1), compared with no new events in the CEA group (P = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: Currently, the use of CAS in patients with cardiac risk factors may not be justifiable.     

The learning curve for reducing complications of robotic-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by a single surgeon

Study Type – Therapy (case series) Level of Evidence 4 What’s known on the subject? and What does the study add? Between December 2005 and January 2010, 200 consecutive patients with prostate cancer received RALP performed by a single surgeon. Only one case with Clavien grade II complication due to gouty arthritis. The complication rate was 1%. We suggested that patient with history of gouty arthritis need to prescribe preventive colchicine. OBJECTIVE

• ? To analyse the learning curve for reducing complications of robotic‐assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (RALP) performed by a single surgeon in Taiwan.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

• ? Complication rates were prospectively assessed in 200 consecutive patients undergoing RALP (Group I: cases 1–50; Group II: cases 51–100; Group III: cases 101–150 and Group IV: cases 151–200).
• ? Complications were classified using the Clavien system: grade I: deviation normal postoperative course without treatment; grade II: drug or bedside treatment; grade III: endoscopic or surgical intervention; grade IV: life‐threatening problem; and grade V: death.
• ? Operative parameters and peri‐operative complications were evaluated, including operative and console time, blood loss and transfusion rate, Gleason scores, positive surgical margin (PSM) rate, specimen volume, tumour size, tumour percentage, node positive rate and intra‐ and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

• ? RALP console time was gradually lowered from Group I to Group IV (P < 0.05). Significantly less blood loss occurred after every 50 cases of RALP (Group I 275 mL, Group II 179 mL, Group III 145 mL, Group IV 102 mL, P < 0.001).
• ? Blood transfusion incidence was 8%, 4%, 2% and 0% in Groups I, II, III and IV, respectively.
• ? Complication rates were 18%, 12%, 18% and 0% in Groups I, II, III and IV, respectively.
• ? Major complications (grade III–IV) were 6%, 2%, 4% and 0% in Groups I, II, III and IV, respectively.
• ? Bowel injury occurred in three cases (Group II: 1; Group III: 2); one received intra‐operative repair without sequelae and two received a transient colostomy and later colostomy closure.

CONCLUSIONS

• ? The learning curve for every 50 cases of RALP showed significantly less blood loss and blood transfusion rate.
• ? The learning curve for significantly decreasing complications is 150 cases.

     

The "learning curve" in videoscopic Heller myotomy.

OBJECTIVES: In the early 1990s, minimally invasive videoscopy was applied to numerous operations. After undertaking more than 50 "open" Heller myotomies, our experience with videoscopic Heller myotomy began in 1992. We sought to determine whether the outcome following videoscopic Heller myotomy is influenced by surgeon experience. METHODS: Seventy-eight patients with severe dysphagia secondary to achalasia underwent videoscopic Heller myotomy between 1992 and 1998. Intraoperative endoscopy was utilized to ensure adequate myotomy in all patients. Patients were stratified into 3 groups: the first 25 patients (group I), the second 25 patients (group II), and the last 28 patients (group III). Clinical outcome was based on length of stay, incidence of intraoperative complications, conversion to an 'open' procedure, and postoperative symptoms. RESULTS: Perioperative complications occurred in 20% of patients in group I compared with 8% and 12% in groups II and III, respectively (P = NS). Only 3 patients required conversion to an 'open' procedure, all in group I (P <0 .05). Symptomatic improvement was achieved in 80% of patients in group I, 100% in group II, and 96% in group III (P < 0.05). Significant reductions in conversions to open, length of stay, and postoperative symptoms were seen after 20 myotomies were undertaken. CONCLUSION: Outcome following videoscopic Heller myotomy, like other videoscopic operations, improves as surgeons progress along the videoscopic "learning curve." After approximately 20 videoscopic Heller myotomies, surgeons can expect fewer conversions to open procedures, shorter hospital stays, and better symptomatic relief.     

A dedicated team approach enhances outcomes of osteomyelitis treatment

To assess the impact of a dedicated musculoskeletal infection team, 70 musculoskeletal infections (traumatic and non-traumatic chronic osteomyelitis, Cierny-Mader Type III or IV) in 58 patients with were treated in two groups. Group I (43 infections) was treated with the assistance of an on-call infectious disease specialist. Group II (27 infections) was treated with the assistance of a dedicated musculoskeletal infectious disease specialist. Overall, there was a 42% success in Group I compared with 78% success in Group II. When stratified by infection type, in patients with Type III infections, there was a 56% success in Group I and a 90% success rate in Group II. For patients with Type IV infections, there was a 25% success rate in Group I and a 71% success rate in Group II. The participation of the dedicated musculoskeletal infectious disease specialist significantly improved patient outcomes.