Carotid artery disease: clinical features and management

The most common single cause of ischaemic carotid territory stroke is thromboembolism from stenoses in the extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA). In the majority, embolism is preceded by an acute change in plaque morphology predisposing the patient to overlying thrombus formation and embolization. The management of patients with carotid artery disease mandates risk factor modification, antiplatelet and statin therapy in everyone. There is grade A, level I evidence that recently symptomatic patients with 50–99% NASCET stenoses gain significant benefit from carotid endarterectomy (CEA), despite a small risk of perioperative stroke. Maximum benefit is conferred if the patient undergoes surgery as soon as possible after onset of symptoms. The management of patients with asymptomatic disease remains controversial. The 2018 European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) carotid guidelines now advise that asymptomatic patients with a 60–99% stenosis who have one or more clinical/imaging features that might make them at higher risk for stroke on medical therapy should be considered for CEA, with the remainder being treated medically. The 2018 ESVS carotid guidelines also advise that carotid artery stenting may be an alternative to CEA in ‘average risk’ symptomatic and asymptomatic patients, although CEA is still the preferred option when treating patients within 14 days of symptom onset.     

Carotid artery disease: clinical features and management

The commonest cause of ischaemic carotid territory stroke is thromboembolism from stenoses in the extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA). In the majority, embolism is preceded by an acute change in plaque morphology thereby predisposing the patient to overlying thrombus formation and embolization.     

Carotid Endarterectomy Versus Carotid Stenting: an Updated Review of Randomized Trials and Subgroup Analyses

Atherosclerotic disease of the carotid arteries is responsible for a significant portion of ischemic strokes. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is currently the accepted standard of treatment for patients with severe symptomatic carotid stenosis. In the past few years, however, carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) has emerged as a potential alternative endovascular treatment strategy for this disorder. In fact, spurred by the positive results of single center studies and small, pivotal randomized trials, some even consider CAS as the treatment modality of choice, especially in presumably surgical high-risk patients. Yet, randomized trials directly comparing CAS with CEA are sparse and have produced conflicting results.

The aim of this article is to review the current trial data on this issue and to define the role of these techniques for the management of two important subgroups of patients.

An updated meta-analysis of seven randomized trials comparing CEA with CAS demonstrates that CAS is associated with a significantly increased risk of any stroke or death within 30 days (OR. 1.41, 95% CI 1.07-1.87, p<0.05). Focusing on patients with a symptomatic carotid stenosis, there was also a significant difference in the odds of treatment-related stroke and death between CAS and CEA (OR, 1.41; CI 1.05 to 1.88, p < 0.05). Data on all disabling strokes and deaths within 30 days was available from five trials. The odds of disabling stroke or death at 30 days were similar in the endovascular and surgical group (OR, 1.33, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.98).

Overall, these data do not justify a blind enthusiasm for CAS and a widespread use of this procedure for the treatment of carotid artery stenosis. On the other hand, a closer inspection of the current literature on elderly patients and those with a contralateral carotid occlusion clearly indicates that CAS and CEA already now have a complementary role. While elderly patients should preferentially be treated with CEA, CAS appears to be the treatment of choice in patients with a symptomatic carotid artery stenosis and a contralateral carotid occlusion in experienced centers.     

冠心病合并颈动脉狭窄的围术期处理

背景 冠心病(coronary artery bypass grafting,CABG)合并颈动脉狭窄者临床上并不少见.如何正确处理CABG患者并存颈动脉狭窄的问题应引起重视.目的 为了探索CABG患者并存颈动脉狭窄的最佳处理方法,此文将CABG患者并存颈动脉狭窄的外科治疗及麻醉处理进行了分析汇总.内窖对于合并颈动脉狭...     

颅外段颈动脉狭窄的治疗策略

目的：探讨颅外段颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄的治疗方法。方法回顾性分析上海中山医院血管外科2012年1～6月51例颅外段颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄患者的临床资料,16例行颈动脉内膜剥脱术（carotid endarterectomy,CEA）,35例行颈动脉支架置入术（ carotid artery stenting ,CAS）。结果51例手术均获成功,1例CAS术后即刻脑卒中,1例CEA术后第3天短暂性脑缺血发作（transient ischemic attack,TIA）,1例CAS术后颈动脉窦压迫。全组术后随访9～15个月,平均13．6月,复查颈动脉B超,无严重再狭窄。结论根据颅外段颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄患者的相关医学资料,对于有下列情况之一的患者我们倾向于行CEA：①6个月内1次或多次TIA,且颈动脉狭窄度≥70％;②6个月内1次或多次轻度非致残性卒中发作,症状或体征持续超过24小时且颈动脉狭窄度≥70％;③对于经颈部血管CTA和颈动脉全脑血管造影发现的颈动脉狭窄段≥2 cm。对于有下列情况之一的患者我们倾向于行CAS：①无症状性颈动脉狭窄度≥70％;②有症状性狭窄度范围50％～69％;③无症状性颈动脉狭窄度＜70％,但血管造影或其他检查提示狭窄病变处于不稳定状态。     

Past,Present and Future of Surgical Training in Belgium

The objective of the authors is to assess the natural history of carotid artery disease and the role of carotid intervention in preventing ipsilateral stroke. The development of endovascular techniques for correction of carotid artery stenoses made this less invasive technique very popular, with an inherent risk of unregulated overuse by a variety of medical specialists, who are not always well informed on the natural history of carotid artery disease. It re-opened the discussion on the value of carotid endarterectomy for stroke prophylaxis. This ongoing debate offers the opportunity to distil evidence-based guidelines for the management of extracranial carotid artery stenoses.

In recent papers, some authors expressed doubts on the validity and general applicability of the results of the pivotal randomised trials of carotid endarterectomy. The excellent results in terms of operative outcome and long term stroke prevention would, according to certain comments, not be attainable in routine practice.

Another criticism of carotid endarterectomy is its higher operative morbidity in terms of cranial nerve lesions and myocardial infarctions, compared to endovascular procedures. This consideration is, for some authors, the main reason to espouse carotid artery stenting as a better alternative to carotid endarterectomy. Any evidence supporting this point of view is missing. The supposed equivalence or non-inferiority of carotid artery stenting is purely speculative. The aim of this review paper is to summarize the crude data of carotid surgery trials. The authors aim to answer four questions. For which lesions is carotid endarterectomy most beneficial ? Are the results of randomised carotid surgery trials biased by the selection of patients ? Is operative morbidity, other than stroke, under-estimated ? Is carotid artery stenting safe and efficacious ?

An in-depth review with a critical analysis is made of recently published and on-going trials, comparing carotid surgery with percutaneous carotid angioplasty.     

Carotid artery endarterectomy in patients over seventy years-of-age

Carotid artery endarterectomy in the elderly patient has been considered to be a high risk procedure. Recent reevaluation, however, showed that advanced age alone doesn't seem to increase the perioperative surgical risk. We retrospectively reviewed the records for 222 carotid artery endarterectomies, not combined with any other type of surgery, in 195 patients over 70 years-of-age. Twenty-eight patients (14.3%) were asymptomatic, 43% were seen after transient ischemic attacks, 5.1% after reversible ischemic neurologic defects, and 37.4% after stroke. A standard operative protocol was followed. We used a shunt in 45.5% of patients, a standard endarterectomy was performed in 93% of patients, using a patch in 68%. There were three perioperative deaths and seven perioperative strokes in the series; total combined morbidity and mortality was 5.1%. In the 73 patients operated after previous stroke, three died and five suffered a perioperative stroke; total combined morbidity and mortality was 10.9%. In the 122 patients operated after previous transient ischemic attack or asymptomatic, two suffered a perioperative stroke; total combined morbidity and mortality was 1.6%. Late survival was identical to the survival of a normal Belgian control population, and stroke and death-free ratio at five years was 65%, 52% for patients operated after previous stroke and 69% for asymptomatic patients or patients operated after transient ischemic attack. Carotid artery endarterectomy can be performed in patients over 70 years-of-age with perioperative results equal to those of younger patients.Presented at the Fourth Annual Meeting of the Société de Chirurgie Vasculaire de Langue Française, June 23–24, 1989, Strasbourg, France.     

颈动脉内膜剥脱术在治疗及预防缺血性脑卒中的临床研究

目的 观察颈动脉内膜剥脱术(CEA)对脑缺血症状的改善作用.方法 对80例颈动脉狭窄患者采用CEA治疗,剥离颈动脉斑块.结果 手术均获成功,术后患者脑缺血症状均有改善,未出现1例脑卒中和死亡病例,78例随访0.5~1.5 a未发生卒中病例.结论 CEA治疗颅外段颈动脉狭窄安全有效,对预防卒中、改善各种脑缺血症状具有重要...     

Analysis of Surgical Treatment of Patients with Carotid Artery Stenosis Endarterectomy Versus Stenting

The aim of this paper is to characterize a group of patients with internal carotid artery stenosis and to analyze the outcome of internal carotid artery stenosis treatment. The outcome of treatment of 230 patients with internal carotid artery stenosis hospitalized from 1^st January 2004 to 31^st August 2006 was analyzed. Twenty nine percent of the patients were selected for medical treatment, 70.4% received surgical or endovascular treatment (83.3% of all invasive procedures were endarterectomies, versus 16.7% stenting). The peri-procedural stroke-death rate was 4.9% of patients [3.7% after CEA and 11.1% after CAS (N.S.)]. Statistical analysis disclosed that endarterectomy was associated with a longer in-hospital stay (p < 0.001). In conclusion: Both surgical methods, endarterectomy and stenting are equivalent in safety and present comparable clinical outcomes in selected subgroups of patients (classified to the specific procedure on the basis of the type of atherosclerotic plaque).     

Carotid endarterectomy: a new technique replacing internal shunts

Summary  Background. Carotid endarterectomy has been reported to increase the time free from cerebral ischemic events in both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with a high grade of stenosis of the internal carotid artery. In cases in whom the compensatory circulation during the carotid clamp time is not sufficient, the use of intraluminal shunts has been proposed. However, the use of intraluminal shunts present several problems, such as the tecnical difficulties in positioning the shunt, the variability of time requested for the placement, the inconstancy of the blood flow during surgery, and the need to clamp off the carotid to introduce and remove the shunt.  For these reasons, most operators prefer not to employ intraluminal shunts, while others do use them only in selected cases. The purpose of this work is to present, for the first time, a new type of temporary extraluminal shunt, connecting the femoral to the internal carotid artery with the interposition of a roller pump to regulate the blood flow. This method allows one to perform carotid endarterectomy without interrupting the blood flow to the brain.  Methods. 407 consecutive patients, who underwent carotid endarterectomy between August 1992 and April 2000, were considered. 35 patients presented an absolutely insufficient collateral circulation, demonstrated by important modifications of the electroencephalographic monitoring during the carotid clamp time. In these patients the endorterectomy was performed using a new femoral-carotid extraluminal shunt.  Findings. In all the cases in whom the femoral-carotid extraluminal shunt was positioned, the normalisation of electroencephalographic monitoring was achieved by regulating the blood flow with the interposed roller pump. The use and the placement of the shunt was simple and easy. None of the patients showed postoperative complications, except for one who had a stroke two days after surgery.  Interpretation. The results obtained, although to be confirmed by further studies, seem to demonstrate the effectiveness of our femoral-carotid extraluminal shunt, which was simple to use and safe.     

Bilateral severe carotid stenosis or occlusion and computed tomographic scan positive hemispheric stroke with neurologic deficit: Immediate contralateral carotid endarterectomy

In the last 10 years, 13 patients presented with acute, hemispheric, computed tomographic scan-positive stroke; neurologic deficit; and bilateral carotid stenosis greater than 90% (N=9) or ipsilateral occlusion with contralateral stenosis greater than 90% (N=4). To improve ipsilateral flow without elevation of pressure to levels causing hemorrhagic infarction, all patients underwent carotid endarterectomy on the side contralateral to the hemispheric stroke from two to 10 days (average 6.6 days) from onset of symptoms. Those with fluctuating deficits stabilized to the initial fixed deficit and all 13 improved over the next six months. Four patients with ipsilateral internal carotid occlusion and one with ipsilateral severe siphon stenosis were discharged on antiplatelet therapy; of the remaining eight patients, seven underwent subsequent ipsilateral carotid endarterectomy from 42 to 111 days (average 58.4 days) from onset of symptoms. Mortality and stroke rate were 0. The four patients with internal carotid occlusion and the one with severe siphon stenosis filled both hemispheres from the contralateral carotid artery arteriographically in four and by oculoplethysmography in one. One patient demonstrated preferential flow from contralateral to the ipsilateral hemisphere, but not the reverse; one patient demonstrated pericallosal collaterals. Immediate endarterectomy of the severely diseased carotid artery contralateral to a hemisphere with a computed tomographic scan-positive stroke causing neurologic deficit resulting from a severe carotid stenosis is a safe treatment option and may be beneficial in those with fluctuating neurologic deficits.Presented at the New England Society for Vascular Surgery, September 14, 1990, Newport, Rhode Island.     

颈动脉内膜切除术治疗症状性颈动脉狭窄

目的:回顾性总结应用颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)治疗症状性颈动脉狭窄的早期效果和经验。方法:对82例(男66例,女16例,年龄48～84岁,平均68.6岁)症状性颈动脉狭窄病人行CEA。全组均经颈部血管多普勒超声和数字减影血管造影术(DSA)确诊颈动脉粥样斑块形成、颈动脉狭窄。手术采用气管内插管全身麻醉39例,颈丛麻醉43例。术中放置动脉临时转流管56例,其中全麻应用39例,颈丛麻醉17例。结果:全组无死亡病例,脑缺血症状明显改善者65例,症状好转者14例,术后并发脑梗死2例,颈动脉内血栓形成1例。结论:CEA是治疗症状性颈动脉狭窄的有效方法。     

Concomitant ipsilateral carotid endarterectomy and stenting is an effective treatment for tandem carotid artery lesions

ObjectiveData regarding the treatment of tandem carotid artery lesions at the bifurcation and ipsilateral, proximal common carotid artery (CCA) are limited. It has been suggested that concomitant treatment with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and proximal ipsilateral carotid artery stenting confers a high risk of stroke and death. The objective of this study was to evaluate the technique and outcomes of this hybrid procedure at a single institution.MethodsA retrospective chart review was performed including patients who underwent CEA + ipsilateral carotid artery stenting for treatment of atherosclerotic carotid artery disease between December 2007 and April 2017. Primary endpoints were postoperative myocardial infarction, neurologic event, and perioperative mortality.ResultsTwenty-two patients (15 male [68%]) underwent CEA + ipsilateral carotid artery stenting with a mean follow-up of 67 ± 77 months. The mean age was 70.0 ± 6.1 years old, all with a prior smoking history (eight current smokers [64%]). Twelve patients (55%) were treated for symptomatic disease and three had a prior ipsilateral CEA (one also with CAS). Computed tomographic angiography imaging was performed preoperatively in 21 patients (95%). CEA was performed first in 18 patients (82%) followed by ipsilateral carotid artery stenting. CEA was performed with a patch in 20 and eversion endarterectomy in two patients. Ipsilateral CCA was stented in 21 patients (96%) and one innominate was stented in a patient with a right CEA. Additional endovascular interventions were performed in three patients: 1 innominate stent, 1 distal ipsilateral internal carotid artery stent, and 1 right subclavian artery stent. All proximal stents were placed with sheath access through the endarterectomy patch in 12 (55%), CCA in 7 (32%), and through the arteriotomy before patching in 3 (14%). Distal internal carotid artery clamping was performed in 18 (90%, available 20) of patients before ipsilateral carotid artery stenting. All proximal lesions were successfully treated endovascularly with no open conversion. One dissection was created and treated effectively with stenting. One perioperative stroke (4.5%) occurred in a patient treated for symptomatic disease, 1 postoperative myocardial infarction (4.5%), and 2 patients (9.1%) with cranial nerve injuries. There was one patient who expired within 30 days, shortly after discharge for unknown reasons. The mean length of stay was 2.6 ± 2.0 days.ConclusionsIn appropriately selected patients, concomitant CEA and ipsilateral carotid artery stenting can be safely performed in high-risk patients with a low risk of myocardial infarction, neurologic events, and perioperative mortality when careful surgical technique is used, using direct carotid access, and distal carotid clamping for cerebral protection before stenting.     

双侧颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄的处理策略

目的:探讨双侧颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄患者的手术适应证、时机和策略.方法:1987年2月至2007年12月共收治74例双侧颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄患者,其中34例患者症状限于一侧,均施行了一侧颈动脉内膜切除(CEA),其中8例对侧因狭窄>70%或粥样硬化斑块不稳定而行CEA或支架成形(CAS).38例双侧均有症状,15例双侧先后施行CEA;3例一侧行CEA,对侧行CAS;20例仅行单侧CEA.另外2例双侧无症状,均因狭窄>70%而行单侧CEA,其中1例还行对侧CAS.结果:本组74例患者共行93侧CEA,68例术后顺利,2例神经功能障碍加重,2例出现心肌缺血,1例脑出血,1例声音嘶哑.67例患者平均随访4.9年,63例无与术侧颈动脉相关的脑缺血事件发生.结论:颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄患者只要指征明确,无论对侧颈动脉正常、狭窄甚至闭塞,均应施行CEA.双侧狭窄患者的治疗时机和策略因人而异.CEA术中主要依据电生理监测结果决定是否采用转流.     

Evidence for Management of Carotid Artery Stenosis

In this review, we presented the evidence concerning carotid artery stenosis treatment in symptomatic stenosis and asymptomatic stenosis separately, and discussed the future challenges. The validity of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) to treat moderate or greater degree of symptomatic carotid artery stenosis appears to be established. Due to the additional option of carotid artery stenting (CAS), it is necessary to comprehensively determine whether CEA or CAS is more appropriate for each individual patient. Moreover, since there are rapid advancements in devices for CAS and improvements in treatment outcomes, continual learning of the latest treatment method is essential. For asymptomatic stenosis, due to improvements in the outcomes with best medical treatment (BMT), it is essential to re-evaluate the use of invasive CEA/CAS. Continual verification of the latest randomized clinical trial that compares CEA, CAS, and BMT, and establishment of a diagnostic method that can accurately extract the group of patients who have the highest future risk of developing ischemia, are desired.