ABSTRACT: We describe characteristics associated with use of endarterectomy (CEA) versus stenting (CAS) in patients before urgent cardiac surgery.
The optimal modality of carotid revascularization preceding cardiac surgery is unknown.
Retrospective evaluation of the CARE (Carotid Artery Revascularization and Endarterectomy) registry from January 2005 to April 2010 was performed on patients undergoing CEA or CAS preceding urgent cardiac surgery within 30 days. Baseline characteristics were compared, and multivariate adjustment was performed.
Of 451 patients who met study criteria, 255 underwent CAS and 196 underwent CEA. Both procedures increased over time to a similar degree (p = 0.18). Patients undergoing CAS had more frequent history of peripheral artery disease (38.2% vs. 26.5%, p < 0.01), neck surgery (5.5% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.01), neck radiation (4.3% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.04), left-main coronary disease (34.8% vs. 23.5%, p < 0.01), neurological events (45.8% vs. 31.3%, p < 0.01), carotid intervention (20.8% vs. 7.6%, p < 0.01), and higher baseline creatinine (1.3 vs. 1.1 mg/dl, p = 0.02). The target carotid arteries of CAS patients were more likely to be symptomatic in the 6 months before revascularization and have restenosis from prior CEA. Patients undergoing CAS had a lower American Society of Anesthesiology grade. Midwest hospitals were less likely to perform CAS than CEA, whereas in the other regions CAS was more common (p < 0.01). Non-Caucasian race, a history of heart failure, previous carotid procedures, prior stroke, left main coronary artery stenosis, lower American Society of Anesthesiology grade, and teaching hospital were independent predictors of patients who would receive CAS.
Carotid artery stenting and CEA have increased among patients undergoing urgent cardiac surgery. Patients who underwent CAS had more vascular disease but lower acute pre-surgical risk. Significant regional variation in procedure selection exists.
11/2011; 4(11):1200-8. · 1.07 Impact Factor
European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery 02/2007; 33 Suppl 1:S1-75. · 2.99 Impact Factor
ABSTRACT: Although the treatment of atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis with use of percutaneous angioplasty, stent placement, and surgical revascularization has gained widespread use, there exist few prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing these techniques to each other or against the standard of medical management alone. To facilitate this process as well as help answer many important questions regarding the appropriate application of renal revascularization, well-designed and rigorously conducted trials are needed. These trials must have clearly defined goals and must be sufficiently sized and performed so as to withstand intensive outcomes assessment. Toward this end, this document provides guidelines and definitions for the design, conduct, evaluation, and reporting of renal artery revascularization RCTs. In addition, areas of critically necessary renal artery revascularization investigation are identified. It is hoped that this information will be valuable to the investigator wishing to conduct research in this important area.
Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology 10/2003; 14(9 Pt 2):S477-92. · 2.08 Impact Factor
Circulation 10/2002; 106(12):1572-85. · 14.74 Impact Factor