Adding Supra-Aortic Trunk Surgical Reconstruction to Carotid Endarterectomy: Implications on Risk of Stroke and Death - 23/03/21

Doi : 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2020.11.016

Bernadette J. Goudreau, MD, MMSc ^a, Linda J. Wang, MD, MBA ^b, Christopher A. Latz, MD, MPH ^b, Mark F. Conrad, MD, MMSc, FACS ^b, Carlin A. Williams, MD, FACS ^a, Margaret C. Tracci, MD, JD, FACS ^a, John A. Kern, MD, FACS ^a, W Darrin Clouse, MD, FACS ^a,^⁎
^a Divisions of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
^b Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA

^∗Correspondence address: W Darrin Clouse, MD, FACS, 1215 Lee St, PO Box 800679, Charlottesville, VA 22908-0679.1215 Lee St, PO Box 800679CharlottesvilleVA22908-0679

Abstract

Background

Additive 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 design

Isolated 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.

Results

Patients 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).

Conclusions

CEA+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.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.