Search

Introduction: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACAS) remains a subject of debate. Current recommendations are based on randomized trials conducted over 20 years ago and improvements in medical therapies may have reduced the risk of cerebral ischemic events (CIE). This study presents a mid-term analysis of results from an ongoing prospective observational study of ACAS patients to assess their CIE risk in a real-world setting., Methods: This is a prospective observational cohort study of patients with ACAS >60 % (NASCET criteria) identified in a single duplex ultrasonography (DUS) vascular laboratory (trial registered: NCT04825080). Patients were not considered for CEA due to their short life expectancy (<3 year) or absence of signs of plaque vulnerability (ulceration, ipoechogenic core). Patient enrollment started in January 2019 and ended in March 2020 with a targeted sample size of 300 patients.A 5-year follow-up was scheduled. Clinical characteristics, risk factors, and medical therapies were documented, and, when necessary, the best medical therapy (BMT), involving antiplatelet agents, blood pressure control, and statins, was recommended during clinical visits. The primary endpoint was to asses CIEs (including strokes, transient ischemic attacks, amaurosis-fugax) ipsilateral to ACAS along with plaque progression rate and patients survival. Follow-up involved annual clinical visit and carotid DUS examination, complemented by telephone interviews at six-month intervals., Results: The study included 307 patients, with an average age of 80 ± 7 years, of whom 55 % were male. Contralateral stenosis exceeding 60 % was present in 61 (20 %) patients. Seventy-seven percent of patients were on BMT. At a mean follow-up of 41±9 months, 7 ispilateral strokes and 9 TIAs occurred, resulting in 14 CIEs (2 patients experienced both TIA and stroke). According to Kaplan-Meier analysis, the 4-year CIE rate was 6±2 %, with an annual CIE rate of 1.5 %. Fifty-eight (19 %) patients had a stenosis progression which was associated with a higher 4-year estimated CIE rate compared to patients with stable plaque (10.3 % vs 3.2 %, P=.01). Similarly, a contralateral carotid stenosis >60 % was associated with a higher 4-year estimated CIE rate: 11.7 % vs 2.9 %, P=.002. These factors were independently associated with high risk for CIE at the multivariate COX analysis: Hazard Ratio (HR): 3.2; 95 % Confidence Interval: 1.1-9.2 and HR: 3.6; 95 % CI: 1.2-10.5., Conclusion: The mid-term results of this prospective study suggest that the incidence of CIE in ACAS patients should not be underestimated, with plaque progression and contralateral stenosis serving as primary predictors of CIEs., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest No conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Symptomatic carotid stenosis and carotid dissection are acute conditions of extracranial cerebrovascular vessels determining transient ischemic attack or stroke. Medical, surgical, or endovascular management are different options to treat these pathologies. This narrative review focused on the management, from symptoms to treatment, of the acute conditions of extracranial cerebrovascular vessels, including post-carotid revascularization stroke. Symptomatic carotid stenosis (> 50% according to North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial criteria) with transient ischemic attack or stroke benefits from carotid revascularization-primarily with carotid endarterectomy associated with medical therapy-within 2 weeks from symptom onset to reduce the risk of stroke recurrence. Different from acute extracranial carotid dissection, medical management with antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy can prevent new neurologic ischemic events, considering stenting only in case of symptom recurrence. Stroke after carotid revascularization can be associated with the following etiologies: carotid manipulation, plaque fragmentation, or clamping ischemia. Medical or surgical management is therefore influenced by the cause and timing of the neurologic events after carotid revascularization. Acute conditions of the extracranial cerebrovascular vessels include a heterogeneous group of pathologies and correct management can reduce symptom recurrence substantially., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Current guidelines do not recommend screening for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (AsxCS). The rationale behind this recommendation is that detection of AsxCS may lead to an unnecessary carotid intervention. In contrast, screening for abdominal aortic aneurysms is strongly recommended., Methods: A critical analysis of the literature was performed to evaluate the implications of detecting AsxCS., Results: Patients with AsxCS are at high risk for future stroke, myocardial infarction and vascular death. Population-wide screening for AsxCS should not be recommended. Additionally, screening of high-risk individuals for AsxCS with the purpose of identifying candidates for a carotid intervention is inappropriate. Instead, selective screening for AsxCS should be considered and should be viewed as an opportunity to identify individuals at high risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and future cardiovascular events for the timely initiation of intensive medical therapy and risk factor modification., Conclusions: Although mass screening should not be recommended, there are several arguments suggesting that selective screening for AsxCS should be considered. The rationale supporting such selective screening is to optimize risk factor control and to initiate intensive medical therapy for prevention of future cardiovascular events, rather than to identify candidates for an intervention., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest All authors are members of the Faculty Advocating Collaborative and Thoughtful Carotid Artery Treatments (FACTCATS; available at www.FACTCATS.org) with the shared goal of optimizing stroke prevention. The views of particular FACTCATS do not necessarily reflect the views of other FACTCATS., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Despite the publication of several national/international guidelines, the optimal management of patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (AsxCS) remains controversial. This article compares 3 recently released guidelines (the 2020 German-Austrian, the 2021 European Stroke Organization [ESO], and the 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery [SVS] guidelines) vs the 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) guidelines regarding the optimal management of AsxCS patients.The 2017 ESVS guidelines defined specific imaging/clinical parameters that may identify patient subgroups at high future stroke risk and recommended that carotid endarterectomy (CEA) should or carotid artery stenting (CAS) may be considered for these individuals. The 2020 German-Austrian guidelines provided similar recommendations with the 2017 ESVS Guidelines. The 2021 ESO Guidelines also recommended CEA for AsxCS patients at high risk for stroke on best medical treatment (BMT), but recommended against routine use of CAS in these patients. Finally, the SVS guidelines provided a strong recommendation for CEA+BMT vs BMT alone for low-surgical risk patients with >70% AsxCS. Thus, the ESVS, German-Austrian, and ESO guidelines concurred that all AsxCS patients should receive risk factor modification and BMT, but CEA should or CAS may also be considered for certain AsxCS patient subgroups at high risk for future ipsilateral ischemic stroke.

Background: The optimal antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) treatment of patients undergoing extracranial carotid artery interventions is a subject of debate. The aim of this multidisciplinary document was to critically review the recommendations of current guidelines, taking into consideration the results of recently published studies., Methods: The various antithrombotic strategies reported were evaluated for asymptomatic and symptomatic patients undergoing extracranial carotid artery interventions (endarterectomy, transfemoral carotid artery stenting [CAS] or transcarotid artery revascularization [TCAR]). Based on a critical review, a series of recommendations were formulated by an international expert panel., Results: For asymptomatic patients, we recommend low-dose aspirin (75-100 mg/day) or clopidogrel (75 mg/day) with the primary goal to reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and cardiovascular event rates rather than to reduce the risk of stroke. For symptomatic patients, we recommend dual antiplatelet treatment (DAPT) initiated within 24 h of the index event to reduce the risk of recurrent events. We suggest that following transfemoral CAS or TCAR, patients continue DAPT for 1 month after which a single antiplatelet agent is used. High level of evidence to support anticoagulant treatment for patients with carotid artery disease is lacking., Conclusions: The antithrombotic treatment offered to carotid patients should be individualized, taking into account the presence of symptoms, the type of intervention and the goal of the treatment. The duration and type of DAPT (ticagrelor instead of clopidogrel) should be evaluated in future trials., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Dr. Mikhailidis has given talks, acted as a consultant or attended conferences sponsored by Amgen and Novo Nordisk. Dr. Chaturvedi reports consulting for Astra Zeneca and BrainGate and serving as an Associate Editor for Stroke, and as an Editorial Board Member of Neurology and Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases. The other authors report no conflicts., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To report the characteristics of the prospective observational cohort study "Carotid Asymptomatic Stenosis (CARAS)", including patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis under medical treatment and their first year of follow-up, in order to estimate the risk of cerebral ischemic events., Methods: This is a prospective observational cohort study of CARAS>60% (Nascet criteria) patients, identified in a single duplex-ultrasonography (DUS) vascular laboratory (trail registration N: NCT04825080). Patient's enrollment started in January 2019 and ended in March 2020 with the follow-up conclusion scheduled in December 2025. The aimed sample size was calculated at 300 patients for a 5-year follow-up. The primary outcome were the incidence of ipsilateral neurologic ischemic events (stokes and transient ischemic attacks [TIA]), plaque progression rate, and survival. The follow-up was scheduled at six-month intervals for clinical visit and annually for DUS examination., Results: a total of 307 patients completed the first follow-up year. The mean age was 81±4 years, 55% were male. Contralateral stenosis >60% was present in 90 (29%) patients. Antiplatelet therapy and statins adherence was 80% and 88%, respectively. During the first year, 3 ispilateral strokes (1%) and 4 TIAs (1.3%) occurred, for a total of 2.3% ipsilateral ischemic events. During the first year, 43 (14%) plaques had a stenosis progression, which was correlated with the occurrence of neurological events (9.3% vs. 1.1%, P=.001, OR: 8.9; 95%CI: 1.9-41); 6 deaths (2%) occurred in the same period., Conclusion: the preliminary one-year results of this prospective study suggest that the overall rate of any ipsilateral ischemic event, and specifically ipsilateral strokes, correlates with plaque progression., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: This guideline (GL) on carotid surgery as updating of "Stroke: Italian guidelines for Prevention and Treatment" of the ISO-SPREAD Italian Stroke Organization-Group, has recently been published in the National Guideline System and shared with the Italian Society of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (SICVE) and other Scientific Societies and Patient's Association., Methods: GRADE-SIGN version, AGREE quality of reporting checklist. Clinical questions formulated according to the PICO model. Recommendations developed based on clinical questions by a multidisciplinary experts' panel and patients' representatives. Systematic reviews performed for each PICO question. Considered judgements filled by assessing the evidence level, direction, and strength of the recommendations., Results: The panel provided indications and recommendations for appropriate, comprehensive, and individualized management of patients with carotid stenosis. Diagnostic and therapeutic processes of the best medical therapy, carotid endarterectomy (CEA), carotid stenting (CAS) according to the evidences and the judged opinions were included. Symptomatic carotid stenosis in elective and emergency, asymptomatic carotid stenosis, association with ischemic heart disease, preoperative diagnostics, types of anesthesia, monitoring in case of CEA, CEA techniques, comparison between CEA and CAS, post-surgical carotid restenosis, and medical therapy are the main topics, even with analysis of uncertainty areas for risk-benefit assessments in the individual patient (personalized medicine [PM])., Conclusions: This GL updates on the main recommendations for the most appropriate diagnostic and medical-surgical management of patients with atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis to prevent ischemic stroke. This GL also provides useful elements for the application of PM in good clinical practice.

Background: The outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) are constantly reported in a multitude of studies; however, the specific causes of perioperative stroke have been scarcely investigated. The aim of the present study was to analyze and categorize the causes of perioperative strokes after CEA. Methods: All CEAs performed from 2006 to 2019 in a single center were collected. CEA was routinely performed under general anesthesia, with routine shunting and patching, using cerebral near-infrared spectroscopy monitoring. Carotid exposure technique was classified as either clamped-dissection (CD) or preclamping-dissection (PCD) if the carotid bifurcation was dissected after or prior to carotid clamping. Perioperative and 30-day strokes and their possible mechanisms were evaluated according to preoperative symptoms and surgical technique adopted. Results: Among 1760 CEAs performed, 30 (1.7%) perioperative strokes occurred. 14 (47%) were identified upon emergence from general anesthesia, and 16 (53%) were noted in the first 30 days following intervention. Stroke etiology was categorized as follows: technical (acute thrombosis or intimal flap or due to intraoperative complications), embolic (no recognized technical defect), hemorrhagic, or contralateral. Symptomatic patients had a significantly higher rate of any type of stroke than asymptomatic patients (3.8% vs 0.9%, P = .0001). CD was protective for postoperative stroke (0.9% vs 3.1%, P = .001) in both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients (2.5% vs 5.9%, P = .05; 0.4% vs 1.9%, P = .005), particularly for the cohort in which symptomatic patients (0.7% vs 3.2%, P = .04) suffered postoperative embolic stroke. Conclusion: Perioperative stroke in CEA may be multifactorial in etiology, including a result of technical errors. A CD technique may help reduce the incidence of perioperative stroke.

The optimal management of patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) is the subject of extensive debate. According to the 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery Guidelines, carotid endarterectomy should (Class IIa; Level of Evidence: B) or carotid artery stenting may be considered (Class IIb; Level of Evidence: B) in the presence of one or more clinical/imaging characteristics that may be associated with an increased risk of late ipsilateral stroke (e.g. silent embolic infarcts on brain computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging, progression in the severity of ACS, a history of contralateral transient ischemic attack/stroke, microemboli detection on transcranial Doppler, etc.), provided documented perioperative stroke/death rates are <3% and the patient's life expectancy is >5 years. Besides these clinical/imaging characteristics, there are additional individual, ethnic/racial or social factors that should probably be evaluated in the decision process regarding the optimal management of these patients, such as individual patient needs/patient choice, patient compliance with best medical treatment, patient sex, culture, race/ethnicity, age and comorbidities, as well as improvements in imaging/operative techniques/outcomes. The present multispecialty position paper will present the rationale why the management of patients with ACS may need to be individualized.

Objective: To determine the effect of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) on early (baseline vs. maximum three months) and late (baseline vs. at least five months) cognitive function in patients with exclusively asymptomatic carotid stenoses (ACS)., Method: Searches were conducted in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane library. This systematic review includes 31 non-randomised studies., Results: Early post-operative period: In 24 CEA/CAS/CEA+CAS cohorts (n = 2 059), two cohorts (representing 91/2 059, 4.4% of the overall study population) reported significant improvement in cognitive function, while one (28/2 059, 1%) reported significant decline. Three cohorts (250/2 059, 12.5% reported "mixed findings" where some cognitive scores significantly improved, and a similar proportion declined. The majority (nine cohorts; 1 086/2 059, 53%) reported no change. Seven cohorts (250/2 059, 12.1%) were mostly unchanged but one to two individual test scores improved, while two cohorts (347/2 059, 16.8%) were mostly unchanged with one to two individual test scores worse. Late post-operative period: In 21 cohorts (n = 1 554), one (28/1 554, 1.8%) reported significantly worse cognitive function, one reported significant improvement (24/1 554, 1.5%), while a third (19/1 554, 1.2%) reported "mixed findings". The majority were unchanged (six cohorts; 1 073/1 554, 69%) or mostly unchanged, but with one to two cognitive tests showing significant improvement (11 cohorts; 386/1 554, 24.8%). Overall, there was a similar distribution of findings in small, medium, and large studies, in studies with controls vs. no controls, in studies comparing CEA vs. CAS, and in studies with shorter/longer late follow up., Conclusion: Notwithstanding accepted limitations regarding heterogeneity within non-randomised studies, CEA/CAS rarely improved overall late cognitive function in ACS patients (< 2%) and the risk of significant cognitive decline was equally low (< 2%). In the long term, the majority were either unchanged (69%) or mostly unchanged with one to two test scores improved (24.8%). Until new research identifies vulnerable ACS subgroups (e.g., impaired cerebral vascular reserve) or provides evidence that silent embolisation from ACS causes cognitive impairment, evidence supporting intervention in ACS patients to prevent/reverse cognitive decline is lacking., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest None., (Copyright © 2021 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The ongoing literature recommends carotid endarterectomy (CEA) primarily for patients with neurological symptoms, however CEA can be precluded by the onset of a severe stroke or a total carotid occlusion. The present study aims to evaluate the effect of unheralded strokes in patients with a previously asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) possibly considered for CEA., Materials and Methods: From 2009 to 2019, patients with an unheralded stroke from an ACS were considered. By neurological examination, patients were divided in unfit-for-CEA (uCEA) - either for the severity of the stroke (according to modified Rankin-Scale - mRS) or the onset of a total carotid occlusion - and patients submitted to CEA. Predictors for uCEA and stroke severity were evaluated., Results: Over a total of 532 patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis, 277 (52%) with unheralded stroke were included in the study. One hundred and one (36%) were considered uCEA: 64(23%) due to their neurological conditions (mRS:5) and 37 (13%) because of the onset of carotid occlusion. One hundred seventy-six (64%) patients underwent CEA. The preoperative medical therapy was similar in uCEA vs CEA patients. Age≥80 years and female sex were independently associated with uCEA (OR:5.9, 95%CI:3.1-11.4, P<.01; OR:3.9, 95%CI:2.0-7.6, P<.01. respectively). Patients submitted to CEA had mRS: 0-2 in 102(37%) cases and mRS:3-4 in 74 (27%). The contralateral carotid occlusion (CCO) was independently associated with mRS:3-4 (OR:8.4, 95%CI 1.8-79, P=.01). Postoperative stroke rate after CEA was 2.9% (4/167); patients with preoperative mRS:3-4 had a higher risk for postoperative stroke compared to those with mRS:0-2 (5.9% vs. 0%. P=.02)., Conclusions: An unheralded stroke in patients with ACS leads to a severe neurological damage in more than half of cases, either precluding CEA (36%) or increasing the risk of postoperative complications (27%). Female sex, age≥80 and CCO are independent predictors of these occurrences and should be considered in ACS patients., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Symptomatic carotid artery stenosis needs revascularization within 2 weeks by carotid endarterectomy (CEA) to reduce the risk of symptom recurrence; however, the optimal timing of intervention is yet to be defined in patients with large-volume cerebral ischemic lesion (LVCIL) and modified Rankin scale (mRS) score ≥3. The aim of this study was to determine the most appropriate timing for CEA in patients with a recent stroke and LVCIL., Methods: Data from patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis with LVCIL and mRS score of 3 or 4 from 2007 to 2017 were considered. Patients were submitted to CEA if they had a stable clinical condition and life expectancy >1 year. LVCIL was defined as a cerebral ischemic lesion of volume >4000 mm 3 . Perioperative stroke and death were evaluated by stratifying for timing of CEA by χ 2 test and multiple logistic regression. Patients with similar characteristics (LVCIL and mRS score of 3 or 4) unfit for CEA served as the control group for recurrence of stroke at 1-year follow-up., Results: In an 11-year period, of a total 4020 CEAs, 126 (2.9%) were performed in patients with a moderate stroke and LVCIL occurring in the same admission. The patients' median age was 69 years (interquartile range [IQR], 10 years); 72% (91) were male, with mRS score of 3 (IQR, 1) and LVCIL volume of 20,000 mm 3 (IQR, 47,000 mm 3 ). The median time elapsed from symptoms to CEA was 7 weeks (IQR, 8 weeks). Overall perioperative stroke/death was 7.3% (eight strokes and one death). By selective timing evaluation of the postoperative events, CEA performed within 4 weeks was associated with a significantly higher rate of stroke/death compared with patients operated on after 4 weeks: 11.9% (8/67) vs 1.7% (1/59; P = .03). By logistic regression, CEA within 4 weeks was an independent (from sex, cerebral ischemic lesion volume, dyslipidemia, and carotid stenosis) predictor of postoperative stroke/death (odds ratio, 8.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-73). In the same period, 101 patients were considered unfit for CEA for dementia (n = 22), severe comorbidities (n = 55), or short (<1-year) life expectancy (n = 24), and 43 (43%) survived at 1 year. At 1 year, the perioperative/recurrent stroke after CEA vs patients unfit for CEA was similar (6.2% vs 13.9%; P = .11), but CEA performed after 4 weeks led to significantly lower perioperative/recurrent stroke (1.7% vs 13.9%; P = .02)., Conclusions: The surgical risk of CEA in patients with a recent moderate-severe ischemic stroke and LVCIL is high. However, if the intervention is delayed >4 weeks, its benefit seems significant., (Copyright © 2020 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: Silent brain infarction (SBI) is associated with an increased risk of stroke in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS), and is therefore one of the criteria for performing carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Despite an extensive literature, this issue is still a matter of debate. Aim of the present work was to evaluate incidence and predictors of SBI in patients undergoing CEA for ACS, and to investigate its possible impact on CEA outcome., Methods: All patients submitted to CEA in a single academic center from 2005 to 2019 were prospectively inserted into a specific database. The presence of SBI was evaluated by preoperative computed tomography (CT), considering exclusively infarctions in the carotid territories from an athero-embolic source. Preoperative characteristics were investigated as possible risk factor for SBI at the uni- and multivariate analysis. The impact of SBI on stroke occurrence after CEA was also evaluated., Results: In the designated period, over a total of 1288 ACS considered and submitted to CEA, 105 (8.2%) were associated with SBI. Male sex, hypertension, dyslipidaemia, smoking, contralateral carotid occlusion and severity of carotid stenosis were associated with SBI at the univariate analysis; preoperative statin therapy showed to be a protective factor. At the multivariate analysis, contralateral carotid occlusion and severity of stenosis were independently associated with SBI (OR: 3.16, 95%CI 1.62-6.18, P=.001; OR: 1.04, 95%CI 1.01-1.07, P=.004, respectively), with statin therapy confirmed as a protective factor (OR: 0.60, 95%CI: 0.40-0.92, P=.002). Overall post-CEA stroke rate was 0.9%, with a higher post-operative risk independently predicted by the presence of SBI (OR:4.23, 95%CI: 1.40-12.73, P=.01)., Conclusion: SBI is present in 8% of patients with ACS, and is significantly associated with contralateral carotid occlusion and severity of the carotid stenosis. Statin therapy reduces the occurrence of this phenomenon. The presence of SBI should be carefully considered in indication to CEA since it significantly increases the surgical risk., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The best timing for carotid endarterectomy in patients with stroke is still matter of debate, particularly in case of significant cerebral ischemic lesion or neurological deterioration. The present review and meta-analysis aimed to report the best evidence in the outcome of patients submitted to urgent (<48h) or standard elapsing time (<2-week) CEA for stroke and to evaluate the impact of cerebral ischemic lesion size and clinical manifestation in the postoperative outcome., Evidence Acquisition: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by searching through Scopus and PubMed all papers reporting carotid endarterectomy (CEA) outcome (stroke and stroke/death) in patients who suffered a stable stroke, treated within 48h and 2 weeks from symptoms. A subgroup analysis of studies reporting the presence and size of cerebral lesion and clinical manifestation was planned. The pooled 30-day stroke and stroke/death risk (effect size) was expressed by crude percentage and 95% confidence interval (CI), by random effect model., Evidence Synthesis: Sixteen studies were included in the meta-analysis, 7 reporting the CEA outcome performed <48h from stroke and 13 reporting the outcome of CEA performed <2-week. The effect size of stroke and stroke/death of CEA performed <48h from symptoms was 7.4% (95% CI: 3.7-11.2) and 7.9% (95% CI: 4.0-11.8) respectively, and for CEA <2-week was 4.5% (95% CI: 2.8-6.3) and 5.4% (95% CI: 3.4-7.4) respectively. The authors agreed in considering the severity of stroke and the volume of the cerebral ischemic lesion a risk factor for postoperative complication however, due to the extremely high heterogeneity of the studies data, the effect size was not calculated. Two studies evaluated the effect of the cerebral ischemic lesion distribution; the presence of a border-zone infarct was associated with a significant increase in the risk of postoperative stroke/death rate compared with territorial cerebral ischemic lesion (OR: 6.0; 95%CI 1.1-32.0)., Conclusions: CEA for patients with a recent stroke is associated with 5.4% and 7.9% of stroke/death. A large volume of the cerebral ischemic lesion and a deteriorated neurological status are associated with a higher perioperative risk; urgent carotid revascularization seems to further increase this risk.

Objective: Carotid stenosis with crescendo-transient-ischemic-attack (cTIA) requires a prompt intervention to reduce the stroke risk. Few data are reported in literature about cTIA suggesting a different perioperative risk compared with patients with single TIA (sTIA). This study aimed to compare the outcome of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with TIA (single/crescendo) and evaluate the outcome risk-factors., Methods: Data from two tertiary hospitals for vascular treatment were analyzed from 2007 to 2016. All patients with TIA subjected to CEA were considered, comparing the 30-day postoperative stroke and stroke/death in patients with cTIA and sTIA, particularly in the urgent (≤48 h) setting., Results: On a total of 3866 CEA, 888 (23%) were performed in symptomatic patients and 515 for TIA: 365 (71%) patients with sTIA and 150 (29%) with cTIA. When compared with sTIA, cTIA patients were younger and less frequently affected by coronary disease, dyslipidemia, and chronic pulmonary disease; however, contralateral carotid occlusion was more common (20% vs. 10%, P = .004; 56% vs. 46, P = .03; 16% vs. 7%, P = .01; >80 years 26% vs. 16%, P = .01 and 2% vs. 10%, P = .001; respectively). Postoperative stroke and stroke/death were significantly higher in cTIA compared with sTIA (5.3% vs. 1.6%, P = .02 and 6.0% vs. 2.2%, P = .03; respectively). Urgent CEA was performed in 58% ( n: 87) cTIA and in 11% ( n: 56) sTIA( P<.01). The urgent setting did not influence the stroke and stroke/death rate of CEA for sTIA (3.6% vs. 1.3%, P = .21 and 3.6% vs. 1.9%, P = .44, respectively), but was associated with lower rate of events in cTIA (1.1%vs. 11.1%, P = .01 and 2.3% vs. 11.1%, P = .03, respectively). This beneficial effect in patients with cTIA treated within 48-h was confirmed also by multivariate analysis (OR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.76-0.01, P=.02)., Conclusions: cTIA subjected to CEA have a higher stroke and stroke/death risk compared with patients with sTIA. The urgent setting seems to reduce the stroke/death rate cTIA; for sTIA with a stable neurological condition, the timing of CEA did not influence the outcome.

Background: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) intervention needs a specific training and a sufficient learning curve to obtain optimal results in terms of outcome. A formative program was settled up in a single academic center to optimize training of standard CEA procedures. This study aims to evaluate the 11-year results of the teaching CEA program., Methods: The trainees CEA teaching program is carried on during the 5-year vascular surgery residency period, and it is stratified as follows: learning theory and intervention assistance (minimum 50 procedures per year) in the first and second residency year; performing CEA as second operator in the third and fourth residency year (minimum 50 procedures per year); CEA execution as first operator with attending supervision in the last residency year. All CEA procedures from 2005 to 2015 were retrospectively collected and the 30-day results were compared according to the expertise of the first operator: experienced vascular surgeons (EVSs) versus trainees. All CEA procedures were performed in general anesthesia, with routine shunting and patching., Results: In the study period, 1,379 (361 [26.2%] symptomatic; 1,018 [73.8%] asymptomatic) CEAs were performed. Trainees performed 199 (14.4%) CEAs as first operator. Patients submitted to CEA by trainees were similar in terms of preoperative clinical characteristics except for the patients' age (trainees 72.4 years versus EVS 70.8 years, P = 0.02) and smoking history (trainees 30.7% versus EVS 24.1%, P = 0.04). The 30-day complication rates were similar in CEA performed by trainees versus EVS: stroke 0.5% vs. 1.1%, P = 0.5; death 0.0% vs. 0.5%, P = 0.6; stroke/death 0.5% vs. 1.7%, P = 0.24; hematoma 3.0% vs. 2.2%, P = 0.48; and cranial nerve injury 9.0% vs. 7.8%, P = 0.47, respectively. The intervention time was significantly longer in CEAs performed by trainees compared with EVS: 104 ± 1.9 min versus 98 ± 1.0 min, P = 0.02., Conclusions: With a defined CEA teaching program, trainees can obtain results similar to those of more experienced surgeons in terms of clinical outcome at the price of an increased intervention time., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The surgical treatment of radio-induced carotid stenosis (RICS) is challenging and burdened with high risk of complications. Carotid stenting (CAS) may be a valid alternative, but better approach is still not defined. Two approaches have been assessed in this an observational monocentric study, focusing on perioperative and follow-up complications., Methods: From 2005 to 2013, data on patients treated for extracranial carotid stenosis with previous radiotherapy (RT) for head or neck tumor were prospectively collected according to the procedure performed (open repair [OR], endovascular stenting [CAS]). Patient demographics, clinical risk factors, organ of cancer origin, elapsed time from RT, duplex ultrasound (DUS) and clinical presentation of carotid stenosis were preoperatively gathered. Primary outcomes were technical success, 30-day mortality, transient ischemic attack (TIA)/stroke and myocardial infarction (MI). In OR group, laterocervical hematoma and cranial nerve injury were evaluated and, in CAS group, arterial access site complications were considered as well. Secondary outcomes were the mortality, TIA/stroke, restenosis and reintervention during follow-up., Results: Fifteen RICS were treated in 12 patients (M/F=9/3; median age: 71 years, range: 51-80). OR was performed to treat 8 RICS in 5 patients (M/F=3/2; median age: 65, range: 50-76) and CAS to treat 7 RICS in 7 patients (M/F=6/1; median age: 75, range 59-80). In OR group, all patients were asymptomatic and all plaques were hypoechogenic at DUS with histological features of vulnerable plaque. Technical success was 100%. Thirty-day mortality was 12.5% (1 death for upper airways complication in patient with previous neck surgery). TIA/stroke and MI rate were 0% and cranial nerve injury 12.5%. In CAS group, carotid stenosis was symptomatic in 2(28.6%) cases, all plaques resulted hypoechogenic at DUS. Technical success was 100%. Thirty-day mortality was 0%. TIA occurred in 4 (57.1%) patients. No stroke, MI or access site hematoma occurred in this group. Mean follow-up was 35.5±18.2 months. At 12 and 36 month, freedom from neurological events, restenosis and reintervention was 100%. At 1 and 3 years, survival was 91.7% and 81.5%, respectively. No patient died for carotid-related or cardiovascular causes., Conclusions: According with the plaque morphology and the high rate of cerebrovascular complications of CAS, OR should be suggested as the first choice for treatment of RICS in the majority of cases. In patients with previous neck surgery, assessment of airways is necessary before OR to avoid respiratory complications.

Background: The influence of acute cerebral ischemic lesions (CILs) on the revascularization outcome of symptomatic carotid stenosis has been scarcely investigated in the literature. This study evaluated the effect of CILs and their volume on the results of carotid revascularization in symptomatic patients., Methods: All patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis who underwent carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) between 2005 and 2014 were considered. CILs ipsilateral to the stenosis were identified in the preoperative cerebral computed tomography. The volume was quantified in mm 3 and correlated with 30-day rates of stroke and stroke/death by χ 2 , multivariate analysis, Pearson correlation, and receiver operating characteristic curves., Results: A total of 489 symptomatic patients were treated by CEA (327 [67%]) or CAS (162 [33%]), 186 (38%) ≤2 weeks and 303 (62%) >2 weeks from symptom onset. CEA and CAS patients had statistically similar rates of stroke (3.3% vs 5.5%; P = .27) and stroke/death (3.8% vs 5.9%; P = .22). CILs were identified in 251 patients (53%) and were associated with similar stroke and stroke/death rate compared with patients without CIL (12 [4.8%] vs 8 [3.5%], P = .46; and 14 [5.6%] vs 8 [3.5%]; P = .26, respectively). The median CIL volume was 1000 mm 3 (interquartile range [IQR], 7000 mm 3 ). Patients with postoperative stroke and stroke/death had a significantly higher preoperative CIL volume of 5100 mm 3 (IQR, 31,000 mm 3 ) vs 1000 mm 3 (IQR, 7000 mm 3 ; P = .01) and 4500 mm 3 (IQR, 17,450 mm 3 ) vs 1000 mm 3 (IQR, 7000 mm 3 ; P = .03), respectively. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed a volume of 4000 mm 3 was predictive of postoperative stroke with 75% sensitivity and 63% specificity. A CIL volume ≥4000 mm 3 was an independent risk factor for postoperative stroke, with a stroke rate of 9.3% (n = 9) vs 1.9% (n = 3) for a CIL volume of <4000 mm 3 (odds ratio, 4.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-19.1; P = .03)., Conclusions: CIL volume in symptomatic carotid stenosis seems to influence the 30-day outcome independently from the timing of carotid revascularization. A CIL volume of ≥4000 mm 3 could be considered a significant predictor for postoperative stroke after carotid revascularization., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Silent cerebral infarctions (SCIs) can be identified by preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans in patients with severe carotid stenosis being considered for carotid endarterectomy (CEA). It is unknown whether this finding has any effect on perioperative complications or long-term outcome. This study investigates the influence of SCI on early and late complications in asymptomatic patients undergoing CEA., Methods: All consecutive CEAs undertaken for asymptomatic severe carotid stenosis from 2005 to 2013 were retrospectively evaluated for clinical and anatomic characteristics. SCI was defined as cerebral embolic infarcts in the anterior or middle cerebral artery territory, ipsilateral to the target carotid stenosis, identified on preoperative CT. The end points of the study were to compare the 30-day and long-term stroke and death rate after CEA in patients with and without SCI. All patients were followed yearly through duplex ultrasonography and clinical assessment. Statistical methods used were Cox regression (hazard ratio) and Kaplan-Meier for life-table analysis., Results: A total of 743 CEAs were performed in asymptomatic patients during the study period of which all had CT scans, and 97 (13.1%) demonstrated SCI. All patient stroke and death outcomes at 30 days were 0.5% and 0.7%, respectively. Patients with SCI had a significantly higher 30-day stroke outcome (3.1% vs 0.2%; P = .001; odds ratio, 16.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.33-201.4; P = .02) but not death or stroke/death outcome (0% vs 0.8%; P = .19 and 3.1% vs 0.9%, P = .06, respectively) compared with those without SCI. In addition, at a mean follow-up of 44.3 ± 23.9 months, the patients with SCI had a significantly worse 5-year ipsilateral stroke or any stroke-/death-free survival compared with patients without SCI (86.7% vs 99.0%; P = .001; and 76.9% vs 87.7%; P = .004). SCI was confirmed as an independent predictor of late any stroke/death by Cox regression (hazard ratio, 2.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.29-4.67; P = .006)., Conclusions: Patients who have SCI in the presence of severe carotid stenosis and undergo CEA have significantly worse perioperative stroke and long-term stroke/death outcomes. This data would suggest that asymptomatic patients undergoing CEA who have CT scan evidence of a cerebral infarct have worse prognosis than those with normal CT scans., (Copyright © 2016 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Major postoperative complications such as stroke and myocardial infarction are usually carefully evaluated in the analysis of carotid revascularization performance. Although transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) are often left unreported, they also may influence long-term outcome. The aim of our study was to evaluate the influence of postoperative TIA in the long-term survival of patients submitted to carotid revascularization., Methods: All consecutive patients submitted to either carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid stenosis from 2005 to 2012 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were stratified according to their postoperative (30-day) neurologic course (no symptoms, TIA, or stroke). Kaplan-Maier with log-rank analysis was performed to compare the 5-year survival of patients with postoperative TIA, stroke, or neither; factors affecting the 5-year mortality were evaluated by multivariable Cox proportional hazards models., Results: Over a total of 1390 carotid revascularizations (carotid endarterectomy, n = 868 [62.4%]; carotid artery stenting, n = 522 [37.6%]), neurological perioperative complications occurred in 67 (4.7%) cases (38, 2.7% TIA; 29, 2.0% stroke). At 5-year follow-up, overall survival was significantly lower in patients with postoperative TIA (78.4 ± 8.0% vs 97.4 ± 0.6%; P < .001) and postoperative stroke (68.2 ± 14.4% vs 97.4 ± 0.6%; P = .03) compared with patients without neurological complications. By means of multivariate Cox analysis, postoperative TIA and stroke were independent predictors of decreased survival (hazard ratio [HR], 3.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-9.72; P = .04, and HR, 3.87; 95% CI, 1.13-13.19; P = .03, respectively), other than age >80 years, postoperative myocardial infarction, and chronic renal failure (HR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.41-4.90; P = .01; HR, 4.33; 95% CI, 2.74-23.79; P = .04; HR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.04-6.19; P = .04, respectively)., Conclusions: TIAs are significant events, possibly determined by a wider extent of atherosclerotic disease, with important effects on long-term mortality similar to that in strokes. Different from most trials evaluating the outcomes of revascularization techniques, the incidence of perioperative TIA should be accurately considered in the analysis., (Copyright © 2014 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in the early period after the onset of cerebral neurologic symptoms seems to be useful in the prevention of recurrent stroke while safety is still under debate. Asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis could be associated with silent cerebral ischemic events (CIEs) detectable on cerebral computed tomographic (CT) scans, but is not clear if (or how) silent cerebral lesions could influence the outcome of CEA. The aim of our work was to analyze the outcome of CEA according to the timing and type of neurologic symptoms and to evaluate the outcome of CEA in asymptomatic patients with silent cerebral events detected with preoperative cerebral CT scans., Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent CEA between January 2006 and December 2010 were collected in a dedicated database and divided into a symptomatic group (with CEA performed within 2 weeks, 2-4 weeks, and 4-24 weeks after occurrence of the symptoms) and an asymptomatic group (with either positive-according to the classification of Stevens et al.-or negative preoperative cerebral CT scan) to evaluate the perioperative outcome in terms of CIEs, myocardial infarction (MI), and death. Results were compared using the chi-squared test, analysis of variance, and multivariate analysis., Results: During the study period, 610 CEAs were performed, resulting in 16 (2.6%) CIEs (10 [1.6%] strokes and 6 [1.0%] transient CIEs), 6 (1.0%) MIs, and 3 (0.5%) deaths. Symptomatic patients (n = 162; 22.6%) were independently associated with a higher incidence of stroke and MI compared with asymptomatic patients (7 [5.1%] vs. 3 [0.7%]; P < 0.002; 2 [1.4%] vs. 4 [0.9%]; P < 0.02; respectively). The analysis of CEA outcome according to the timing of revascularization found no differences among groups within 2 weeks (5 [7.9%]), 2-4 weeks (no events), and after 4 weeks (6 [7.4%]); in the same manner, the type of preoperative symptom was not associated with significant differences in outcome. Preoperative positive cerebral CT scans were present in 88 (19.6%) asymptomatic patients and were associated with a higher incidence of perioperative CIEs (7 [7.9%] vs. 2 [0.5%]; P = 0.001), transient CIEs (4 [4.5%] vs. 2 [0.5%]; P = 0.004), and stroke (3 [3.0%] vs. 0 [0.0%]; P = 0.001)., Conclusions: Although symptomatic patients have a higher risk of perioperative complications compared with asymptomatic patients, early CEA after symptom onset does not influence the results. Asymptomatic patients with positive CT scans who undergo CEA have a higher rate of neurologic complications., (Crown Copyright © 2013. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective/background: The influence of contralateral carotid occlusion (CCO) on the outcome of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and stenting (CAS) is debated. This study aims to evaluate CEA and CAS results in patients with CCO., Methods: All carotid revascularizations from 2005 to 2011 were analyzed, focusing on the role of CCO on 30-day cerebral events and death (CED). A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the results of the literature by random effect., Results: Of the 1,218 carotid revascularizations performed in our institution, 706 (57.9%) were CEA and 512 (42.1%) were CAS. CED occurred in 3.6% of the CEAs and 8.2% of the CASs (p = .001). CCO was present in 37 (5.2%) CEAs and 38 (7.4%) CASs. In CEA, CCO patients had a higher CED compared with the non-CCO patients (16.2% vs. 2.9%, p = .001), as confirmed by multiple regression analysis (OR [odds ratio]: 5.1[1.7-14.5]). In CAS, CED was not significantly different in the CCO and non-CCO patients (2.6% vs. 8.7%, p = 0.23). The comparative analysis of the CCO patients showed a higher CED in CEA compared with that in CAS (16.2% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.04). Meta-analysis of 33 papers (27 on CEA and 6 on CAS) revealed that CCO was associated with a higher CED in CEA, but not in CAS (OR: 1.82 [1.57-2.11]; OR: 1.22 [0.60-2.49], respectively)., Conclusion: CCO can be considered as a risk factor for CED in CEA, but not in CAS. CAS appears to be associated with lower CED than CEA in CCO patients., (Copyright © 2013 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess the influence of oral anticoagulant therapy conversion to heparin (OAT-CH) on carotid endarterectomy (CEA) outcomes and the influence of unmodified oral anticoagulant therapy (OAT) on carotid artery stenting (CAS) and to compare the outcomes of CEA in OAT-CH with CAS in ongoing OAT., Materials and Methods: The 30-day results from all patients who underwent CEA and CAS in a 6-year period were analyzed for stroke, death, myocardial infarction (MI), and hematoma of the access site requiring surgical evacuation. We evaluated the influence of OAT-CH in CEA and the influence of OAT in CAS and compared CEA and CAS outcomes in patients receiving OAT-CH and OAT., Results: Among 1,222 carotid revascularizations, there were 711 CEAs (58.1%) and 511 CAS procedures (41.9%). In the CEA group, 31 (4.4%) patients were treated with OAT-CH, and these patients had a significantly higher complication rate compared with patients not receiving OAT, including death (1 [3.2%] vs 4 [0.6%]; P = .04), stroke (4 [12.9%] vs 10 [1.4%]; P = .001), and hematoma (3 [9.6%] vs 11 [1.6%]; P = .02). In CAS, the results were similar in patients receiving OAT (30 [5.8%]) and patients not receiving OAT. Patients receiving OAT who underwent CAS had better outcomes than patients receiving OAT-CH who underwent CEA, including stroke, death, MI, and hematoma combined (0 [0.0%] vs 7 [22.5%]; P =.01)., Conclusions: OAT management significantly influences the results of carotid revascularization. Because CAS with unmodified OAT had a significantly better outcome than CEA with OAT-CH, carotid revascularization strategies should favor CAS rather than CEA in this setting., (Copyright © 2013. Published by Elsevier Inc.)