This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Web of Science (5) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Calaitges, J. Articles by Annest, S. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Calaitges, J. Articles by Annest, S. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Eversion Carotid Endarterectomy: A Safe, Advantageous Alternative to Conventional Carotid Endarterectomy

A Preliminary Report

Ajaya Kashyap, M.D.

Stephen Annest, M.D., F.A.C.S.

Department of Surgery, Guthrie Clinic, Sayre, Pennsylvania

Objective: To compare the results and time and cost efficacy of eversion carotid endarterectomy (ECEA) with standard carotid endarterectomy (SCEA).

Methods: A retrospective analysis of 88 carotid endarterectomies performed by the residents under the guidance of the senior author between January 1, 1991, and December 31, 1993, was done. Fifty-five patients underwent SCEA (44 vein patch, 11 primary closure) and 33 had ECEA. The two groups were compared for operative time, intraoperative evaluation, cost, immediate and delayed morbidity, and restenosis ( 50%).

Results: The two groups were found to be similar for age, sex ratio, and associated diseases. The indications for surgery were transient ischemic attack (TIA) (57% ECEA, 64% SCEA), previous stroke with minimal residual deficit (9% ECEA, 17% SCEA), and asymptomatic high-grade stenosis (34% ECEA, 19% SCEA). The average operative time for ECEA was significantly less (99.2 vs 135.2 minutes, P < 0.02). The mean blood loss was also less for ECEA (86 vs 181 cc). Two SCEA patients had immediate postoperative thrombosis resulting in 1 cerebrovascular accident (CVA) (1.8%), and 3 SCEA patients had cranial nerve injuries. In follow-up, 1 patient with SCEA had restenosis and 1 had a CVA unrelated to carotid disease. Morbidity associated with ECEA included 1 unsuccessful ECEA requiring interposition vein grafting and 1 intraoperative repair of an intimal flap. There was no associated residual morbidity. There was no significant difference in stroke rate between the two groups. The operative cost (excluding surgeon fee) was 28% higher for SCEA patients.

Conclusion: Eversion carotid endarterectomy is a safe procedure and can be an important addition to a surgeon's armamentarium in efforts to cut costs while maintaining quality.

Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Vol. 30, No. 5, 381-385 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/153857449603000506


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?