Effect of severe contralateral carotid stenosis or occlusion on early and late outcomes after carotid endarterectomy

5Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Purpose: We aimed to compare clinical outcomes after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) between Korean patients with and without severe contralateral extracranial carotid stenosis or occlusion (SCSO). Methods: Between January 2004 and December 2014, a total of 661 patients who underwent 731 CEAs were stratified by SCSO (non-SCSO and SCSO groups) and analyzed retrospectively. The study outcomes included the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as stroke or myocardial infarction, and all-cause mortality during the perioperative period and within 4 years after CEA. Results: There were no significant differences in the incidence of MACE or any individual MACE manifestations between the 2 groups during the perioperative period or within 4 years after CEA. On multivariate analysis to identify clinical variables associated with long-term study outcomes, older age (hazard ratios [HRs], 1.06; 95% confidence intervals [CIs], 1.03–1.09; P < 0.001) and diabetes mellitus (HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.14–2.57; P = 0.010) were significantly associated with an increased risk of MACE occurrence, while preexisting SCSO was not associated with long-term incidence of MACE and individual MACE components. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed similar MACE-free (P = 0.509), overall (P = 0.642), and stroke-free (P = 0.650) survival rates in the 2 groups. Conclusion: There were no significant differences in MACE incidence after CEA between the non-SCSO and SCSO groups, and preexisting SCSO was not associated with an increased risk of perioperative or long-term MACE occurrence.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jeong, M. J., Kwon, H., Kim, M. J., Han, Y., Kwon, T. W., & Cho, Y. P. (2019). Effect of severe contralateral carotid stenosis or occlusion on early and late outcomes after carotid endarterectomy. Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research, 97(4), 202–209. https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2019.97.4.202

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free