Outcome of carotid endarterectomy under local anaesthesia with respect to the patients’ risk profile

VASA ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 225-233 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksic ◽  
Luebke ◽  
Brunkwall
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Carotid Endarterectomy ◽  
Complication Rate ◽  
Local Anaesthesia ◽  
High Risk Group ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Hostile Neck ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Angioplasty And Stenting

Background: In the present study the perioperative complication rate is compared between high- and low-risk patients when carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is routinely performed under local anaesthesia (LA). Patients and methods: From January 2000 through June 2008 1220 consecutive patients underwent CEA under LA. High-risk patients fulfilled at least one of the following characteristics: ASA 4 classification, “hostile neck”, recurrent ICA stenosis, contralateral ICA occlusion, age ≥ 80 years. The combined complication rate comprised any new neurological deficit (TIA or stroke), myocardial infarction or death within 30 days after CEA, which was compared between patient groups. Results: Overall 309 patients (25%) were attributed to the high-risk group, which differed significantly regarding sex distribution (more males: 70% vs. 63%, p = 0,011), neurological presentation (more asymptomatic: 72% vs. 62%, p = 0,001) and shunt necessity (33% vs. 14%, p < 0,001). In 32 patients 17 TIAs and 15 strokes were observed. In 3 patients a myocardial infarction occurred. Death occurred in one patient following a stroke and in another patient following myocardial infarction, leading to a combined complication rate of 2,9% (35/1220). In the multivariate analysis only previous neurological symptomatology (OR 2,85, 95% CI 1,38-5,91) and intraoperative shunting (OR 5,57, 95% CI 2,69-11,55) were identified as independent risk factors for an increased combined complication rate. Conclusions: With the routine use of LA, CEA was not associated with worse outcome in high-risk patients. Considering the data reported in the literature, it does not appear justified to refer high-risk patients principally to carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) when LA can be chosen to perform CEA.

P3609Temporal trends of the management and outcomes of patients after myocardial infarction according to the risk for recurrent cardiovascular events

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
T Grinberg ◽  
T Bental ◽  
Y Hammer ◽  
A R Assali ◽  
H Vaknin-Assa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Cardiovascular Events ◽  
Risk Group ◽  
Temporal Trends ◽  
High Risk Group ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Patients

Abstract Background Following Myocardial Infarction (MI), patients are at increased risk for recurrent cardiovascular events, particularly during the immediate period. Yet some patients are at higher risk than others, owing to their clinical characteristics and comorbidities, these high-risk patients are less often treated with guideline-recommended therapies. Aim To examine temporal trends in treatment and outcomes of patients with MI according to the TIMI risk score for secondary prevention (TRS2°P), a recently validated risk stratification tool. Methods A retrospective cohort study of patients with an acute MI, who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and were discharged alive between 2004–2016. Temporal trends were examined in the early (2004–2010) and late (2011–2016) time-periods. Patients were stratified by the TRS2°P to a low (≤1), intermediate (2) or high-risk group (≥3). Clinical outcomes included 30-day MACE (death, MI, target vessel revascularization, coronary artery bypass grafting, unstable angina or stroke) and 1-year mortality. Results Among 4921 patients, 31% were low-risk, 27% intermediate-risk and 42% high-risk. Compared to low and intermediate-risk patients, high-risk patients were older, more commonly female, and had more comorbidities such as hypertension, diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, and chronic kidney disease. They presented more often with non ST elevation MI and 3-vessel disease. High-risk patients were less likely to receive drug eluting stents and potent anti-platelet drugs, among other guideline-recommended therapies. Evidently, they experienced higher 30-day MACE (8.1% vs. 3.9% and 2.1% in intermediate and low-risk, respectively, P<0.001) and 1-year mortality (10.4% vs. 3.9% and 1.1% in intermediate and low-risk, respectively, P<0.001). During time, comparing the early to the late-period, the use of potent antiplatelets and statins increased among the entire cohort (P<0.001). However, only the high-risk group demonstrated a significantly lower 30-day MACE (P=0.001). During time, there were no differences in 1-year mortality rate among all risk categories. Temporal trends in 30-day MACE by TRS2°P Conclusion Despite a better application of guideline-recommended therapies, high-risk patients after MI are still relatively undertreated. Nevertheless, they demonstrated the most notable improvement in outcomes over time.

scholarly journals Carotid endarterectomy in sapphire-eligible high-risk patients: implications for selecting patients for carotid angioplasty and stenting

2004 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 958-965 ◽  
Author(s):  
Geza Mozes ◽  
Timothy M Sullivan ◽  
Diego R Torres-Russotto ◽  
Thomas C Bower ◽  
Tanya L Hoskin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Carotid Endarterectomy ◽  
Carotid Angioplasty ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Angioplasty And Stenting ◽  
Carotid Angioplasty And Stenting

scholarly journals Demographic And Technical Risk Factors Of 30-Day Stroke, Myocardial Infarction, And/Or Death In Standard And High Risk Patients Who Underwent Carotid Angioplasty And Stenting

2017 ◽  
pp. 13
Author(s):  
Samaneh Yousefi ◽  
Ehsan Bahramali ◽  
Safoora Kokabi ◽  
Seyed Taghi Heydari ◽  
Abdolhamid Shariat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Carotid Angioplasty ◽  
Short Term ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Angioplasty And Stenting ◽  
Carotid Angioplasty And Stenting

Background: Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is an accepted treatment to prevent stroke in patients with carotid artery stenosis. The purpose of this study is to identify risk factors for major complications after carotid angioplasty and stenting.Methods and Material: This is a prospective study conducted at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences in southern Iran from March 2011 to June 2014. Consecutive patients undergoing carotid angioplasty and stenting were enrolled. Both standard risk and high risk patients for endarterectomy were enrolled. Demographic data, atherosclerotic risk factors, site of stenosis, degree of stenosis, and data regarding technical factors were recorded. 30-day stroke, myocardial infarction, and/or death were considered as the composite primary outcome of the study.Results:  two hundred and fifty one patients were recruited (mean age: 71.1+ 9.6 years, male: 65.3%).  One hundred and seventy eight (70.9%) patients were symptomatic; 73 (29.1%), 129 (51.4%), 165 (65.7%) and 62 (24.7%) patients were diabetic, hyperlipidemic, hypertensive and smoker respectively. CAS performed for left ICA in 113 (45.4%) patients. 14 (5.6%) patients had Sequential bilateral stenting. Mean stenosis of operated ICA was 80.2 +13.8 %. Embolic protection device was used in 203 (96.2%) patients. Predilation and post-dilation were performed in 39 (18.5%) and 182 (86.3%) patients respectively. Composite outcome was observed in 3.6% (3.2% stroke, 0% myocardial infarction and 1.2% death). Left sided lesions and presence of DM was significantly associated with poor short term outcome. (P value: 0.025 and 0.020, respectively)Conclusion: There was a higher risk of short term major complications in diabetic patients and left carotid artery intervention. 

Safety and Efficacy of Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting in High-Risk Patients

2006 ◽  
Vol 72 (8) ◽  
pp. 694-699 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rabih A. Chaer ◽  
Brian G. Derubertis ◽  
Susan M. Trocciola ◽  
Stephanie C. Lin ◽  
Robert Hynecek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Carotid Angioplasty ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Angioplasty And Stenting ◽  
Carotid Angioplasty And Stenting

Performance of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) may be associated with an increased risk in patients with significant comorbid medical conditions, neck irradiation, or previous CEA. This study compared the results of CEA with carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) in high-risk patients treated for carotid stenosis. Five hundred forty-five patients who underwent CEA and 148 patients who underwent CAS were evaluated. For patients undergoing CEA, general anesthesia was used in 91 per cent, electroencephalographic monitoring was used in 63 per cent, and shunting was performed in 19.8 per cent. Cerebral protection devices were used in 145/148 of CAS cases, and self-expanding stents were used in all cases. Evaluated end points included major cardiovascular events, and a composite of death, stroke, or myocardial infarction for the duration of the follow-up. Mean follow-up was 18 months for CAS and 23 months for CEA. Significant differences were present in patient age (CAS, 75 ± 11.0 years vs CEA, 71 ± 9 years, P = 0.012), however, there were no significant differences ( P = NS) in gender or smoking history. The mean modified Goldman Score was significantly higher for CAS (21.1 ± 14.8 [95% confidence interval = 18, 24]) than for CEA (6.3 ± 6.8 [95% confidence interval = 5.7, 6.9]; P = 0.0001) patients. The incidence of periprocedural complications did not vary significantly between patients treated with CAS (CVA, 1.4%; myocardial infarction [MI], 1.4%; death, 0.7%; CVA/MI/death, 3.4%) compared with CEA (CVA, 1.8%; MI, 1.1%; death, 0.4%; CVA/MI/death, 4.0%). CAS is equivalent to CEA in safety and efficacy, even when performed in patients who may be at increased surgical risk.

scholarly journals Pre-hospital risk assessment in suspected non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: A prospective observational study

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominique N van Dongen ◽  
Rudolf T Tolsma ◽  
Marion J Fokkert ◽  
Erik A Badings ◽  
Aize van der Sluis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Risk Group ◽  
High Risk Group ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Heart Score ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
St Elevation

Background: Pre-hospital risk stratification of non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) by the complete HEART score has not yet been assessed. We investigated whether pre-hospital risk stratification of patients with suspected NSTE-ACS using the HEART score is accurate in predicting major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Methods: This is a prospective observational study, including 700 patients with suspected NSTE-ACS. Risk stratification was performed by ambulance paramedics, using the HEART score; low risk was defined as HEART score ⩽ 3. Primary endpoint was occurrence of MACE within 45 days after inclusion. Secondary endpoint was myocardial infarction or death. Results: A total of 172 patients (24.6%) were stratified as low risk and 528 patients (75.4%) as intermediate to high risk. Mean age was 53.9 years in the low risk group and 66.7 years in the intermediate to high risk group ( p<0.001), 50% were male in the low risk group versus 60% in the intermediate to high risk group ( p=0.026). MACE occurred in five patients in the low risk group (2.9%) and in 111 (21.0%) patients at intermediate or high risk ( p<0.001). There were no deaths in the low risk group and the occurrence of acute myocardial infarction in this group was 1.2%. In the high risk group six patients died (1.1%) and 76 patients had myocardial infarction (14.4%). Conclusions: In suspected NSTE-ACS, pre-hospital risk stratification by ambulance paramedics, including troponin measurement, is accurate in differentiating between low and intermediate to high risk. Future studies should investigate whether transportation of low risk patients to a hospital can be avoided, and whether high risk patients benefit from immediate transfer to a hospital with early coronary angiography possibilities.

scholarly journals Appropriate secondary prevention and clinical outcomes after acute myocardial infarction according to atherothrombotic risk stratification: The FAST-MI 2010 registry

2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 411-419 ◽  
Author(s):  
Victoria Tea ◽  
Marc Bonaca ◽  
Chekrallah Chamandi ◽  
Marie-Christine Iliou ◽  
Thibaut Lhermusier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Acute Myocardial Infarction ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Secondary Prevention ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
St Elevation ◽  
Group 3 ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Background Full secondary prevention medication regimen is often under-prescribed after acute myocardial infarction. Design The purpose of this study was to analyse the relationship between prescription of appropriate secondary prevention treatment at discharge and long-term clinical outcomes according to risk level defined by the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) Risk Score for Secondary Prevention (TRS-2P) after acute myocardial infarction. Methods We used data from the 2010 French Registry of Acute ST-Elevation or non-ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction (FAST-MI) registry, including 4169 consecutive acute myocardial infarction patients admitted to cardiac intensive care units in France. Level of risk was stratified in three groups using the TRS-2P score: group 1 (low-risk; TRS-2P=0/1); group 2 (intermediate-risk; TRS-2P=2); and group 3 (high-risk; TRS-2P≥3). Appropriate secondary prevention treatment was defined according to the latest guidelines (dual antiplatelet therapy and moderate/high dose statins for all; new-P2Y12 inhibitors, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin-receptor-blockers and beta-blockers as indicated). Results Prevalence of groups 1, 2 and 3 was 46%, 25% and 29% respectively. Appropriate secondary prevention treatment at discharge was used in 39.5%, 37% and 28% of each group, respectively. After multivariate adjustment, evidence-based treatments at discharge were associated with lower rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (death, re-myocardial infarction or stroke) at five years especially in high-risk patients: hazard ratio = 0.82 (95% confidence interval: 0.59–1.12, p = 0.21) in group 1, 0.74 (0.54–1.01; p = 0.06) in group 2, and 0.64 (0.52–0.79, p < 0.001) in group 3. Conclusions Use of appropriate secondary prevention treatment at discharge was inversely correlated with patient risk. The increased hazard related to lack of prescription of recommended medications was much larger in high-risk patients. Specific efforts should be directed at better prescription of recommended treatment, particularly in high-risk patients.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document