Partial Eversion Carotid Endarterectomy versus Conventional Techniques for Significant Carotid Stenosis

Abstract

Background: To compare the outcomes of patients who were submitted to partial carotid endarterectomy (P-CEA) to those of patients who underwent standard conventional CEA with patch closure (C-CEA) and eversion CEA (E-CEA) for a significant carotid stenosis.

Methods: Data of patients who consecutively underwent CEA from January 2014 to December 2018 for a significant carotid stenosis were retrospectively collected. Primary outcomes included mortality and the occurrence of neurologic and cardiologic complications, both at 30 days and during follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the occurrence of perioperative local complications (i.e. cranial nerve injuries, hematomas) and restenosis during follow-up. P values < 0.5 were considered statistically significant.

Results: Three-hundred twenty-seven patients (241 males, 74%) underwent CEA for carotid stenosis (28.6% symptomatic). P-CEA was performed in 202 patients (61.8%), while C-CEA and E-CEA were performed in 103 and 22 cases respectively. At 30 days, neurologic complications were not significantly different among the 3 groups (2.8% in the group of C-CEA, 2.4% after P-CEA and 0% in E-CEA patients, P = 0.81), neither during follow-up. Perioperative local complications also were not significantly different among the 3 groups (P = 0.16).

Conclusions: P-CEA had similar outcomes if compared to C-CEA and to E-CEA in terms of perioperative mortality, occurrence of neurologic and cardiologic complications, and occurrence of local complications. Also, in the long-term, P-CEA, C-CEA, and E-CEA were burdened by similar rates of mortality, neurologic, and cardiologic complications and restenosis.