Vascular Surgery: International, Multispecialty Position Statement on Carotid Stenting, 2013 and Contributions of a Vascular Surgeon at Peak Career – Richard Paul Cambria, MD
Author and Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN
Part One:
Vascular Surgery International, Multispecialty Position Statement on Carotid Stenting, 2013
Part Two:
Contributions of a Vascular Surgeon at Peak Career – Richard Paul Cambria, MD, Chief, Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Co-Director, Thoracic Aortic Center @ MGH
I. Recollection of a visit at Dr. Cambria’s Office, 2004
II. Shadowing Dr. Cambria in OR @MGH
III. Dr. Cambria: Selection of Contributions to Scientific Research on Vascular Surgery
IV. Cardiovascular Clinical Observational Experience – Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN
V. Cases with Complications: CEA and CAS
Part Three:
On 8/1/2013, Cleveland Clinic Reports Equivalence between carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and open-heart surgery (OHS) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) followed by coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery or non-CABG cardiac surgery
Part One:
Vascular Surgery International, Multispecialty Position Statement on Carotid Stenting, 2013 Part
No other invasive intervention procedure in the history of Vascular Surgery has stormed the profession more than the two treatment options for carotid artery partial to complete blockage than Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS).
The debate required evidence based resolution for the two treatment options in terms of patient outcomes and adverse events. As the title of the Position statement explained below, the verdict is non equivocal: Routine Carotid Stenting is inferior to Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) from a patient safety and outcomes.
A special Report was published in
Stroke. 2013;44:1186-1190; originally published online March 19, 2013
Why Calls for More Routine Carotid Stenting Are Currently Inappropriate : An International, Multispecialty, Expert Review and Position Statement
Anne L. Abbott, MD, PhD, FRACP; Mark A. Adelman, MD; Andrei V. Alexandrov, MD;
P. Alan Barber, PhD, MBChB, FRACP; Henry J.M. Barnett, CC, MD; Jonathan Beard, FRCS, ChM, MEd;
Peter Bell, FRCS, MD, DSC, KBE; Martin Björck, MD, PhD; David Blacker, MD, FRACP;
Leo H. Bonati, MD; Martin M. Brown, MD, FRCP; Clifford J. Buckley, MD, FACS;
Richard P. Cambria, MD; John E. Castaldo, MD; Anthony J. Comerota, MD, FACS, RVT;
E. Sander Connolly, Jr, MD; Ronald L. Dalman, MD, FACS;
Alun H. Davies, MA, DM, FRCS, FHEA, FEBVS, FACPh; Hans‐Henning Eckstein, MD, PhD;
Rishad Faruqi, MD, FRCS (Eng), FRCS (Ed), FACS; Thomas E. Feasby, MD; Gustav Fraedrich, MD;
Peter Gloviczki, MD; Graeme J. Hankey, MD, FRACP; Robert E. Harbaugh, MD, FAANS, FACS;
Eitan Heldenberg, MD; Michael G. Hennerici, MD; Michael D. Hill, MD, MSc, FRCPC;
Timothy J. Kleinig, PhD FRACP, MBBS (Hons), BA;
Dimitri P. Mikhailidis, BSc, MSc, MD, FRSPH, FCP, FFPM, FRCP, FRCPath;
Wesley S. Moore, MD; Ross Naylor, MD, FRCS; Andrew Nicolaides, MS, FRCS, PhD (Hon);
Kosmas I. Paraskevas, MD, PhD; David M. Pelz, MD, FRCPC; James W. Prichard, MD;
Grant Purdie, MD, FRACP; Jean‐Baptiste Ricco, MD, PhD; Peter A. Ringleb, MD, PhD;
Thomas Riles, MD; Peter M. Rothwell, MD, PhD, FRCP, FMedSci;
Peter Sandercock, MA, DM, FRCPE, FMedSci; Henrik Sillesen, MD, DMSc;
J. David Spence, BA, MBA, MD, FRCPC, FCAHS; Francesco Spinelli, MD;
Jonathon Sturm, MBChB, PhD; Aaron Tan, MD, FRACP; Ankur Thapar, BSc, MBBS, MRCS;
Frank J. Veith, MD; Tissa Wijeratne, MD, FRACP; Wei Zhou, MD
[DISCLOSURE for Richard Cambria: He is co‐PI for a future Transcervical Carotid Stenting/Flow Reversal Trial (ROADSTER).]
Special Reports Main Points
Key Words: carotid angioplasty/stenting ◼ carotid endarterectomy ◼ carotid
stenosis ◼ health policy ◼ stroke prevention
In conclusion, current global evidence shows that, even in the best academic centers, CAS is less effective (causing more strokes) and more expensive than CEA. It is premature that some guidelines have recently added support for routine practice CAS as an alternative to CEA for
- asymptomatic43,44 and
- low/ average surgical risk symptomatic patients43–45
because CAS may easily be misinterpreted by readers as being equivalent for
- stroke prevention46 and
- historical procedural standards were cited.
CAS, for these patients, should still only be performed and paid for within well‐designed, adequately powered trials. The US Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services is doing its job and setting an excellent global example. It is protecting Medicare beneficiaries from routine practice procedures, which are currently more likely to harm them and waste finite resources47 that could be used for their advantage. Meanwhile, we need to reassess the current routine practice role of CEA and deliver optimal current medical treatment to all who need it.
To avoid misguidance from calls for more routine practice (nontrial) carotid angioplasty/stenting (CAS), we need to distinguish relevant facts and patients’ best interests from all else (distractions). A recent editorial by White and Jaff1 is one publication which illustrates this need particularly well. First, these authors are correct in reminding us that the responsibility of physicians is to provide best patient care, putting aside personal interest. This is inherent in any profession.2 However, misconception, bias, and conflict of interest exist. Therefore, healthcare payment organizations, such as the US Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services are important gatekeepers to facilitate patient access to interventions that are likely to help them, as opposed to all others.
It is also true that CAS and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) result in better outcomes when patients are carefully selected and skilled operators perform the procedures in experienced centers.1 We would add that key indicators (such as 30‐day periprocedural stroke/death rates) must be accurately measured in routine (real‐world) practice, particularly as stroke and death rates here may be unacceptably higher than in trials. 3–5 Therefore, it is most appropriate, as suggested by White and Jaff,1 that coverage for carotid procedures be dependent on facility accreditation and audited measurement of key standards indicators in all practices performing these procedures.
This is a priority issue. White and Jaff1 also correctly state “a major change in evidence based stroke prevention strategies will require clinical trial data. ,7,8 meta‐analyses, and routine practice.9–14 Most of these data relate to low/average risk symptomatic patients and demonstrate that, for these patients, even in the best academic centers, CAS is consistently associated with significantly higher rates of stroke or death (during or after the periprocedural period) compared with CEA.
It is incorrect that CREST “failed to show a difference in overall stroke rate between CAS and CEA” as stated by White and Jaff.1 In CREST, for average surgical risk symptomatic patients, the periprocedural stroke and death rates were 6.0% for CAS versus 3.2% for CEA (hazard ratio, 1.89; 95% confidence interval, 1.11–3.21; P=0.02).8
The higher periprocedural risk of stroke or death with CAS is particularly evident in the most senior patients (>68–70 years),13,15,16 those undergoing the procedure <7 days of incident cerebral or retinal ischemic symptoms17 (when CEA has the highest stroke prevention potential),18 those undergoing CAS outside clinical trials,19 and those with certain anatomic features.20 No study has shown that CAS is more effective than CEA in preventing stroke. Further, most analyses show that CAS costs considerably more,21–24 despite calculations derived from CREST results.25 No randomized trial has been adequately powered to compare the procedural and longer term risk of CAS on stroke or death in low/average risk asymptomatic patients. However, in CREST, the direction of effect was toward nearly twice the risk (periprocedural stroke/death rate was 2.5% for CAS versus 1.4% for CEA; hazard ratio, 1.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.79–4.42; P=0.15).8 This was consistent with the significantly higher periprocedural stroke rates seen in CREST CAS‐treated symptomatic patients8 and nontrial CAS‐treated asymptomatic patients.9,26
Meanwhile, medical treatment for asymptomatic carotid disease has improved significantly since past randomized trials of medical treatment alone versus additional CEA.27–32 Medical treatment consists of identification of risk factors for heart and vascular disease and risk reduction using healthy lifestyles and appropriate drugs. Improvement in medical treatment is clear from robust analyses of all published comparable, quality stroke rate calculations (including from, and within, randomized surgical trials) of patients with 50% to 99% asymptomatic carotid stenosis. This knowledge is not, as claimed by White and Jaff,1 derived from short‐cut extrapolation from coronary artery trials. Using the same standardized rate calculations, we are now seeing an average annual rate of ipsilateral stroke of ≈0.5% with medical treatment alone.30,33,34 This is about 3X— lower than that of asymptomatic CREST CAS‐treated patients and about half the rate of asymptomatic CREST CEA‐treated patients.7,9 This low rate with medical treatment is likely to fall further with improvements in efficacy, definition, and implementation.
However, recently published rate calculations indicate that, at most, only ≈2.5% of low/average CEA risk patients with 50% to 99% asymptomatic carotid stenosis will receive a stroke prevention benefit from CEA or CAS during their remaining average 10‐year lifetime if they receive good, current medical treatment (assuming the procedural risk of stroke/death is always zero).35 This indicates that a one‐size‐fits‐all procedural approach for these asymptomatic patients is now unlikely to be beneficial overall. We need to be much more selective. Research is required to determine which asymptomatic subgroups now benefit from carotid procedures in addition to current optimal medical treatment.
We have found no direct information about the influence of current medical treatment in patients with low/average CEA risk symptomatic carotid stenosis. However, improving results for medically treated asymptomatic patients27–32 and procedural trial asymptomatic and symptomatic patients8 indicate that a 6% periprocedural risk of
- stroke or
- death (the current standard) is now too high.
New randomized and risk stratification studies are required using current optimal medical treatment and procedural methods.36 For example,
- improved plaque37 and
- thrombus identification38 or
- embolic signal detection39 above and below the stenosis
may help better identify carotid plaques responsible for carotid territory ischemic symptoms. Further, the best approach for patients with high surgical risk carotid stenosis remains uncertain because risk of stroke or death has not been measured with any standard of medical treatment or adequate procedural trials. However, some registries show significantly higher risks of stroke/death with CAS compared with CEA in asymptomatic and symptomatic high surgical risk patients.40
Incidence of MI
Calls from other authors for more routine CAS on the grounds of lower periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI) rates compared with CEA are distracting.41 MI is not a measure of stroke prevention efficacy, even though it is an important procedural complication. The inclusion of periprocedural MI with stroke and death in the primary outcome measure in CREST resulted in primary outcome equivalence between CAS and CEA. However, it did not result in efficacy equivalence. In CREST, 1.1% (14/1262) of CAS patients had periprocedural clinical MI (biomarkers plus chest pain/ECG evidence) compared with 2.3% (28/1240) of CEA patients7 (P=0.03). However, periprocedural stroke was nearly twice as common (81/2502; 3.2%)7 as periprocedural clinical MI (42/2502; 1.7%) and, as mentioned above, CAS caused almost twice as many of these strokes as CEA. Further, in CREST, the mortality rate up to 4 years was equally poor for CREST patients with periprocedural stroke (20%),42 periprocedural clinical MI (19%),41 or periprocedural biomarker‐positive only MI (25%).41 Finally, nonfatal stroke was associated with a poorer quality of life at 1 year than nonfatal MI.7 Therefore, MI is a measure of carotid procedural risk (not benefit) and must be considered separately from stroke risk. Moreover, in CREST, CAS‐associated stroke was more troublesome for patients than CEA‐associated MI.
Conclusion
Calls for More Routine Carotid Stenting Are Currently Inappropriate, 3/2013
SOURCE
Carotid Artery Disease
What is carotid artery disease?
Carotid artery disease, also called carotid artery stenosis, occurs when the carotid arteries, the main blood vessels that carry oxygenated blood to the brain, become narrowed. The narrowing of the carotid arteries is most commonly related to atherosclerosis (a buildup of plaque, which is a deposit of fatty substances, cholesterol, cellular waste products, calcium, and fibrin in the inner lining of an artery). Atherosclerosis, or “hardening of the arteries,” is a vascular disease (disease of the arteries and veins). Carotid artery disease is similar to coronary artery disease, in which blockages occur in the arteries of the heart, and may cause a heart attack.
To better understand how carotid artery disease affects the brain, a basic review of the anatomy of the circulation system of the brain follows.
What are the carotid arteries?
The main supply of blood to the brain is carried by the carotid arteries. The carotid arteries branch off from the aorta (the largest artery in the body) a short distance from the heart, and extend upward through the neck carrying oxygen-rich blood to the brain.
There are four carotid arteries: the right and left internal carotid arteries and the right and left external carotid arteries. One pair (external and internal) is located on each side of the neck. Just as a pulse can be felt in the wrists, a pulse can also be felt on either side of the neck over the carotid arteries.
Why are the carotid arteries important?
Because the carotid arteries deliver blood to the brain, carotid artery disease can have serious implications by reducing the flow of oxygen to the brain. The brain needs a constant supply of oxygen in order to function. Even a brief interruption in blood supply can cause problems. Brain cells begin to die after just a few minutes without blood or oxygen. If the narrowing of the carotid arteries becomes severe enough to block blood flow, or a piece of atherosclerotic plaque breaks off and obstructs blood flow to the brain, a stroke may occur.
What causes carotid artery disease?
Atherosclerosis is the most common cause of carotid artery disease. It is unknown exactly how atherosclerosis begins or what causes it. Atherosclerosis is a slow, progressive, vascular disease that starts as early as childhood. However, the disease has the potential to progress rapidly. It is generally characterized by the accumulation of fatty deposits along the innermost layer of the arteries. If the disease process progresses, plaque formation may take place. Plaque is made up of deposits of smooth muscle cells, fatty substances, cholesterol, calcium, and cellular waste products. This thickening narrows the arteries and can decrease blood flow or completely block the flow of blood to the brain.
Risk factors associated with atherosclerosis include:
- Older age
- Male
- Family history
- Race or ethnicity
- Genetic factors
- Hyperlipidemia (elevated fats in the blood)
- Hypertension (high blood pressure)
- Smoking
- Diabetes
- Obesity
- Diet high in saturated fat
- Lack of exercise
A risk factor is anything that may directly increase or be associated with a person’s chance of developing a disease. It may be an activity, such as smoking, diet, family history, or many other things. Different diseases have different risk factors.
Although these risk factors increase a person’s risk, they do not necessarily cause the disease. Some people with one or more risk factors never develop the disease, while others develop disease and have no known risk factors. Knowing your risk factors to any disease can help to guide you into the appropriate actions, including changing behaviors and being clinically monitored for the disease.
What are the symptoms of carotid artery disease?
Carotid artery disease may be asymptomatic (without symptoms) or symptomatic (with symptoms). Asymptomatic carotid disease is the presence of a significant amount of atherosclerotic buildup without obstructing enough blood flow to cause symptoms. However, a sufficiently tight stenosis will not always cause symptoms. Symptomatic carotid artery disease may result in either a transient ischemic attack (TIA) and/or a stroke (brain attack).
A transient ischemic attack (TIA) is a sudden or temporary loss of blood flow to an area of the brain, usually lasting a few minutes to one hour. Symptoms go away entirely within 24 hours, with complete recovery. Symptoms of a TIA may include, but are not limited to, the following:
- Sudden weakness or clumsiness of an arm and/or leg on one side of the body
- Sudden paralysis (inability to move) of an arm and/or leg on one side of the body
- Loss of coordination or movement
- Confusion, decreased ability to concentrate, dizziness, fainting, and/or headache
- Numbness or loss of sensation (feeling) in the face
- Numbness or loss of sensation in an arm and/or leg
- Temporary loss of vision or blurred vision
- Inability to speak clearly or slurred speech
TIA may be related to severe narrowing or blockage or from small pieces of an atherosclerotic plaque breaking off, traveling through the bloodstream, and lodging in small blood vessels in the brain. With TIA, there is rarely permanent brain damage.
Call for medical help immediately if you suspect a person is having a TIA, as it may be a warning sign that a stroke is about to occur. Not all strokes, however, are preceded by TIAs.
Stroke is another indicator of carotid artery disease. The symptoms of a stroke are the same as for a TIA. A stroke is loss of blood flow (ischemia) to the brain that continues long enough to cause permanent brain damage. Brain cells begin to die after just a few minutes without oxygen. The area of dead cells in tissues is called an infarct.
The area of the brain that suffered the loss of blood flow will determine what the physical or mental disability may be. This may include impaired ability with movement, speech, thinking and memory, bowel and bladder function, eating, emotional control, and other vital body functions. Recovery from the specific ability affected depends on the size and location of the stroke. A stroke may result in problems, such as weakness in an arm or leg or may cause paralysis, loss of speech, or even death.
The symptoms of carotid artery disease may resemble other medical conditions or problems. Always consult your doctor for a diagnosis.
How is carotid artery disease diagnosed?
In addition to a complete medical history and physical examination, diagnostic procedures for carotid artery disease may include any, or a combination, of the following:
- Auscultation (listening to) of carotid arteries. Placement of a stethoscope over the carotid artery to listen for a particular sound called a bruit (pronounced brew-ee). A bruit is an abnormal sound that is produced by blood passing through a narrowed artery. A bruit is generally considered a sign of an atherosclerotic artery; however, an artery may be diseased without producing this sound.
- Carotid artery duplex scan. A type of vascular ultrasound study performed to assess the blood flow of the carotid arteries. A carotid artery duplex scan is a noninvasive (the skin is not pierced) procedure. A probe called a transducer sends out ultrasonic sound waves at a frequency too high to be heard. When the transducer (like a microphone) is placed on the carotid arteries at certain locations and angles, the ultrasonic sound waves move through the skin and other body tissues to the blood vessels, where the waves echo off of the blood cells. The transducer picks up the reflected waves and sends them to an amplifier, which makes the ultrasonic sound waves audible. Absence or faintness of these sounds may indicate an obstruction to the blood flow.
- Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). A diagnostic procedure that uses a combination of large magnets, radiofrequencies, and a computer to produce detailed images of organs and structures within the body. To have this test done, you lie inside a big tube while magnets pass around your body. It is very loud. Sometimes it is done with IV contrast injected into your veins and sometimes not.
- Magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). A noninvasive diagnostic procedure that uses a combination of magnetic resonance technology (MRI) and intravenous (IV) contrast dye to visualize blood vessels. Contrast dye causes blood vessels to appear opaque on the MRI image, allowing the doctor to visualize the blood vessels being evaluated.
- Computed tomography scan (also called a CT or CAT scan). A diagnostic imaging procedure that uses a combination of X-rays and computer technology to produce horizontal, or axial, images (often called slices) of the body. A CT scan shows detailed images of any part of the body, including the bones, muscles, fat, and organs. CT scans are more detailed than general X-rays. Like an MRI, it is sometimes done with IV contrast injected into your veins and sometimes not.
- Angiography. An invasive procedure used to assess the degree of blockage or narrowing of the carotid arteries by taking X-ray images while a contrast dye in injected. The contrast dye helps to visualize the shape and flow of blood through the arteries as X-ray images are made.
Treatment for carotid artery disease
Specific treatment for carotid artery disease will be determined by your doctor based on:
- Your age, overall health, and medical history
- Extent of the disease
- Your signs and symptoms
- Your tolerance of specific medications, procedures, or therapies
- Expectations for the course of the disease
- Your opinion or preference
Carotid artery disease (asymptomatic or symptomatic) in which the narrowing of the carotid artery is less than 50 percent is most often treated medically. Asymptomatic disease with less than 70 percent narrowing may also be treated medically, depending on the individual situation.
Medical treatment for carotid artery disease may include:
- Modification of risk factors. Risk factors that may be modified include smoking, elevated cholesterol levels, elevated blood glucose levels, lack of exercise, poor dietary habits, and elevated blood pressure.
- Medications. Medications that may be used to treat carotid artery disease include:
- Antiplatelet medications. Medications used to decrease the ability of platelets in the blood to stick together and cause clots. Aspirin, clopidogrel, and dipyridamole are examples of antiplatelet medications.
- Antihyperlipidemics. Medications used to lower lipids (fats) in the blood, particularly cholesterol. Statins are a group of antihyperlipidemic medications, and include simvastatin, atorvastatin, and pravastatin, among others. Studies have shown that certain statins can decrease the thickness of the carotid artery wall and increase the size of the lumen (opening) of the artery.
- Antihypertensives. Medications used to lower blood pressure. There are several different groups of medications which act in different ways to lower blood pressure.
In people with narrowing of the carotid artery greater than 50 to 69 percent, a more aggressive treatment may be recommended, particularly in people with symptoms. Surgical treatment decreases the risk for stroke after symptoms such as TIA or minor stroke, especially in people with an occlusion (blockage) of more than 70 percent who are good candidates for surgery.
Surgical treatment of carotid artery disease includes:
Carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Carotid endarterectomy is a procedure used to remove plaque and clots from the carotid arteries, located in the neck. Endarterectomy may help prevent a stroke from occurring in people with symptoms with a carotid artery narrowing of 70 percent of more.
Carotid artery angioplasty with stenting (CAS). Carotid angioplasty with stenting is an option for patients who are high risk for carotid endarterectomy. This is a minimally invasive procedure in which a very small hollow tube, or catheter, is advanced from a blood vessel in the groin to the carotid arteries. Once the catheter is in place, a balloon may be inflated to open the artery and a stent is placed. A stent is a cylinder-like tube made of thin metal-mesh framework used to hold the artery open. Because there is a risk of stroke from bits of plaque breaking off during the procedure, an apparatus, called an embolic protection device, may be used. An embolic protection device is a filter (like a small basket) that is attached on a guidewire to catch any debris that may break off during the procedure.
VIEW VIDEO –
Carotid Artery Disease and Stroke: Prevention and Treatment – John Hopkins
VIEW VIDEO –
Carotid Endarterectomy with Temporary Bypass – A Fifty year old procedure
Docteur Jean VALLA
Chirurgien Cardiovasculaire et Thoracique
AIHR/ACCA – Ancien Chirurgien des Hôpitaux Universitaires.
Membre de la Société de Chirurgie Thoracique et Cardiovasculaire de Langue Française Conventionné
Carotid artery stenosis is the narrowing of the carotid arteries. These are the main arteries in the neck that supply blood to the brain. Carotid artery stenosis, also called carotid artery disease, is a major risk factor for ischemic stroke.The narrowing is usually caused by plaque in a blood vessel. Plaque forms when cholesterol, fat and other substances build up in the inner lining of an artery.Depending on the degree of stenosis and the patient’s overall condition, carotid artery stenosis can usually be treated with surgery. The procedure is called carotid endarterectomy. It removes the plaque that caused the carotid artery to narrow. Carotid endarterectomy has proven to benefit patients with arteries stenosed (narrowed) by 70 percent or more. For people with arteries narrowed less than 50 percent, anti-clotting medicine is usually prescribed to reduce the risk of ischemic stroke.
VIEW VIDEO –
Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) – Mayo Clinic
In carotid angioplasty and stenting, a long hollow tube called a catheter is inserted in the femoral artery in the groin area. The catheter is then maneuvered through the arteries until it reaches the narrowing in the carotid artery in the neck. An umbrella-shaped filter is inserted beyond the narrowing to catch any plaque or debris that may break off during the procedure. Then, a tiny balloon at the end of the catheter is inflated to push the plaque to the side and widen the vessel. A small metal coil called a stent is inserted into the vessel. The stent serves as a scaffold to help prevent the artery from narrowing again.
Part Two:
Contributions of a Vascular Surgeon at Peak Career – Richard Paul Cambria, MD, Chief, Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Co-Director, Thoracic Aortic Center @ MGH
I. Recollection of a visit at Dr. Cambria’s Office @MGH, 2004
The author arrived for a 4PM appointment @ MGH with a referral from NWH for a Carotid artery duplex scan that in 2004 was not performed at NWH. The consultation appointment with Dr. Kwolek CJ, a vascular surgeon trained under Dr. RP Cambria, took place in Dr. Cambria’s Office. Few minutes into the patient Medical History interview, Dr. Kwolek was called for an emergency in the OR and asked me to wait for him till he comes back. I looked around and found myself in a 14’x22′ Room, the Office of Dr. Richard Cambria @ MGH, Chief Vascular Surgery and among the Top ten in the World. Except for the glass entrance door and the wide window to the right of the entrance – 3 1/2 walls from the ceiling to one yard above the floor where completely covered with framed Awards, licenses, renewed licenses, Pictures with graduating Medical Students, Pictures with Faculty, with Patients and in the OR. I waited for Dr. Kwolek’s return for the completion of my Medical History Interview about 30 minutes. I used that time to walk along the walls in Dr. Cambria’s Office and read the framed Exhibits. It was clear to me that this Office will need, one day, in the future, to become a Museum @MGH, for most significant milestones in Vascular Surgery, a branch of Cardiothoracic Surgery. Dr. Kwolek returned and completed the interview, scheduled my Lab appointment and the next appointment to discuss the duplex scan results.
II. Shadowing Dr. Cambria in OR @MGH
Per section IV, below which described the author’s Cardiovascular Clinical Observational Experience, I recorded my Shadowing experience at the OR @MGH, including Dr. Cambria performing a CEA on a 84 year old women under going aorta valve replacement (performed by Dr. Walker) priot to a CEA performed by Dr. Cambria. It was all captivating to watch his double gloved hands performing sutures on a >95% blocked carotid artery prior to incision.
The dexterity and the speed of Dr. Cambria’s fingers’ movement, could only have reminded me of World #1 Harp Player: Nicanor Zabaleta, which I met in person, in the presence of my prominent Harp teacher, on his US Tour in 11/1989. He was awarded the Premio Nacional de Música of Spain in 1982 and six years later, in 1988, he was elected to the Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando. Dr. Cambria’s and Mr. Zabaleta’s fingers dexterity and eye hand coordination, both are of the rarest endowments in fine motor precision and perfection with Worldly finest outcomes in art, Surgery is Art, the mastering of the Harp is Art, too.
The Author in the OR — Mass General Hospital, Boston
Cardiac Surgery – Operating Room
Supervisor: Dr. J. Walker, Cardiac Surgeon
Experience: Shadowing Open Heart Surgery at MGH
1/24/2005: Carotid Artery endarterectomy operation by Dr. Richard Cambria
1/24/2005: Mitral Valve Replacement by Dr. Jennifer Walker
1/26/2005: Aorta Valve Replacement and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting by Dr. Jennifer Walker
[Saphenous vein harvested from the leg and Radial vein harvested from the right arm]
III. Dr. Cambria: Selection of Contributions to Scientific Research on Vascular Surgery
The Author covered In Part One, Dr. Cambria’s participation in and contribution to the International, Multispecialty Position Statement on Carotid Stenting, 2013.
In Part Two Section II, I share with the e-Reader watching Dr. Cambria in the Surgical Theater performing CEA
In Part Two Section III, I am carrying with me the heavy weight of my Recollections from a Visit to his Office in 2004, my experience shadowing Dr. Cambria in the OR @MGH on 1/24/2005. Now I am giving back.
I became aware that both events have impacted favorably my 7/2013, Editorial decision, for a forthcoming book on Cardiovascular Disease in 2013. The Editorial decision is two fold:
- the selection and representation of a prominent Vascular Surgery Center in the US, @MGH, and
- my personal decision to select a Vascular Surgeon at Peak Career – Richard Paul Cambria, MD @MGH.
The decision to focus on Peripheral Vascular Surgery @MGH as described in Dr. Richard P Cambria’s research had yielded one Sub-Chapter (5.5) in Chapter 5
Chapter 5
Invasive Procedures by Surgery versus Catheterization
in Volume Three in a forthcoming three volume Series of e-Books on Cardiovascular Diseases
Cardiovascular Diseases: Causes, Risks and Management
This very Sub-Chapter, 5.5, represents milestones in Dr. Cambria as a Vascular Surgeon. His eminent profile as a Vascular Surgery Researcher, is now in:
Volume Three
Management of Cardiovascular Diseases
Justin D. Pearlman MD ME PhD MA FACC, Editor
Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intelligence, Los Angeles
Editor-in-Chief BioMed E-Book Series
Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intelligence, Boston
avivalev-ari@alum.berkeley.edu
5.5 Peripheral Vascular Disease and Vascular Surgery
Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN
Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN
Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP and Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN
Similarly, catheter-based interventions offer less invasive alternatives to open surgery for the abdomenal aorta.
Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP and Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN
Larry H. Bernstein, MD, FCAP and Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN
Larry H Bernstein, MD, FCAP and Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN
Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN
IV. Cardiovascular Clinical Observational Experience – Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN
- Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston. MA
Cardiac ICU, Coronary Care Unit, Medical Rounds [100 hours] June 2006-November 2006
- Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston. MA
CDIC – Cardiovascular Diagnostic and Interventional Center
Angiography & Interventional Radiology [100 hours] March 2006-August 2006
Experience shadowing the daily activities of three Physician Assistants
1. attended consultation appointments with patient candidate for procedures: fibroid embolization
2. patient candidate for intra-vertebral cement injection in fractured vertebrae in spinal column, L-9 – Kyphoplasty vertebral augmentation
3. drainage of bile leakage – biliary duct obstruction
4. attended invasive procedures in the Angiography Lab
5. attended 7:30AM department meeting on all cases scheduled for procedures in the Lab for the day
6. discussed procedure outcomes and patient follow ups with PAs
7. Shadowing PAs and Interventional Radiologists performing angiography.
– VENOUS ACCESS PROCEDURES – TUNNELED CATHETER AND PORT PLACEMENT
– DIALYSIS ACCESS MANAGEMENT – ARTERIOVENOUS FISTULA/GRAFT.
ANGIOGRAMS/ANGIOPLASTIES
Mass General Hospital, Boston
- Cardiac Catheterization Lab
Supervisor: Dr. Igor Palacios, Director, Cath Lab
Experience Shadowing in the Cath Lab at MGH
1/19/2005: stenting – MI case, mitral valve opening with balloon
1/20/2005: multiple stenting case, Mitral valve opening, circumflex artery opening with catheter
1/25/2005: stenting case
1/25/2005: Vascular case: Saphenous vein plaque removal (Room 5)
Mass General Hospital, Boston
- Cardiac Surgery – Operating Room
Supervisor: Dr. J. Walker, Cardiac Surgeon
Experience: Shadowing Open Heart Surgery at MGH
1/24/2005: Carotid Artery endarterectomy operation by Dr. Richard Cambria
1/24/2005: Mitral Valve Replacement by Dr. Jennifer Walker
1/26/2005: Aorta Valve Replacement and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting by Dr. Jennifer Walker
[Saphenous vein harvested from the leg and Radial vein harvested from the right arm]
- Texas Heart Institute, Houston, TX
Cardiac Surgery – Operating Room at THI
Supervisor: Terry Crane
Experience: Shadowing Open Heart Surgery at THI
Scheduled for an Interview at THI in the Perfusion Program.
Spent 6 hours in the dome above the Cardiac OR when open-heart surgery on pump was performed, 2/19/2005.
- Faulkner Hospital – BWH, Boston, MA — ICU Unit
Practicum Staff Nurse, Clinical Comprehensive Practicum, Sept 2007 – December 2007
V. Cases with Complications: CEA and CAS
#1: Case on Cerebral Hyperperfusion Syndrome following Protected Carotid Artery Stenting
Case Reports in Vascular Medicine
Volume 2013 (2013), Article ID 207602, 4 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/207602
Cerebral Hyperperfusion Syndrome following Protected Carotid Artery Stenting
Department of Cardiology and Angiology, Allgemeines Krankenhaus Viersen, Hoserkirchweg 63, 47147 Viersen, Germany
Received 2 May 2013; Accepted 26 June 2013
Academic Editors: K. A. Filis and N. Papanas
Copyright © 2013 Rainer Knur. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Abstract
The cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome is a very rare complication after revascularization of the carotid artery and accompanied by postoperative or postinterventional hypertension in almost all patients. We report a case of a 77-year-old man who developed a complete aphasia and increased right-sided weakness following endovascular treatment of severe occlusive disease of the left internal carotid artery. We discuss the risk and management of cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome after carotid artery stenting.
Introduction
Neurological complications following carotid artery stenting (CAS) are usually ischemic in nature, due to embolization or occlusion of the carotid artery. However, in a small subset of patients, cerebral hyperperfusion causes postinterventional neurological dysfunction, characterized by ipsilateral headache, focal seizure activity, focal neurological deficit, and ipsilateral intracerebral edema or hemorrhage. A high clinical suspicion and early diagnosis will allow early initiation of therapy and preventing fatal brain swelling or bleeding in patients with peri- and postinterventional cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome (CHS).
Discussion
In 1981, Sundt et al. [1] described a triad of complications that included atypical migrainous phenomena, transient focal seizure activity, and intracerebral hemorrhage after CEA and used the term cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome (CHS). The first report on CHS after CAS was published by Schoser et al. [2]. They described a 59-year-old woman with ipsilateral putaminal hemorrhage that was diagnosed on the 3rd day after CAS of a high-grade stenosis of the left ICA. Outcome in this case was not fatal. The patient recovered with a mild upper limb paresis. McCabe et al. [3] were the first to report the occurrence of fatal ICH soon after CAS. Only a few hours after the procedure, neurological symptoms occurred without any prodromata (severe headache, nausea, and seizures) postulated by Sundt et al. [1] to be an obligate component of CHS. CT of the brain revealed extensive ICH and the patient died 18 days later. Abou-Chebl et al. [4] reported a retrospective single-center study on 450 patients who had been treated with CAS. Three patients (0.67%) developed ICH after the intervention. Further reports on results and complications after CAS have been published [5]. Nearly all reports on CHS after carotid revascularizations in general and CAS in particular have in common patients who had high-grade stenoses in the treated vessel.
CHS following surgical or endovascular treatment of severe carotid occlusive disease is thought to be the result of impaired cerebral autoregulation, hypertension, ischemia-reperfusion injury, oxygen-derived free radicals, baroreceptor-dysfunction, and intraprocedural ischemia [6]. Chronic cerebral hypoperfusion due to critical stenosis leads to production of vasodilatory substances. Autoregulatory failure results in the cerebral arterioles being maximally dilated over a long period of time, with subsequent loss of their ability to constrict when normal perfusion pressure is restored. The degree of microvascular dysautoregulation is proportional to the duration and severity of ischemia determined by the severity of ipsilateral stenosis and poor collateral flow.
Hypertension plays an important role in the development of CHS. In the absence of cerebral autoregulation, cerebral blood flow is directly dependent on the systemic blood pressure. The restoration of normal blood flow to chronically underperfused brain can result in edema, capillary breakthrough, and perivascular and macroscopic hemorrhages aggravated by peri- and postinterventional hypertension [6, 7]. The risk factors for CHS after CAS are summarized in Table 1.
The classic clinical presentation includes ipsilateral headache, seizures or focal neurological deficit, and ipsilateral intracerebral edema or hemorrhage. The diagnosis can be made readily with color Doppler ultrasound of the carotid artery and especially with transcranial Doppler (TCD) of the middle cerebral artery [9]. An increase in peak blood flow velocity of >100% is predictive of postinterventional hyperperfusion. Diffusion weighted MRI or single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) could also be performed for diagnosis [10]. Angiography normally shows normal findings.
The prognosis of CHS depends on timely recognition of hyperperfusion and adequate treatment of hypertension before cerebral edema or hemorrhage develops. The prognosis following intracerebral bleeding is very poor, with mortality over 50% and significant morbidity of 80% in the survivors [4, 6]. The prognosis of CHS in patients without cerebral edema or hemorrhage is clearly better especially when they are identified and treated early. The most important aspects in preventing and treating this syndrome are early identification, careful monitoring, and control of blood pressure ideally in a high-dependency unit setting. In our special case, early diagnosis of CHS and immediate intensive medical treatment of blood pressure could prevent devastating cerebral edema or hemorrhage following CAS.
Conclusion
CHS, which is characterized by ipsilateral headache, hypertension, seizures, and focal neurological deficits, is a rare but devastating complication following carotid artery stenting. Hypertension is the most important risk factor. The diagnosis can be confirmed quickly by TCD, DWI, or SPECT. Especially peri- or postinterventional TCD monitoring should be available to identify patients with hyperperfusion who may benefit from intensive blood pressure management ideally in a specialized intensive care unit.
Abbreviations
CAS: | Carotid artery stenting |
CCA: | Common carotid artery |
CEA: | Carotid endarterectomy |
CHS: | Cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome |
CT: | Computed tomography |
CVR: | Cerebrovascular reactivity |
DWI: | Diffusion-weighted imaging |
ICA: | Internal carotid artery |
ICH: | Intracerebral haemorrhage |
MRI: | Magnetic resonance imaging |
SPECT: | Single photon emission computed tomography |
TCD: | Transcranial Doppler. |
REFERENCES
- T. M. Sundt Jr., F. W. Sharbrough, and D. G. Piepgras, “Correlation of cerebral blood flow and electroencephalographic changes during carotid endarterectomy. With results of surgery and hemodynamics of cerebral ischemia,” Mayo Clinic Proceedings, vol. 56, no. 9, pp. 533–543, 1981.View at Scopus
- B. G. H. Schoser, C. Heesen, B. Eckert, and A. Thie, “Cerebral hyperperfusion injury after percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of extracranial arteries,” Journal of Neurology, vol. 244, no. 2, pp. 101–104, 1997. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
- D. J. H. McCabe, M. M. Brown, and A. Clifton, “Fatal cerebral reperfusion hemorrhage after carotid stenting,” Stroke, vol. 30, no. 11, pp. 2483–2486, 1999. View at Scopus
- A. Abou-Chebl, J. S. Yadav, J. P. Reginelli, C. Bajzer, D. Bhatt, and D. W. Krieger, “Intracranial hemorrhage and hyperperfusion syndrome following carotid artery stenting: risk factors, prevention, and treatment,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 43, no. 9, pp. 1596–1601, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
- J.-H. Buhk, L. Cepek, and M. Knauth, “Hyperacute intracerebral hemorrhage complicating carotid stenting should be distinguished from hyperperfusion syndrome,” American Journal of Neuroradiology, vol. 27, no. 7, pp. 1508–1513, 2006. View at Scopus
- V. Adhiyaman and S. Alexander, “Cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome following carotid endarterectomy,” QJM, vol. 100, no. 4, pp. 239–244, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
- W. F. Morrish, S. Grahovac, A. Douen et al., “Intracranial hemorrhage after stenting and angioplasty of extracranial carotid stenosis,” American Journal of Neuroradiology, vol. 21, no. 10, pp. 1911–1916, 2000. View at Scopus
- R. Gupta, A. Abou-Chebl, C. T. Bajzer, H. C. Schumacher, and J. S. Yadav, “Rate, predictors, and consequences of hemodynamic depression after carotid artery stenting,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 47, no. 8, pp. 1538–1543, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
- M. B. Sánchez-Arjona, G. Sanz-Fernández, E. Franco-Macias, and A. Gil-Peralta, “Cerebral hemodynamic changes after carotid angioplasty and stenting,” American Journal of Neuroradiology, vol. 28, pp. 640–644, 2007.
- Y. Kaku, S. I. Yoshimura, and J. Kokuzawa, “Factors predictive of cerebral hyperperfusion after carotid angioplasty and stent placement,” American Journal of Neuroradiology, vol. 25, pp. 1403–1408, 2004.
SOURCE
#2: Case Narrative: Carotid Artery Duplex
Patient came to her appointment as part of a standard pre-operative evaluation for removal of a uterine myoma. She had a history of stroke with residual slurred speech, making it difficult to understand her. Accordingly, I assumed I would see some carotid stenosis, but her ultrasound showed a stunning 70-99% stenosis in her right internal carotid artery and full occlusion of her left internal carotid artery.
Flow in the common carotid arteries looked fine. The plaque itself in the internal carotid arteries was relatively hypoechoic and not easily visualized in brightness mode, so bidirectional color flow at the proximal internal carotid arteries was surprising. Adding power Doppler allowed me to conclude that there was presence of flow on the right, though minimal, and absolutely no flow in the left internal carotid artery.
Upon completion of the exam, I called the ER and spoke with the doctor, who asked me to bring Rose to the ER. Unfortunately, due to the location of the right internal carotid artery stenosis in the bony canal and total occlusion of the left internal carotid artery, surgery was not an option for clearing out the carotid plaque, but doctors believed she could continue functioning well with collateral vasculature carrying blood to her brain.
Thankfully, the patient passed her other pre-operative tests, consented to her surgery, and underwent general anesthesia with no complications. An 8-cm malignant mass was removed from her uterus and her prognosis is good.
SOURCE
http://mintmedicaleducation.com/portfolio-view/carotid-artery-duplex/
REFERENCES
1. White CJ, Jaff MR. Catch-22: Carotid stenting is safe and effective (Food
and Drug Administration) but is it reasonable and necessary (Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services)? J Am Coll Cardiol Cardiovasc Interv.
2012;5:694–696.
2. Australian Consumer Competition and Consumer Commission Website.
Definition of a profession. Australian Council of Professions: http://
http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/277772. Last accessed 8
Jan, 2013.
3. Abbott AL, Bladin CF, Levi CR, Chambers BR. What should we do with
asymptomatic carotid stenosis? Int J Stroke. 2007;2:27–39.
4. Björck M, Bergqvist D, Eliasson K, Jansson I, Karlstrom L, Kragsterman
B, et al. Twenty years with the Swedvasc Registry. Eur J Vasc Endovasc
Surg. 2008;35:129–130.
5. Nallamothu BK, Gurm HS, Ting HH, Goodney PP, Rogers MA, Curtis
JP, et al. Operator experience and carotid stenting outcomes in Medicare
beneficiaries. JAMA. 2011;306:1338–1343.
6. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. National Coverage
Determination (NDC) for Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty
(PTA) (20.7), 2010. US Department of Health & Human Services:
http://www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/details/ncd-details.
aspx?NCDId=201&ver=9. Last accessed Jan 8, 2013.
7. Brott TG, Hobson RW II, Howard G, Roubin GS, Clark WM, Brooks W,
et al.; CREST Investigators. Stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment
of carotid-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:11–23.
8. Silver FL, Mackey A, Clark WM, Brooks W, Timaran CH, Chiu D,
et al. Safety of stenting and endarterectomy by symptomatic status in
the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial
(CREST). Stroke. 2011;42:675–680
9. Abbott AL, Adelman MA, Alexandrov AV, Barnett HJ, Beard J, Bell P,
et al. Why the United States Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services
(CMS) should not extend reimbursement indications for carotid
artery angioplasty/stenting. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2012;43:
247–251.
10. Meier P, Knapp G, Tamhane U, Chaturvedi S, Gurm HS. Short term
and intermediate term comparison of endarterectomy versus stenting
for carotid artery stenosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised
controlled clinical trials. BMJ. 2010;340:c467.
11. Murad MH, Shahrour A, Shah ND, Montori VM, Ricotta JJ. A systematic
review and meta-analysis of randomized trials of carotid endarterectomy
vs stenting. J Vasc Surg. 2011;53:792–797.
12. Bangalore S, Kumar S, Wetterslev J, Bavry AA, Gluud C, Cutlip DE,
et al. Carotid artery stenting vs carotid endarterectomy: meta-analysis
and diversity-adjusted trial sequential analysis of randomized trials. Arch
Neurol. 2011;68:172–184.
13. Bonati LH, Lyrer P, Ederle J, Featherstone R, Brown MM. Percutaneous
transluminal balloon angioplasty and stenting for carotid artery stenosis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;12:CD000515.
14. Brown MM, Dobson J, Doig D, Featherstone RL, Turner EL; ICSS
Collaborators. Primary analysis of the International Carotid Stenting
Study: A randomised comparison of the effectiveness of carotid stenting
and endarterectomy in preventing long-term stroke in patients with
symptomatic carotid stenosis. Abstract. Cerebrovasc Dis 2012;33:15–16.
15. Bonati LH, Fraedrich G. Age modifies the relative risk of stenting versus
endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis: a pooled analysis
of EVA-3s, SPACE and ICSS. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011;41:
153–158.
16. Economopoulos KP, Sergentanis TN, Tsivgoulis G, Mariolis AD,
Stefanadis C. Carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy: a
comprehensive meta-analysis of short-term and long-term outcomes.
Stroke. 2011;42:687–692.
17. Carotid Stenting Trialists’ Collaboration. The risk of carotid artery stenting
compared with carotid endarterectomy is greatest in patients treated
within 7 days of symptoms. J Vasc Surg. 2012: Published online ahead
of print, Dec 10, 2012.
18. Rothwell PM, Eliasziw M, Gutnikov SA, Warlow CP, Barnett HJ.
Endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis in relation to clinical
subgroups and timing of surgery. Lancet. 2004;363:915–924.
19. Qureshi AI, Chaudhry SA, Hussein HM, Majidi S, Khatri R, Rodriguez
GJ, et al. A comparison of outcomes associated with carotid artery stent
placement performed within and outside clinical trials in the United
States. J Vasc Surg. 2012;56:317–323.
20. Naggara O, Touze E, Beyssen B, Trinquart L, Chatellier G, Meder JF,
et al. Anatomical and technical factors associated with stroke or death
during carotid angioplasty and stenting: Results from the endarterectomy
versus angioplasty in patients with symptomatic severe carotid stenosis
(EVA-3S) trial and systematic review. Stroke. 2011;42:380–388.
21. Eslami MH, McPhee JT, Simons JP, Schanzer A, Messina LM. National
trends in utilization and postprocedure outcomes for carotid artery revascularization
2005 to 2007. J Vasc Surg. 2011;53:307–315.
22. Khan AA, Chaudhry SA, Sivagnanam K, Hassan AE, Suri MF, Qureshi
AI. Cost-effectiveness of carotid artery stent placement versus endarterectomy
in patients with carotid artery stenosis. J Vasc Surg.
2012;117:89–93.
23. Sternbergh WC III, Crenshaw GD, Bazan HA, Smith TA. Carotid endarterectomy
is more cost-effective than carotid artery stenting. J Vasc Surg.
2012;55:1623–1628.
24. McDonald RJ, Kallmes DF, Cloft HJ. Comparison of hospitalization
costs and Medicare payments for carotid endarterectomy and carotid
stenting in asymptomatic patients. Am J Neuroradiol. 2012;33:420–425.
25. Vilain KR, Magnuson EA, Li H, Clark WM, Begg RJ, Sam AD, II,
et al. Costs and cost-effectiveness of carotid stenting versus endarterectomy
for patients at standard surgical risk: Results from the Carotid
Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial (CREST).
Stroke. 2012;43:2408–2416.
26. McPhee JT, Schanzer A, Messina LM, Eslami MH. Carotid artery stenting
has increased rates of postprocedure stroke, death, and resource utilization
than does carotid endarterectomy in the United States, 2005. J
Vasc Surg. 2008;48:1442–1450.
27. Abbott AL. Medical (nonsurgical) intervention alone is now best for prevention
of stroke associated with asymptomatic severe carotid stenosis:
results of a systematic review and analysis. Stroke. 2009;40:e573–e583.
28. Naylor AR, Gaines PA, Rothwell PM. Who benefits most from intervention
for asymptomatic carotid stenosis: patients or professionals? Eur J
Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2009;37:625–632.
29. Spence JD, Coates V, Li H, Tamayo A, Muñoz C, Hackam DG, et al.
Effects of intensive medical therapy on microemboli and cardiovascular
risk in asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Arch Neurol. 2010;67:180–186.
30. Marquardt L, Geraghty OC, Mehta Z, Rothwell PM. Low risk of ipsilateral
stroke in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis on best
medical treatment: a prospective, population-based study. Stroke.
2010;41:e11–e17.
31. Naylor AR. Time to rethink management strategies in asymptomatic
carotid artery disease. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2011;9:116–124.
32. Raman G, Kitsios GD, Moorthy D, Hadar N, Dahabreh IJ, O’Donnell
TF, et al. Management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis: Technology
Assessment Report. Tufts Evidence-based Practice Center: Project ID:
CRDT0510. Available at http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/ta/carotidstenosis.
pdf. Last accessed 8 Jan, 2013.
33. Goessens BM, Visseren FL, Kappelle LJ, Algra A, van der Graaf Y.
Asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis and the risk of new vascular events
in patients with manifest arterial disease: the SMART study. Stroke.
2007;38:1470–1475.
34. Markus HS, King A, Shipley M, Topakian R, Cullinane M, Reihill
S, et al. Asymptomatic embolisation for prediction of stroke in the
Asymptomatic Carotid Emboli Study (ACES): a prospective observational
study. Lancet Neurol. 2010;9:663–671.
35. Abbott AL. Proximal internal carotid artery stenosis: Time to capitalise
on current knowledge. In: Davies AH, ed. Fast Facts. 2012.
36. European Carotid Surgery Trial 2 (ECST‐2) website. 2012. Available at
http://www.ecst2.com. Last accessed 8 Jan, 2013.
37. Nicolaides AN, Kakkos SK, Kyriacou E, Griffin M, Sabetai M, Thomas
DJ, et al. Asymptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis and cerebrovascular
risk stratification. J Vasc Surg. 2010;52:1486–1496 e1481–1485
38. Wang X, Hagemeyer CE, Hohmann JD, Leitner E, Armstrong PC,
Jia F, et al. Novel single-chain antibody-targeted microbubbles for
molecular ultrasound imaging of thrombosis: validation of a unique
noninvasive method for rapid and sensitive detection of thrombi and
monitoring of success or failure of thrombolysis in mice. Circulation.
2012;125:3117–3126.
39. Abbott AL. Transcranial doppler and risk stratification in patients
with internal carotid stenosis. . In: Nicolaides A, Beech K, Pattichis C,
Kyriacou E, eds. Ultrasound and Carotid Bifurcation Atherosclerosis.
London: Springer; 2011.
40. Giles KA, Hamdan AD, Pomposelli FB, Wyers MC, Schermerhorn ML.
Stroke and death after carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting
with and without high risk criteria. J Vasc Surg. 2010;52:1497–1504.
41. Blackshear JL, Cutlip DE, Roubin GS, Hill MD, Leimgruber PP, Begg
RJ, et al.; CREST Investigators. Myocardial infarction after carotid stenting
and endarterectomy: results from the carotid revascularization endarterectomy
versus stenting trial. Circulation. 2011;123:2571–2578.
42. Brooks W, Mohr JP, Voeks JH, Clark WM, Silver FL, Mackey A, et al; for
the CREST Investigators. Stroke type, laterality and severity following
carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotidendarterectomy (CEA) in the
carotid revascularization endarterectomy versus stenting trial (CREST).
Stroke. 2011;42:e42–e110 (abstract).
43. Brott TG, Halperin JL, Abbara S, Bacharach JM, Barr JD, Bush RL, et al.
2011 ASA/ACCF/AHA/AANN/AANS/ACR/ASNR/CNS/SAIP/SCAI/
SIR/SNIS/SVM/SVS guideline on the management of patients with extracranial
carotid and vertebral artery disease. Stroke. 2011;42:e420–463.
44. Tendera M, Aboyans V, Bartelink ML, Baumgartner I, Clément D, Collet
JP, et al.; European Stroke Organisation; ESC Committee for Practice
Guidelines. ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of peripheral
artery diseases: Document covering atherosclerotic disease of extracranial
carotid and vertebral, mesenteric, renal, upper and lower extremity
arteries: the Task Force on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral
Artery Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur
Heart J. 2011;32:2851–2906.
45. Furie KL, Kasner SE, Adams RJ, Albers GW, Bush RL, Fagan SC, et
al. Guidelines for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke or
transient ischemic attack: A guideline for healthcare professionals from
the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke.
2011;42:227–276.
46. Paraskevas KI, Veith FJ, Riles TS, Moore WS. Is carotid artery stenting a
fair alternative to carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid artery
stenosis? A commentary on the AHA/ASA guidelines. J Vasc Surg.
2011;54:541–543; discussion 543.
47. Redberg RF. Squandering medicare’s money. New York Times.
25th May 2011. Available at http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/26/
opinion/26redberg.html. Last accessed Jan 8, 2013.
Part Three:
Cleveland Clinic Reports Equivalence between carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and open-heart surgery (OHS) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) followed by coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery or non-CABG cardiac surgery
Stent first, then heart surgery, for patients with severe carotid/coronary disease
AUGUST 1, 2013
Cleveland, OH – With the absence of randomized, controlled clinical trials to address the optimal management of patients with severe carotid and coronary artery disease, a new retrospective study suggests the best tactic is a staged approach that sees the patient undergo carotid artery stenting (CAS) followed by coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery or non-CABG cardiac surgery [1].
Investigators report that a combined approach that includes carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and open-heart surgery (OHS) is equivalent in terms of short-term outcomes with the staged CAS-OHS procedure. Beyond one year, however, the staged CAS-OHS approach resulted in the lowest risk of all-cause mortality, stroke, and MI when compared with a combined CEA-OHS procedure and staged CEA-OHS.
“The surgeons get very worried about doing operations on these patients because they don’t want to do a beautiful job on the bypass only to have the patient have a stroke,” lead investigator Dr Mehdi Shishehbor(Cleveland Clinic, OH) told heartwire.
Shishehbor said that when patients are undergoing open-heart surgery, whether it’s CABG or valve surgery, they are screened for carotid artery disease, given the heightened risk of stroke when undergoing heart surgery. As a result, various teams from neurology, vascular surgery, and interventional cardiology are called to address the safety of the surgery in the setting of severe carotid disease, said Shishehbor.
“These patients are the sickest of the sick in the sense that they have two conditions that are occurring concomitantly,” he said. “These are not patients who just have carotid disease. There are many patients who have moderate or mild carotid disease who undergo open-heart surgery with no problem. These are people with severe disease, those with more than 80% stenosis in one of their carotid arteries or maybe both. They also have severe coronary artery disease. These are people with left-main or three-vessel disease who are destined to undergo bypass.”
The whole point is to prevent stroke
In the study, published this week in the Journal of the American College Cardiology, the investigators reported data on 350 patients who underwent carotid revascularization and cardiac surgery. These included 45 patients who were treated with a staged CEA-OHS approach (OHS performed a median of 14 days after CEA), 110 who were treated with a staged CAS-OHS procedure (OHS performed a median of 47 days after CEA), and 195 patients treated with a combined CEA-OHS procedure. OHS is defined as CABG, CABG plus other cardiac procedures, or non-CABG cardiac surgery (isolated valve or aortic-repair surgery). In total, just 8% of procedures were non-CABG surgeries.
In a propensity-adjusted analysis analyzed by intention-to-treat, the 30-day risk of death, stroke, and MI was similar between the staged CAS-OHS and combined CEA-OHS procedures. The highest risk of the composite end point was observed in patients who underwent staged CEA-OHS.
At one year and beyond (median follow-up was 3.7 years), the staged CAS-OHS patients had the lowest risk of death, stroke, and MI. Compared with staged CEA-OHS, those treated with CAS-OHS had a 67% lower risk of death, stroke, and MI and a 65% lower risk compared with combined CEA-OHS.
Unadjusted comparison of primary/secondary end points
Event | Staged CEA-OHS,n=45 (%) | Combined CEA-OHS,n=195 (%) | Staged CAS-OHS,n=110 (%) | p |
Overall 30-d risk post-OHS | 31 | 10 | 10 | 0.003 |
Death | 7 | 5 | 6 | 0.75 |
Stroke | 2 | 7 | 2 | 0.11 |
MI | 24 | 0.5 | 3 | <0.001 |
Overall composite risk 1 y and beyond | 27 | 39 | 12 | <0.001 |
Death | 38 | 39 | 11 | <0.001 |
Stroke | 2.2 | 1.5 | 0 | 0.37 |
MI | 0 | 3.1 | 2.7 | 0.5 |
“In the long term, stenting [followed by OHS] definitely did better than the combined approach,” said Shishehbor. “What’s also important is that with the combined approach, the reason they didn’t do very well is because they had a higher rate of stroke in the perioperative period. . . . Remember the whole point of doing this is to prevent stroke. This is why we feel the combined approach is a little bit inferior to the staged CAS/open-heart-surgery approach. If you have a 7% risk of stroke in the 30-day perioperative period, that doesn’t appear to be the best option for the majority of patients.”
To heartwire, Shishehbor said that while the patients were well matched, the patients undergoing stenting tended to be sicker. For example, they were more likely to have symptomatic carotid stenosis and were more likely to have undergone a previous carotid revascularization. Shishehbor also said that clinical events occurring between the initial carotid artery revascularization procedure and OHS were included in the analysis. These deaths, strokes, and MIs were identified and accounted for in the data.
In an editorial accompanying the study [2], Drs Ehtisham Mahmud and Ryan Reeves (University of California, San Diego) say the work by the Cleveland Clinic group is strengthened by the propensity-adjusted analysis and long follow-up beyond the perioperative period. Most important, they say the study provides clarity for the management of patients with carotid and coronary disease.
- “For patients presenting with an acute coronary syndrome requiring urgent coronary revascularization in whom waiting three to four weeks is not safe, combined CEA-OHS is the optimum revascularization strategy, though associated with higher neurological ischemic events,” write Mahmud and Reeves.
- “However, for patients with a stable or an accelerating anginal syndrome who can wait three to four weeks to complete dual antiplatelet therapy [DAPT] after carotid stenting, staged CAS followed by OHS leads to superior early and long-term outcomes.”
Since completing the analysis, Shishehbor said there have been discussions with colleagues in vascular surgery, vascular medicine, cardiac surgery, and cardiology to establish the optimum way to treat patients with severe carotid and coronary disease. “The bottom line is that there will never be a randomized, clinical trial in this setting,” he told heartwire. “I hope there would be, but I doubt it. So I think papers like this are critical because we’re doing these procedures to prevent stroke. It’s important that we pick the right procedure for the right patient.”
|
Shishehbor reports serving as a speaker and consultant for Abbot Vascular, Medtronic, and Gore but waives all compensation for his work. Mahmud reports trial support from Boston Scientific and Abbott Vascular. In addition,he consults for Cordis and the Medicines Company and serves on the speaker‘s bureau for Medtronic. Disclosures for the coauthors are listed in the paper. |
Sources
- Shishehbor MH, Venkatachalam S, Sun Z, et al. A direct comparison of early and late outcomes with three approaches to carotid revascularization and open heart surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; available at: http://content.onlinejacc.org.
- Mahmud E, Reeves R. Carotid revascularization prior to open heart surgery: The data driven treatment strategy. J Am Coll Cardiol 2013; available at: http://content.onlinejacc.org.
Related links
- Restenosis similar with carotid stenting or surgery: CREST
[heartwire > Medscape Medical News; Feb 01, 2012] - Carotid stent or surgery? New meta-analysis sends mixed messages
[heartwire > Medscape Medical News; Oct 12, 2010] - CREST trial published, but debate continues on stenting vs surgery for symptomatic carotid disease
[heartwire > Medscape Medical News; May 27, 2010] - CREST: Stenting and endarterectomy show similar net safety and efficacy for carotid stenosis
[heartwire > Medscape Medical News; Feb 26, 2010] - No relationship between significant carotid stenosis and stroke after cardiac surgery
[Interventional/Surgery > Interventional/Surgery; Sep 28, 2009] - Yet again, CMS declines to expand carotid-stenting coverage
[Brain/Kidney/Peripheral > Brain/Kidney/Peripheral; Sep 17, 2009] - CMS once again reopening decision over coverage of carotid-stenting procedures
[Brain/Kidney/Peripheral > Brain/Kidney/Peripheral; Mar 25, 2009]
I actually consider this amazing blog , âSAME SCIENTIFIC IMPACT: Scientific Publishing –
Open Journals vs. Subscription-based « Pharmaceutical Intelligenceâ, very compelling plus the blog post ended up being a good read.
Many thanks,Annette
I actually consider this amazing blog , âSAME SCIENTIFIC IMPACT: Scientific Publishing –
Open Journals vs. Subscription-based « Pharmaceutical Intelligenceâ, very compelling plus the blog post ended up being a good read.
Many thanks,Annette
I actually consider this amazing blog , âSAME SCIENTIFIC IMPACT: Scientific Publishing –
Open Journals vs. Subscription-based « Pharmaceutical Intelligenceâ, very compelling plus the blog post ended up being a good read.
Many thanks,Annette
I actually consider this amazing blog , âSAME SCIENTIFIC IMPACT: Scientific Publishing –
Open Journals vs. Subscription-based « Pharmaceutical Intelligenceâ, very compelling plus the blog post ended up being a good read.
Many thanks,Annette
I actually consider this amazing blog , âSAME SCIENTIFIC IMPACT: Scientific Publishing –
Open Journals vs. Subscription-based « Pharmaceutical Intelligenceâ, very compelling plus the blog post ended up being a good read.
Many thanks,Annette