High-Risk Carotid Endarterectomy
“High-risk” carotid endarterectomy (CEA): fact or fiction? To answer this question we reviewed the available evidence starting from controlled randomized trials, through retrospective population- and large institution-based studies to case-series. CEA can be performed in most “high-risk” patients wi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Seminars in vascular surgery 2005-06, Vol.18 (2), p.61-68 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 68 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 61 |
container_title | Seminars in vascular surgery |
container_volume | 18 |
creator | Mozes, Geza |
description | “High-risk” carotid endarterectomy (CEA): fact or fiction? To answer this question we reviewed the available evidence starting from controlled randomized trials, through retrospective population- and large institution-based studies to case-series. CEA can be performed in most “high-risk” patients with low mortality and morbidity. A broad concept of high-risk CEA, based merely on exclusion from previous controlled randomized CEA trials, cannot be justified. The vast majority of evidence suggests that age (≥80 years) per se should not be considered a high-risk criterion for CEA. However, it appears that there are certain individual risk factors, which may influence outcome adversely. It appears that CEA in the setting of contralateral carotid occlusion may be associated with very slightly increased risk of adverse perioperative events. Local risk factors, namely carotid reoperation and CEA following prior cervical radiation therapy, are associated with slightly increased stroke, death and probably cranial nerve injury rates. If these risk factors are frequent in a particular series the overall outcome of CEA will be worse. In the absence of level-one evidence on the long-term efficacy of carotid artery stenting (CAS) in stroke prophylaxis, selection for CAS should be restricted to well-defined high-risk categories, such as severe medical comorbidities or local-anatomic risk factors. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2005.04.001 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67984596</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0895796705000128</els_id><sourcerecordid>67984596</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c290t-9c44796cba2466ade2a72049fdcffaaac529de563b3568b9d8ceafe3c21565563</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkNFKwzAUhoMobk5fQeaNd61JmqTJpZTphIEgeh3S5HRmrutM2sHe3pYO9NKrA4fvPz_nQ-iO4JRgnj1s0gj1wUQbu7BOKcY8xSzFmJyhKeFcJowTeY6mWCqe5ErkE3QV4wZjKgTNL9GEcCVFRukUzZd-_Zm8-fg1L0xoWu_mi50zoYUAtm3q4zW6qMw2ws1pztDH0-K9WCar1-eX4nGVWKpwmyjLWN9kS0OZEMYBNTnFTFXOVpUxxnKqHHCRlRkXslROWjAVZJYSLni_n6H78e4-NN8dxFbXPlrYbs0Omi5qkSvJuBpANYI2NDEGqPQ--NqEoyZYD3r0Rv_Rowc9GjPd6-mzt6eSrqzB_SZPPnqgGAHoXz14CDpaDzsLzg8-tGv8P2p-AN3hfEk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67984596</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>High-Risk Carotid Endarterectomy</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Mozes, Geza</creator><creatorcontrib>Mozes, Geza</creatorcontrib><description>“High-risk” carotid endarterectomy (CEA): fact or fiction? To answer this question we reviewed the available evidence starting from controlled randomized trials, through retrospective population- and large institution-based studies to case-series. CEA can be performed in most “high-risk” patients with low mortality and morbidity. A broad concept of high-risk CEA, based merely on exclusion from previous controlled randomized CEA trials, cannot be justified. The vast majority of evidence suggests that age (≥80 years) per se should not be considered a high-risk criterion for CEA. However, it appears that there are certain individual risk factors, which may influence outcome adversely. It appears that CEA in the setting of contralateral carotid occlusion may be associated with very slightly increased risk of adverse perioperative events. Local risk factors, namely carotid reoperation and CEA following prior cervical radiation therapy, are associated with slightly increased stroke, death and probably cranial nerve injury rates. If these risk factors are frequent in a particular series the overall outcome of CEA will be worse. In the absence of level-one evidence on the long-term efficacy of carotid artery stenting (CAS) in stroke prophylaxis, selection for CAS should be restricted to well-defined high-risk categories, such as severe medical comorbidities or local-anatomic risk factors.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0895-7967</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1558-4518</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2005.04.001</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15986322</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Age Factors ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Carotid Stenosis - complications ; Carotid Stenosis - surgery ; Contraindications ; Endarterectomy, Carotid - adverse effects ; Endarterectomy, Carotid - mortality ; Humans ; Risk Assessment ; Risk Factors ; Stents ; Stroke - etiology ; Stroke - prevention & control</subject><ispartof>Seminars in vascular surgery, 2005-06, Vol.18 (2), p.61-68</ispartof><rights>2005 Elsevier Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c290t-9c44796cba2466ade2a72049fdcffaaac529de563b3568b9d8ceafe3c21565563</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c290t-9c44796cba2466ade2a72049fdcffaaac529de563b3568b9d8ceafe3c21565563</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2005.04.001$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15986322$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mozes, Geza</creatorcontrib><title>High-Risk Carotid Endarterectomy</title><title>Seminars in vascular surgery</title><addtitle>Semin Vasc Surg</addtitle><description>“High-risk” carotid endarterectomy (CEA): fact or fiction? To answer this question we reviewed the available evidence starting from controlled randomized trials, through retrospective population- and large institution-based studies to case-series. CEA can be performed in most “high-risk” patients with low mortality and morbidity. A broad concept of high-risk CEA, based merely on exclusion from previous controlled randomized CEA trials, cannot be justified. The vast majority of evidence suggests that age (≥80 years) per se should not be considered a high-risk criterion for CEA. However, it appears that there are certain individual risk factors, which may influence outcome adversely. It appears that CEA in the setting of contralateral carotid occlusion may be associated with very slightly increased risk of adverse perioperative events. Local risk factors, namely carotid reoperation and CEA following prior cervical radiation therapy, are associated with slightly increased stroke, death and probably cranial nerve injury rates. If these risk factors are frequent in a particular series the overall outcome of CEA will be worse. In the absence of level-one evidence on the long-term efficacy of carotid artery stenting (CAS) in stroke prophylaxis, selection for CAS should be restricted to well-defined high-risk categories, such as severe medical comorbidities or local-anatomic risk factors.</description><subject>Age Factors</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Carotid Stenosis - complications</subject><subject>Carotid Stenosis - surgery</subject><subject>Contraindications</subject><subject>Endarterectomy, Carotid - adverse effects</subject><subject>Endarterectomy, Carotid - mortality</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Risk Assessment</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Stents</subject><subject>Stroke - etiology</subject><subject>Stroke - prevention & control</subject><issn>0895-7967</issn><issn>1558-4518</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkNFKwzAUhoMobk5fQeaNd61JmqTJpZTphIEgeh3S5HRmrutM2sHe3pYO9NKrA4fvPz_nQ-iO4JRgnj1s0gj1wUQbu7BOKcY8xSzFmJyhKeFcJowTeY6mWCqe5ErkE3QV4wZjKgTNL9GEcCVFRukUzZd-_Zm8-fg1L0xoWu_mi50zoYUAtm3q4zW6qMw2ws1pztDH0-K9WCar1-eX4nGVWKpwmyjLWN9kS0OZEMYBNTnFTFXOVpUxxnKqHHCRlRkXslROWjAVZJYSLni_n6H78e4-NN8dxFbXPlrYbs0Omi5qkSvJuBpANYI2NDEGqPQ--NqEoyZYD3r0Rv_Rowc9GjPd6-mzt6eSrqzB_SZPPnqgGAHoXz14CDpaDzsLzg8-tGv8P2p-AN3hfEk</recordid><startdate>200506</startdate><enddate>200506</enddate><creator>Mozes, Geza</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200506</creationdate><title>High-Risk Carotid Endarterectomy</title><author>Mozes, Geza</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c290t-9c44796cba2466ade2a72049fdcffaaac529de563b3568b9d8ceafe3c21565563</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Age Factors</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Carotid Stenosis - complications</topic><topic>Carotid Stenosis - surgery</topic><topic>Contraindications</topic><topic>Endarterectomy, Carotid - adverse effects</topic><topic>Endarterectomy, Carotid - mortality</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Risk Assessment</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Stents</topic><topic>Stroke - etiology</topic><topic>Stroke - prevention & control</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mozes, Geza</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Seminars in vascular surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mozes, Geza</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>High-Risk Carotid Endarterectomy</atitle><jtitle>Seminars in vascular surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Semin Vasc Surg</addtitle><date>2005-06</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>18</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>61</spage><epage>68</epage><pages>61-68</pages><issn>0895-7967</issn><eissn>1558-4518</eissn><abstract>“High-risk” carotid endarterectomy (CEA): fact or fiction? To answer this question we reviewed the available evidence starting from controlled randomized trials, through retrospective population- and large institution-based studies to case-series. CEA can be performed in most “high-risk” patients with low mortality and morbidity. A broad concept of high-risk CEA, based merely on exclusion from previous controlled randomized CEA trials, cannot be justified. The vast majority of evidence suggests that age (≥80 years) per se should not be considered a high-risk criterion for CEA. However, it appears that there are certain individual risk factors, which may influence outcome adversely. It appears that CEA in the setting of contralateral carotid occlusion may be associated with very slightly increased risk of adverse perioperative events. Local risk factors, namely carotid reoperation and CEA following prior cervical radiation therapy, are associated with slightly increased stroke, death and probably cranial nerve injury rates. If these risk factors are frequent in a particular series the overall outcome of CEA will be worse. In the absence of level-one evidence on the long-term efficacy of carotid artery stenting (CAS) in stroke prophylaxis, selection for CAS should be restricted to well-defined high-risk categories, such as severe medical comorbidities or local-anatomic risk factors.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>15986322</pmid><doi>10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2005.04.001</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0895-7967 |
ispartof | Seminars in vascular surgery, 2005-06, Vol.18 (2), p.61-68 |
issn | 0895-7967 1558-4518 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67984596 |
source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
subjects | Age Factors Aged Aged, 80 and over Carotid Stenosis - complications Carotid Stenosis - surgery Contraindications Endarterectomy, Carotid - adverse effects Endarterectomy, Carotid - mortality Humans Risk Assessment Risk Factors Stents Stroke - etiology Stroke - prevention & control |
title | High-Risk Carotid Endarterectomy |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T21%3A18%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=High-Risk%20Carotid%20Endarterectomy&rft.jtitle=Seminars%20in%20vascular%20surgery&rft.au=Mozes,%20Geza&rft.date=2005-06&rft.volume=18&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=61&rft.epage=68&rft.pages=61-68&rft.issn=0895-7967&rft.eissn=1558-4518&rft_id=info:doi/10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2005.04.001&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67984596%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=67984596&rft_id=info:pmid/15986322&rft_els_id=S0895796705000128&rfr_iscdi=true |