TY - JOUR
T1 - Interposition Grafts for Difficult Carotid Artery Reconstruction
T2 - A 17-Year Experience
AU - Dorafshar, Amir H.
AU - Reil, Todd D.
AU - Ahn, Samuel S.
AU - Quinones-Baldrich, William J.
AU - Moore, Wesley S.
PY - 2008/1
Y1 - 2008/1
N2 - Carotid interposition grafts (CIP) for carotid artery revascularization can be a viable alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) for complex carotid disease. This is a retrospective review of the UCLA 17-year experience with CIP for carotid reconstruction. Carotid operations performed between 1988 and 2005 revealed 41 CIP procedures in 39 patients using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE, n = 31) or reversed greater saphenous vein (Vein) (n = 10). Perioperative data and long-term follow-up for each conduit were statistically compared. There were no significant differences in demographics, risk factors, operative indications, complications, or 30-day perioperative deaths. There was one postoperative stroke in each group, for an overall stroke rate of 4.9% (PTFE 3.2%, Vein 10%). There was one asymptomatic occlusion and there were two high-grade restenoses in the PTFE group compared with one asymptomatic occlusion and one high-grade restenosis in the Vein group. Overall primary patency was 90% and the assisted primary patency was 97% for the PTFE group (mean follow-up 50 months), whereas primary patency was 80% (mean follow-up 30 months) in the Vein group. CIP is a safe and effective technique with excellent long-term follow-up for complex carotid reconstruction when CEA or CAS may be contraindicated.
AB - Carotid interposition grafts (CIP) for carotid artery revascularization can be a viable alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) for complex carotid disease. This is a retrospective review of the UCLA 17-year experience with CIP for carotid reconstruction. Carotid operations performed between 1988 and 2005 revealed 41 CIP procedures in 39 patients using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE, n = 31) or reversed greater saphenous vein (Vein) (n = 10). Perioperative data and long-term follow-up for each conduit were statistically compared. There were no significant differences in demographics, risk factors, operative indications, complications, or 30-day perioperative deaths. There was one postoperative stroke in each group, for an overall stroke rate of 4.9% (PTFE 3.2%, Vein 10%). There was one asymptomatic occlusion and there were two high-grade restenoses in the PTFE group compared with one asymptomatic occlusion and one high-grade restenosis in the Vein group. Overall primary patency was 90% and the assisted primary patency was 97% for the PTFE group (mean follow-up 50 months), whereas primary patency was 80% (mean follow-up 30 months) in the Vein group. CIP is a safe and effective technique with excellent long-term follow-up for complex carotid reconstruction when CEA or CAS may be contraindicated.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=37849000583&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=37849000583&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.avsg.2007.07.038
DO - 10.1016/j.avsg.2007.07.038
M3 - Article
C2 - 18082917
AN - SCOPUS:37849000583
SN - 0890-5096
VL - 22
SP - 63
EP - 69
JO - Annals of Vascular Surgery
JF - Annals of Vascular Surgery
IS - 1
ER -