Introduction The benefit of revascularization of internal carotid artery (ICA) pseudo-occlusion is not defined well, and the method of revascularization is controversial. There has been no comparison between carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stent (CAS) placement for pseudo-occlusion. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of CEA and CAS and compare long term imaging and clinical follow up.
Methods A retrospective database review was performed from 1/2010 to 1/2014 to identify patients who underwent carotid endarterectomy and carotid stent placement at two tertiary centers. The medical records and imaging studies of patients with ICA pseudo-occlusion were selected for analysis.
Results 24 patients met the criteria for ICA pseudo-oclcusion, and 17 patients underwent CEA while 7 patients underwent CAS. All patients had technically successful revascularization of the ICA. All patients underwent 1 month and 1 year follow up imaging. CAS patients had 14% re-stenosis and 86% vessel maturation (defined as resolution of ICA hypoplasia) rates while CEA patients had 18% with re-stenosis and 88% vessel maturation. Peri-procedure complication for CAS was 0% and CEA was 6%. There were no deaths or strokes at 1 year in any patients.
Conclusion CAS shows similar outcomes in restenosis and vessel maturation rates when compared to CEA for ICA pseudo-occlusion. There was no significant difference between the two treatments in clinical outcomes or peri-procedural complications. CAS is a revascularization option if the patient is considered high risk for CEA.
Disclosures J. Kim: None. C. Miller: None. D. Damania: None. A. Grande: None. B. Jagadeesan: None. B. Jahromi: None. R. Tummala: None.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.