Objective: Carotid stenosis with crescendo-transient-ischemic-attack (cTIA) requires a prompt intervention to reduce the stroke risk. Few data are reported in literature about cTIA suggesting a different perioperative risk compared with patients with single TIA (sTIA). This study aimed to compare the outcome of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with TIA (single/crescendo) and evaluate the outcome risk-factors. Methods: Data from two tertiary hospitals for vascular treatment were analyzed from 2007 to 2016. All patients with TIA subjected to CEA were considered, comparing the 30-day postoperative stroke and stroke/death in patients with cTIA and sTIA, particularly in the urgent (≤48 h) setting. Results: On a total of 3866 CEA, 888 (23%) were performed in symptomatic patients and 515 for TIA: 365 (71%) patients with sTIA and 150 (29%) with cTIA. When compared with sTIA, cTIA patients were younger and less frequently affected by coronary disease, dyslipidemia, and chronic pulmonary disease; however, contralateral carotid occlusion was more common (20% vs. 10%, P =.004; 56% vs. 46, P =.03; 16% vs. 7%, P =.01; >80 years 26% vs. 16%, P =.01 and 2% vs. 10%, P =.001; respectively). Postoperative stroke and stroke/death were significantly higher in cTIA compared with sTIA (5.3% vs. 1.6%, P =.02 and 6.0% vs. 2.2%, P =.03; respectively). Urgent CEA was performed in 58% (n: 87) cTIA and in 11% (n: 56) sTIA(P<.01). The urgent setting did not influence the stroke and stroke/death rate of CEA for sTIA (3.6% vs. 1.3%, P =.21 and 3.6% vs. 1.9%, P =.44, respectively), but was associated with lower rate of events in cTIA (1.1%vs. 11.1%, P =.01 and 2.3% vs. 11.1%, P =.03, respectively). This beneficial effect in patients with cTIA treated within 48-h was confirmed also by multivariate analysis (OR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.76–0.01, P=.02). Conclusions: cTIA subjected to CEA have a higher stroke and stroke/death risk compared with patients with sTIA. The urgent setting seems to reduce the stroke/death rate cTIA; for sTIA with a stable neurological condition, the timing of CEA did not influence the outcome.
Pini, R., Faggioli, G., Gargiulo, M., Gallitto, E., Cacioppa, L.M., Vacirca, A., et al. (2019). The different scenarios of urgent carotid revascularization for crescendo and single transient ischemic attack. VASCULAR, 27(1), 51-59 [10.1177/1708538118799225].
The different scenarios of urgent carotid revascularization for crescendo and single transient ischemic attack
Pini, Rodolfo
;Faggioli, Gianluca
;Gargiulo, Mauro
;Gallitto, Enrico
;Cacioppa, Laura M
;Vacirca, Andrea
;Pilato, Alessandro
;Stella, Andrea
2019
Abstract
Objective: Carotid stenosis with crescendo-transient-ischemic-attack (cTIA) requires a prompt intervention to reduce the stroke risk. Few data are reported in literature about cTIA suggesting a different perioperative risk compared with patients with single TIA (sTIA). This study aimed to compare the outcome of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with TIA (single/crescendo) and evaluate the outcome risk-factors. Methods: Data from two tertiary hospitals for vascular treatment were analyzed from 2007 to 2016. All patients with TIA subjected to CEA were considered, comparing the 30-day postoperative stroke and stroke/death in patients with cTIA and sTIA, particularly in the urgent (≤48 h) setting. Results: On a total of 3866 CEA, 888 (23%) were performed in symptomatic patients and 515 for TIA: 365 (71%) patients with sTIA and 150 (29%) with cTIA. When compared with sTIA, cTIA patients were younger and less frequently affected by coronary disease, dyslipidemia, and chronic pulmonary disease; however, contralateral carotid occlusion was more common (20% vs. 10%, P =.004; 56% vs. 46, P =.03; 16% vs. 7%, P =.01; >80 years 26% vs. 16%, P =.01 and 2% vs. 10%, P =.001; respectively). Postoperative stroke and stroke/death were significantly higher in cTIA compared with sTIA (5.3% vs. 1.6%, P =.02 and 6.0% vs. 2.2%, P =.03; respectively). Urgent CEA was performed in 58% (n: 87) cTIA and in 11% (n: 56) sTIA(P<.01). The urgent setting did not influence the stroke and stroke/death rate of CEA for sTIA (3.6% vs. 1.3%, P =.21 and 3.6% vs. 1.9%, P =.44, respectively), but was associated with lower rate of events in cTIA (1.1%vs. 11.1%, P =.01 and 2.3% vs. 11.1%, P =.03, respectively). This beneficial effect in patients with cTIA treated within 48-h was confirmed also by multivariate analysis (OR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.76–0.01, P=.02). Conclusions: cTIA subjected to CEA have a higher stroke and stroke/death risk compared with patients with sTIA. The urgent setting seems to reduce the stroke/death rate cTIA; for sTIA with a stable neurological condition, the timing of CEA did not influence the outcome.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
