Why the study?
Does carotid endarterectomy in patients >75 years have similar 30-day safety outcomes compared to patients <75 years?
Does carotid endarterectomy in patients >75 years have similar 30-day safety outcomes compared to patients <75 years?
Carotid endarterectomy is a safe procedure in patients over 75 years of age, with no significant increase in 30-day stroke or death rates compared to younger patients despite altered intraoperative hemodynamics.
May support CEA consideration in selected elderly patients; leaves open need for randomized safety confirmation.
This retrospective analysis aims to demonstrate the safety of carotid endarterectomy (CE) in patients >75 years with particular attention paid to intraoperative hemodynamics. Four hundred and ninety-six consecutive patients with >70% symptomatic and asymptomatic stenosis who underwent CE were prospectively assessed and divided into those <75 years (n = 408; mean 64 years) and those >75 years (n = 88; mean 78 years). Associated risk factors, hemodynamic parameters, surgical techniques and 30-day perioperative complications were compared. Carotid artery stump pressures of <25 mmHg (13 versus 29%) and middle cerebral artery velocities of <20 cm/sec (46 versus 29%) were more common in those >75 years (P = 0.0001 and P <0.005, respectively). However, there was no difference in the frequency of intraluminal shunt (34% in both groups) or synthetic patch usage (primary patching: 12.5%, older group versus 11%, younger group; secondary patching: 34% in both groups), and no difference in the combined 30-day stroke and death rates (3.4%, >75 years versus 1.1%, <75 years; P = 0.425). CE in this cohort of patients >75 years was not associated with increased morbidity or mortality. Altered intraoperative hemodynamics were not associated with increased use of shunting or patching. This analysis supports CE as a safe procedure in the elderly.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sadideen et al. (2013) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: