Emergency Glomus-Sparing Carotid Endarterectomy According to A.N. Kazantsev

Aim of study. Analysis of the results of a new method of emergency glomus-sparing carotid endarterectomy (CEE) according to A.N. Kazantsev in the acute period of ischemic stroke.

Material and methods. This cohort comparative prospective open-label study from January 2017 to April 2020 included 517 patients operated on for occlusive stenotic lesions of the internal carotid arteries (ICA) in the acute period of ischemic stroke (within 24 hours after the development of ischemic stroke). Depending on the implemented revascularization strategy, all patients were divided into three groups: group 1 — 214 patients (41.4%) — glomus-sparing CEE according to A.N. Kazantsev; 2nd group — 145 (28%) — classical CEE with plasty of the reconstruction zone with a patch; 3rd group — 158 (30.6%) — eversion CEE. The observation period was 35.2±9.6 months. Glomus-saving СE according to A.N. Kazantsev was carried out as follows. Arteriotomy with transition to the common carotid artery (CCA) was performed along the inner edge of the external carotid artery (ECA) adjacent to the carotid sinus, 2–3 cm above the ostium, depending on the spread of atherosclerotic plaque, the ICA was cut off at the site formed by the sections of the wall of the ECA and CCA. Then endarterectomy from the ICA was performed using the eversion technique. The next step was open endarterectomy from ECA and CCA. Then the ICA was implanted in the same position on the saved site.

Results. In the hospital follow-up period, there were no significant intergroup differences in the number of complications. However, it should be noted that in the CEE group according to A.N. Kazantsev had no adverse cardiovascular events. In the long-term follow-up period, the smallest number of cardiovascular accidents was detected after CEE according to A.N. Kazantsev. However, intergroup differences were found only in the combined endpoint and the incidence of thrombosis, which were the highest in the 2nd and 3rd groups (p = 0.01). When analyzing the survival curves, it was revealed that the greatest number of cardiovascular accidents in the group of classical and eversion CEE occurred either during the hospital observation period or during the first months after surgery, and after CEE according to A.N. Kazantsev - in a year or more. When analyzing the graph of the dynamics of systolic blood pressure (BP), it was revealed that after glomus-sparing CEE according to A.N. Kazantsev, stable numbers are maintained while receiving preoperative antihypertensive therapy and do not rise above 140 mm Hg. In turn, after classical and eversion CEE, critical hypertension persists in the first three days, which is difficult to treat. In the future, blood pressure figures are unstable and fluctuate in the range from 140 to 160 mm Hg. All cases of myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke were recorded against the background of critical numbers of systolic blood pressure, reaching 180-200 mm Hg.

Conclusion. The presented glomus-sparing carotid endarterectomy according to A.N. Kazantsev meets the modern standards of carotid surgery, combined with the minimum permissible risks of developing adverse cardiovascular events, both in hospital and in the long-term follow-up. The confident effect of the developed revascularization is based on the precise removal of plaque from the common, external and internal carotid arteries, as well as maintaining the stability of hemodynamic parameters.

1. DeBakey ME. Successful carotid endarterectomy for cerebrovascular insufficiency. Nineteen-yearfollow-up. JAMA. 1975;233(10):1083–1085. PMID: 1174155

2. Kazantsev AN, Tarasov RS, Burkov NN, Shabaev AR, Leader RYu, Mironov AV. Carotid Endarterectomy: Three-Year Results of Follow up Within the Framework of a Single-Centre Register. Angiology and vascular surgery. 2018; 2 (3):101–108. (In Russ.)

3. Natsional’nye rekomendatsii po vedeniyu patsientov s zabolevaniyami brakhiotsefal’nykh arteriy. Moscow; 2013. (In Russ.) Available at: http://www.angiolsurgery.org/recommendations/2013/recommendations_brachiocephalic.pdf [Accessed 05 Nov, 2020]

4. Kazantsev AN, Sultanov RV, Burkov NN, Leader RYu, Yakhnis EYa, Bukhtoyarova VI, et al. Long-Term Results of Surgical and Conservative Treatment of Patients With Occlusal-Stenotic Lesions of the Carotid Arteries. Surgery. Pirogov Russian Journal of Surgery. 2020;1:67–73. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17116/hirurgia202001167

5. Stafeeva IV, Dudanov IP, Voznjouk IA, Ordinec SV, Ahmetov VV. Neurophysiological Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Early Carotid Endarterectomy in Atherothrombotic Stroke. Grekov’s Bulletin of Surgery. 2019;178(6):10–17. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24884/0042-

6. -2019-178-6-10-17

7. Grinev KM, Vakhitov KM, Vladimirov PA, Cherniakov IS, Karlov KA, Vinokurov AI, et al. Carotid Artery Surgery: 25 years of Experience in the Leningrad Region. Grekov’s Bulletin of Surgery. 2018;177(6):59–62. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24884/0042-4625-2018-177-6-59-62

8. Tarasov RS, Kazantsev AN, Moldavskaya IV, Burkov NN, Mironov AV, Lazukina IA, et al. In-hospital Outcomes of Carotid Endarterectomy in Acute Period of Ischemic Stroke: Single-Center Register Data. Russian Journal of Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2018;11 (5):60–65. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17116/kardio20181105160

9. Kazantsev AN, Burkov NN, Tarasov RS, Anufriev AM, Shabaev AR, Ruban E, et al. Carotid Endarterectomy in Acute Ischemic Stroke. Circulation Pathology and Cardiac Surgery. 2018;22(1):66–72. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21688/1681-3472-2018-1-66-72

10. Antsupov KA, Lavrentiev AV, Vinogradov OA, Dadashov SA, Marynich AA. Peculiarities of Glomus-Sparing Eversion Carotid Endarterectomy. Angiology and vascular surgery. 2011;17(2):119–123. (In Russ.).

11. Vinogradov RA, Matusevich VV. Sposob lecheniya khronicheskoy sosudisto-mozgovoy nedostatochnosti. Patent RUS 2635471 C, 11/13/2017. Appl. No. 2016137627, dated 09/20/2016. (In Russ.). Available at https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/1a/94/af/4cb9ef58ccf7b2/RU2635471C1.pdf Accessed 05 Nov, 2020]

12. Rosseykin EV, Voevodin AB, Bazylev VV. Autotransplantatsiya vnutrenney sonnoy arterii: novyy vzglyad na tekhniku eversionnoy karotidnoy endarterektomii. The Bulletin of Bakoulev Center. Cardiovascular Diseases. 2015;16(S6):98. (In Russ.).

13. Meschia JF, Hopkins LN, Altafullah I, Wechsler LR, Stotts G, Gonzales NR, et al. Time From Symptoms to Carotid Endarterectomy or Stenting and Perioperative Risk. Stroke. 2015;46(12):3540–3542. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.011123

14. Rantner B, Kollerits B, Roubin GS, Ringleb PA, Jansen O, Howard G, et al. Early Endarterectomy Carries a Lower Procedural Risk Than Early Stenting in Patients With Symptomatic Stenosis of the Internal Carotid Artery: Results From 4 Randomized Controlled Trials. Stroke. 2017;48(6):1580–1587. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.016233

15. Vinogradov RA, Matusevich VV. Use of Glomus-Sparing Techniques in Surgery of Carotid Arteries. Angiology and Vascular Surgery. 2018;24(2):201–205. (In Russ.)

16. Kazantsev AN, Tarasov RS, Burkov NN, Shabayev AR, Mironov AV, Lider RYu, et al. Predictors of Long-Term Complications After Carotid Endarterectomy. Pirogov Russian Journal of Surgery. 2019;6:20–25. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17116/hirurgia201906120

17. Pokrovsky AV, Beloyartsev DF, Adyrkhaev ZA, Shatokhina AD, Vafina GR, Kutyrev OE. Does the Method of Carotid Reconstruction Influence the Outcomes of the Intervention? Angiology and Vascular Surgery. 2012;18(3):81–91. (In Russ.).

18. Volkers EJ, Algra A, Kappelle LJ, Jansen O, Howard G, Hendrikse J, et al. Prediction Models for Clinical Outcome After a Carotid Revascularization Procedure. Stroke. 2018;49(8):1880–1885. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.020486

19. Gavrilenko AV, Kuklin AV, Khripkov AS. Early Carotid Endarterectomy in Patients After Endured Acute Cerebral Circulation Impairment. Angiology and vascular surgery. 2019;25(2):186–192. (In Russ.)

20. Kazantsev AN, Chernykh KP, Shabaev AR, Volkov AN, Lider RYu, Bayandin MS, et al. Thirty day results of carotid endarterectomy using a xenopericard patch compared to conservative treatment tactics. Russian Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2020;62(1):51–56 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24022/0236-2791-2020-62-1-51-56

21. Pokrovsky AV, Zotikov AE, Adyrkhaev ZA, Timina IE, Kozhanova AV, Krasnoschekova LS, et al. Formation of a “Newbifurcation” in Patients With Atherosclerotic Plaque Progression in Internal Carotid Arteries. Atherothrombosis. 2018;(2):141–146. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21518/2307-1109-2018-2-141-146

22. Shatravka AV, Sokurenko GYu, Akif’eva OD, Suvorov S.A., Khantalin IA, Yuzvinkevich SA. Rezul’taty khirurgicheskogo lecheniya okklyuzionnogo porazheniya vnutrenney sonnoy arterii pri stenoziruyushchem porazhenii obshchey ili naruzhnoy sonnoy arterii. The Bulletin of Bakoulev Center. Cardiovascular Diseases. 2013;14(5):48–57. (In Russ.)

23. Khripun AV, Malevannyy MV, Kulikovskikh YaV, Fomenko EP, Lavnik DV, Demina AV, et al. Carotid Stenting With the Use of Proximal Cerebral Protection in Patients With Concomitant External Carotid Artery Disease. Russian Journal of Endovascular Surgery. 2016;3(2):78–82. (In Russ.)

24. Kazantsev AN, Sumtsova EM, Shabaev AR, Burkov NN. Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting, Carotid Endarterectomy. Simultaneous or Phased Tactics – Which Is Better? Medicine of Extreme Situations. 2020;22(1):39–48. (In Russ.)

25. Kazantsev AN, Tarasov RS, Burkov NN, Ganyukov VI. Hybrid Revascularization of the Brain and Myocardium: Risk Stratification for In-Hospital Complications. Angiology and Vascular Surgery. 2020;2:118–123. (In Russ.)