Carotid Endarterectomy In Octogenarians Research Articles

Outcomes of carotid endarterectomy in octogenarians compared to their younger counterparts: a retrospective observational study.

This study was performed to analyze the association between age and outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) by comparing postoperative outcomes between octogenarians and younger patients. From November 1994 to December 2022, 1,585 internal carotid arteries of 1,434 patients were enrolled. Patients were stratified into 2 groups: octogenarians (≥80 years old) and non-octogenarians (<80 years old). Primary endpoints were early (≤30 days) outcomes of ipsilateral stroke, any stroke, myocardial infarction, death, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). We also compared overall any stroke and death between the 2 groups. One of 132 octogenarians (0.8%) and 17 of 1,453 non-octogenarians (1.1%) experienced ipsilateral stroke within 30 days. Thirty-day MACE occurred in 4 of 132 octogenarians (3%) and 44 of 1,453 non-octogenarians (3%). There were no significant differences in any early (≤30 days) outcomes. Symptomatic status was associated with increased 30-day MACE (odds ratio [OR], 2.610; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.450-4.696; P = 0.003) and 30-day any stroke (OR, 3.999; 95% CI, 1.627-9.828; P = 0.003). Symptomatic status was also associated with overall any stroke (hazard ratio [HR], 2.885; 95% CI, 1.865-4.463; P < 0.001), but age of ≥80 years was not associated with 30-day MACE, 30-day any stroke, or overall stroke. Age of ≥80 years was only associated with overall survival (HR, 2.644; 95% CI, 1.967-3.555; P < 0.001). CEA would be a safe and effective treatment for octogenarians with low 30-day complications and long-term stroke rates, comparable with that of younger counterparts. Advanced age is not a contraindication for CEA.

How Old Is Too Old? Long-term Follow-up of Carotid Endarterectomy in Octogenarians and Above

How Old Is Too Old? Long-term Follow-up of Carotid Endarterectomy in Octogenarians and Above

Carotid Endarterectomy in Octogenarians

The aim of the present study was to evaluate the outcome of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for symptomatic carotid artery stenosis (SCAS) in patients >80 years old. This is a retrospective analysis of patients treated with CEA from 2005 to 2022 for SCAS. Patients were divided according to their age in nonoctogenarian (<80 years old) and octogenarian (≥80 years old) and compared for postoperative stroke/death, considering also type of symptoms and the timing of intervention. Clinical visit was performed yearly during the follow-up. In the period examined 457 symptomatic patients were treated by CEA, 166 (36%) were octogenarian (mean age 84 ± 4 years) and had similar preoperative characteristics of nonoctogenarian except for the distribution of preoperative neurological type of symptoms: transient ischemic attack 51% vs 42% (P = .05), amaurosis fugax (14% vs 5%; P = .001), and stroke (36% vs 53%; P = .01). The timing between symptoms and surgery was similar between the two groups 10 ± 8 days vs 8 ± 7 days, respectively (P = .22). Overall, the postoperative rate of stroke/death was similar between octogenarian and nonoctogenarian: 2.4% vs 3.1% (P = .54). Similarly, by stratifying the patients by type of preoperative symptom they did not affect the outcome between older and younger patients: transient ischemic attack (2.4% vs 3.3% P = .63); amaurosis fugax (0% vs 0%; P = 1.0), and stroke (3.4% vs 3.3%; P = 1.0). The timing of CEA did not affect the rate of stroke/death: in octogenarian 3.7%, if performed within 48 hours, 1.6% between 2 and 14 days and 1.3% after 2 weeks (P = .72). At the 5-year follow-up (mean follow-up, 68 ± 14 months), the ipsilateral stroke free survival was 97.6% ± 4% with no differences between octogenarians and nonoctogenarians: 95.2% ± 6% vs 98.1% ± 3% (P = .32). SCAS octogenarian submitted to CEA have low rate of perioperative and follow-up events, comparable with not octogenarian. The timing and the type of symptoms do not seem to affect the CEA outcome.

Carotid Endarterectomy Versus Carotid Artery Stenting for Carotid Disease in Octogenarians: A Nationwide Analysis of 6-Month Outcomes

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) are widely performed revascularization procedures for the prevention of neurological sequences of atherosclerotic carotid artery disease. The optimal revascularization approach for older adults (>80 years) is still unknown. The aim of our study was to evaluate the outcomes of CAS versus CEA in octogenarians.

Carotid endarterectomy in asymptomatic octogenarians: Outcomes at 30 days and 5 years.

The following study investigated the 30-day and 5-year relative survival rate and freedom from neurological events in asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) octogenarians who had undergone elective carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Between January 2008 and June 2014, a retrospective review was conducted on ACS patients who had undergone elective CEA. The patients' sample was divided into two groups: Group A (GA) included octogenarians and Group B (GB) included younger patients. The GA patients were subjected to a risk-scoring system and follow-up. The two groups were compared analysing the following primary endpoints: 30-day mortality, stroke, stroke/death and acute myocardial infarction (AMI); GA patients' survival rate and freedom from neurological events at 5years. The 30-day secondary endpoints included carotid shunting, redo surgical, need for general anaesthesia with preserved consciousness (GAPC) conversion and length of hospital stay. We identified 620 patients with ACS, of them 144 (23.2%) belonged to the GA and 476 (76.8%) belonged to the GB. No statistical difference between the two groups was found regarding the primary and secondary endpoints. One hundred nineteen of 144GA patients (82.6%) underwent the follow-up; the median follow-up was 78.3months. The GA patients' 5-year survival rate was 62%, while freedom from cerebral events was 94.9%. Analysis regarding GA patients' 5-year survival rate revealed a significantly lower percentage among the patients with a severe risk score compared with those with a moderate risk score (respectively, 29.5% vs 67.7%; p = .005). The multivariate analysis showed that chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) were independently associated with lower survival. The 30-day outcomes of CEA in octogenarians are comparable to those in younger patients. Comprehensive life expectancy and preoperative score, rather than age alone, should be taken into account before performing CEA on octogenarian patients, considering the short- and long-term efficacy in stroke prevention.

A comparison of results of carotid endarterectomy in octogenarians and nonagenarians to younger patients from the Mid-America Vascular Study Group and the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative

ObjectiveCarotid endarterectomy (CEA) reduces stroke risk in selected patients. However, CEA risk profile may be different in older patients. We compared characteristics and outcomes of octogenarians and nonagenarians with those of younger patients. MethodsDeidentified data from CEA patients were obtained from the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database. Prior CEA, carotid artery stent, or combined CEA and coronary artery bypass were excluded, yielding 7390 CEAs in octogenarians and nonagenarians (≥80 years of age) and 35,303 CEAs in younger patients (<80 years of age). We compared post-CEA outcomes, including periprocedural cerebral ischemic events and death, and details such as operative time, bleeding, and return to surgery. ResultsOctogenarians and nonagenarians were more likely to have pre-CEA neurologic symptoms (51.4% vs 45.6%; P < .001) and to have never smoked (37.8% vs 22.0%; P < .001), and they were slightly more likely to have required urgent CEA (16.1% vs 13.4%; P < .001). Stenosis ≥70% was similar (octogenarians and nonagenarians, 94.2%; younger patients, 94.4%; P = .45). Perioperative ipsilateral neurologic events and ipsilateral stroke were slightly more common among octogenarians and nonagenarians (1.6% vs 1.1% [P < .001] and 1.2% vs 0.8% [P = .002]). Multivariate modeling (logistic regression) showed that pre-CEA neurologic symptoms (odds ratios, 1.35 [P = .005] and 1.42 [P = .007]), pre-CEA ipsilateral cortical ischemic event (odds ratios, 1.18 [P < .001] and 1.20 [P < .001]), and urgency (odds ratios, 1.75 [P < .001] and 1.67 [P < .001]) remained strong predictors of any ipsilateral neurologic event and any ipsilateral stroke, respectively. However, age ≥80 years remained a significant predictor of these outcomes (odds ratios, 1.37 [P = .003] and 1.44 [P = .004]). Kaplan-Meier estimated survival was lower for octogenarians and nonagenarians at 30 days and 1 year (98.6% vs 99.4% and 93.7% vs 97.0%; log-rank, P < .001). Age ≥80 years was also associated with a greater rate of discharge to other than home after CEA, a difference that was only partially explained by comorbidities in multivariate modeling. ConclusionsCEA was performed with low rates of perioperative neurologic events and mortality. Multivariate testing showed that the higher rate of neurologic complications in octogenarians and nonagenarians appeared partially related to symptomatic status and urgent surgery; but after adjusting for these factors, age ≥80 years still predicted a slightly higher rate. Periprocedural CEA outcomes appear similar in comparing older and younger patients, although longer term survival is lower for older patients, and older patients are at greater risk of discharge to other than home. CEA was associated with slightly higher risk of neurologic complications in older patients but may be considered appropriate for selected octogenarians and nonagenarians.

Operative morbidity and mortality in octogenarians after carotid endarterectomy: a propensity score matching study.

Carotid endarterectomy remains the most effective surgical treatment for reducing the risk of stroke in patients with significant carotid stenosis. In fact, endovascular approach is associated with a higher incidence of perioperative and long-term minor stroke when compared to carotid endarterectomy although long-term functional outcome and risk of major stroke are similar. However, advanced age resulted to be associated with an increased risk of complications after carotid endarterectomy. Therefore, we decided to evaluate the outcome of carotid endarterectomy in octogenarians in our high-volume center. Data of all patients who underwent CEA between June 2009 and December 2014 were retrospectively recorded. Patients were categorized as aged <80 or ≥80 years. Propensity score matching based on baseline clinical variables was performed to correct for any bias. Primary outcome was the difference in combined stroke and death. Secondary outcomes included incidence of myocardial infarction, surgical reintervention, unplanned intensive care unit admission and length of hospital stay. A total of 2463 carotid endarterectomies were performed, including 439 patients aged ≥80 years. After propensity score adjustment all octogenarians were matched one-to-one to younger patients. No differences in combined stroke and death were found (1.10% in octogenarians vs. 0.46% in younger patients; P=0.45). Octogenarians had an increased length of hospital stay when compared to younger patients (3.1±0.7 vs. 3.4±1.3 days; P=0.0001). No differences in other secondary outcomes were found. Age ≥80 years does not entail an increased perioperative risk after carotid endarterectomy. Hence, surgical carotid revascularization in octogenarians can be regarded as a safe and viable alternative to best medical therapy alone when performed in high-volume centers.

Comparison of Results of Carotid Endarterectomy in Octogenarians and Nonagenarians Versus Younger Patients

Comparison of Results of Carotid Endarterectomy in Octogenarians and Nonagenarians Versus Younger Patients

Carotid endarterectomy in octogenarians: A 5-years single centre experience

Carotid endarterectomy in octogenarians: A 5-years single centre experience

Carotid Endarterectomy in Octogenarian: Short- and Midterm Results

Randomized controlled trials that have established recommendations for carotid surgery have excluded patients >79 years of age, and in our day to day practice, patients in this age group are becoming more common. We sought to analyze the outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in octogenarians, determine the risk factors of morbidity and mortality, and evaluate the midterm survey of these patients. Age was the only selection criteria for inclusion in this study. We compared symptomatic and asymptomatic populations and retrospectively analyzed the CEA results performed in patients ≥80 years of age in each group. We calculated the combined ipsilateral stroke/death for each group. In the 6-year study period (2002-2007), 132 CEAs were performed in 118 octogenarians. The mean age was 83.2 years (range: 80-93), and there were 70 men (59.3%) and 48 women (40.6%). In this study group, 37.9% of patients were symptomatic and 62.1% were asymptomatic; the rate of internal carotid stenosis was 81.6% (standard deviation: ±8.5%). The combined ipsilateral stroke/death rate was 3.79% (4 deaths and 1 stroke): 2% in the symptomatic patients and 4.88% in the asymptomatic patients. No differences were found between the groups' combined ipsilateral stroke/death rate (P > 0.05), but there were significant more patients with coronary artery disease and peripheral artery disease in the asymptomatic patients. A contralateral significant internal carotid stenosis was a risk factor of combined ipsilateral stroke and death (P = 0.024). The mean duration of follow-up was 3.8 ± 2.0 years, and 73% ± 5% of the patients were alive at 3 years. The good immediate results and good probability of survival at 3 years after surgery conveys a real benefit of this surgery in this age group, but patients should be selected on a case by case basis. In our experience, the presence of bilateral lesions should be a significant influence criterion in the preoperative risk assessment. Other evaluation criteria, such as cardiac status, are needed to optimize the selection of asymptomatic patients in particular.

Safety and Efficacy of Carotid Endarterectomy in Octogenarians

To evaluate the outcome of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in octogenarians. Between January 2005 and July 2010, all CEA patients were prospectively recorded. Patients were categorized into those <80 and ≥80 years of age. Primary outcome measures were hospital duration of stay (HDOS), mortality, any stroke, and postprocedural complications. In total, 477 patients with carotid artery stenosis were treated with CEA. Seventy-one patients (13%) were ≥80 years of age and 477 (87%) patients were <80 years of age. Median HDOS was 3.0 days (interquartile range [IQR], 2-5) for the entire cohort with a median of 3 days (IQR, 2-4) for patients <80 years of age and 4 days (IQR, 2-7) for patients ≥80 years of age (P = 0.0001). Fifteen patients (3%) had an early adverse neurologic event, with 7 patients (1.3%) developing a transient ischemic attack, 2 patients (0.3%) a minor stroke with full neurologic recovery, and 6 patients (1.1%) had a major stroke. Forty patients (6.8%) had a postoperative nerve injury. No statistical differences were observed between the younger (<80 years of age) and older (≥80 years of age) group despite a significant difference in postoperative delirium (P < 0.0001). During follow-up, more fatal cardiac events occurred in the octogenarians group (4.2% vs. 0.4%; P = 0.02). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a significantly better survival for the younger patients (log rank test; P = 0.04). Octogenarians who suffer from carotid artery stenosis can be safely treated by CEA. The increased incidence of postoperative delirium is an important finding and requires extra attention in this vulnerable group.

PS80. Safety and Effectiveness of Carotid Endarterectomy in Octogenarians

PS80. Safety and Effectiveness of Carotid Endarterectomy in Octogenarians

Is Age of 80 Years a Threshold for Carotid Revascularization?

Background and purpose:Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting (CAS) has emerged as an alternative to Carotid Endarterectomy (CEA) in treatment of carotid stenotic disease. With increasing life expectancy clinicians are more often confronted with patients of higher age. Octogenarians were often excluded from randomized trials comparing CAS to CEA because they were considered high-risk for revascularization. Conflicting results on the peri-procedural outcome of carotid revascularization in these patients have been reported. In order to objectively evaluate whether age above 80 years should be an upper limit for indicating carotid revascularization we systematically reviewed the currently available literature.Methods:Literature was systematically reviewed between January 2000 and June 2010 using Pubmed and Embase, to identify all relevant studies concerning CAS and CEA in octogenarians. Inclusion criteria were 1) reporting outcome on either CEA or CAS; and 2) data subanalysis on treatment outcome by age. The 30-day Major Adverse Event (MAE) rate (disabling stroke, myocardial infarction or death) was extracted as well as demographic features of included patients.Results:After exclusion of 23 articles, 46 studies were included in this review, 18 involving CAS and 28 involving CEA. A total of 2.963 CAS patients and 14.365 CEA patients with an age >80 years were reviewed. The MAE rate was 6.9% (range 1.6 - 24.0%) following CAS and 4.2% (range 0 – 8.8%) following CEA.A separate analysis in this review included the results of one major registry 140.376 patients) analyzing CEA in octogenarians only reporting on 30-day mortality and not on neurological or cardiac adverse events. When these data were included the MAE following CEA is 2.4% (range 0 – 8.8%)Conclusions:MAE rates after CEA in octogenarians are comparable with the results of large randomized trials in younger patients. Higher complication rates are described for CAS in octogenarians. In general, age > 80 years is not an absolute cut off point to exclude patients from carotid surgery. In our opinion, CEA should remain the golden standard in the treatment of significant carotid artery stenoses, even in the very elderly.

Invited commentary

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) remains a safe and highly efficacious procedure, even in patients considered to be at high risk by conventional standards.1Gasparis A.P. Ricotta L. Cuadra S.A. Char D.J. Purtill W.A. Van Bemmelen P.S. et al.High-risk carotid endarterectomy fact or fiction.J Vasc Surg. 2003; 37: 40-46Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (109) Google Scholar, 2Mozes G. Sullivan T.M. Torres-Russotto D.R. Bower T.C. Hoskins T.L. Sampaio S.M. et al.Carotid endarterectomy in SAPPHIRE-eligible high-risk patients implications for selecting patients for carotid endarterectomy.J Vasc Surg. 2004; 39: 958-966Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (158) Google Scholar, 3Miller M.T. Comerota A.J. Tzilinis A. Daoud Y. Hammerling J. Carotid endarterectomy in octogenarians does increased age indicate “high risk”?.J Vasc Surg. 2005; 41: 231-237Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (81) Google Scholar The criteria by which a patient with carotid disease is considered to have “unacceptably” high risk for CEA remain in dispute, especially considering that current standards have largely been set by trials evaluating the safety of carotid angioplasty and stenting. Thus, the present study is a most welcome attempt to clarify patient variables that are associated with mortality in patients undergoing CEA. The authors have applied elegant statistics to analyze the potential association of perioperative death and various comorbidities entered as International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision (ICD-9) codes. The main strength of the study is the huge dataset that included >20,000 patients from a wide range of practice situations extending over 10 years. In addition to identifying specific risk factors for death, the authors have created a weighted index that is both simple and practical. Although timely and intuitive, the study is not flawless. The authors have acknowledged three limitations that are worth emphasizing: First, they did not include system-level factors that have previously been shown to impact outcome, particularly surgeon and hospital volumes. Fortunately, the authors intend to include these variables in their forthcoming prospective study. A second important limitation is the significant potential for coding bias. An analysis of coding trends by individual hospital would be required to evaluate the possible impact of over- or undercoding. Furthermore, the diligence of individual coders may have had an impact on the frequency of individual codes in this study. A third limitation is the reliance on integer ICD-9 codes rather than extended codes with decimal places. For example, code 331 reflected both cerebral degeneration due to cerebrovascular disease (global ischemia) and Alzheimer’s disease—differences that are clinically important. Likewise, code 280 reflected all iron-deficiency anemias, which may have been a marker for other diseases such as malignancy. Thus, the important risk factors identified in this study may be relatively nonspecific. Despite the inherent limitations, this is a powerful study with immediate practical implications. The information may help to decide between CEA and angioplasty/stenting to treat compelling carotid lesions in individual patients, and these data may be useful in defining patients at high risk in ongoing trials. Until the results of the authors’ prospective analysis are known, the index probably represents the best method currently available for stratifying an individual patient’s risk for CEA.

Carotid endarterectomy in octogenarian veterans: does age affect outcome? A single-center experience

Background The efficacy of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in octogenarians is controversial. Recent reports have examined this question in the general population, but little data exist on veterans. With the emergence of carotid artery stenting, we need to evaluate the role of CEA in treating elderly veterans with carotid stenosis. Methods Retrospective chart review of all CEAs performed between January 1995 and December 2004. Results A total of 286 procedures were performed in 239 patients; 39 procedures were performed in 33 octogenarians, and 247 procedures were performed in 206 younger veterans. Both groups had similar preoperative comorbidities. There were no statistically significant differences between octogenarians and younger veterans for postoperative stroke (2% vs. 1%), death (0% vs. 1%), myocardial infarction (5% vs. 2%), length of stay (7 ± 19 vs. 3 ± 8 days), or 4-year survival (53% vs. 57%). Conclusions CEA can be safely performed in octogenarian veterans with outcomes similar to younger veterans.

Carotid endarterectomy in octogenarians: Does increased age indicate “high risk?”

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is proven to be the most effective treatment for symptomatic carotid artery stenosis of 50% or greater and asymptomatic carotid stenosis of 60% or greater. Although the prevalence of carotid artery disease increases with age, most prospective and randomized trials have excluded patients older than 80 years, implying that they are either at higher procedural risk or have decreased life expectancy. Since advanced age (>/=80 years) has been viewed as a "high-risk" indicator for CEA, age >/=80 years has been used as an indication for alternative treatment. The study was conducted to determine if age >/=80 years is related to increased morbidity, mortality, and length of stay in patients undergoing CEA. In the 12-year period from 1993 to 2004, 2217 CEAs were performed in 1961 patients. Three hundred sixty procedures were performed in 334 patients >/=80 years. Demographics, presentation, risk factors, operative outcome, and survival were analyzed. Contemporary literature was reviewed and the results summarized. In patients aged >/=80 years, compared with their younger cohort, there was no difference in stroke (1.1% vs 0.8%, P = .333) but there was a higher operative mortality (1.9% vs 0.8%, P = .053). The combined stroke/death rate was higher in octogenarians (3.1% vs 1.5%, P = .041). This difference was due to the greater stroke/death rate in symptomatic octogenarians vs asymptomatic octogenarians (6.0% vs 0.9%, P = .007). The average postoperative length of stay was 3.2 +/- 4.8 days for octogenarians compared with 2.4 +/- 3.5 days for their younger counterparts ( P < .001). Thirty-seven percent of the octogenarians were discharged on the first postoperative day vs 51% ( P < .001), whereas 13% remained hospitalized beyond 5 days vs 8% ( P = .003). Although Kaplan-Meier survival curves show a higher mortality in octogenarians, survival after CEA approaches that of the overall population. A summary of the contemporary literature of CEA in 2204 patients >/=80 shows an operative stroke rate of 2.23% and death rate of 1.28%, with a combined stroke/death rate of 3.51%. CEA is a safe and effective procedure in the octogenarian. The combined stroke/death rate is increased in patients aged >/=80, indicating increased risk, predominantly in symptomatic patients. Although CEA risk in octogenarians is higher compared with a younger cohort, outcomes remain within acceptable national guidelines and within outcome measures known to confer benefit compared with best medical care. Therefore, the term "high risk" should not be arbitrarily applied to patients reaching the 80-year threshold. This is confirmed by the contemporary literature.

Carotid endarterectomy in octogenarians.

The role of carotid endarterectomy in octogenarians is unclear as this age group was not included in the major trials of carotid surgery. The aim of the present study was to determine the trends and early outcome of carotid endarterectomy performed in octogenarians at a single institution. A retrospective review of all carotid endarterectomies performed between 1990 and 2001 was conducted as part of a clinical audit. Trends in procedure numbers, length of stay, age and early outcome were assessed. The results of octogenarians were analysed separately. Three hundred and fifty-nine carotid endarterectomies were performed in 329 patients including 33 octogenarians. The number of cases and the mean age of patients increased and length of stay decreased during the study period. There was a significant increase in the proportion of octogenarians undergoing carotid endarterectomy (P = 0.03) in the second half of the study period. The combined rate of stroke and death was higher in octogenarians compared with patients under 80 years old, but the difference was not statistically significant (8.8%vs 5.8%; P = 0.59). The mean age of patients and the proportion of octogenarians undergoing carotid endarterectomy has increased over the 12-year study period.

Carotid Endarterectomy in Octogenarians and Nonagenarians: Is it Worth the Effort ?

Purpose: The safety, effectiveness and cost issues of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in the elderly patient have been debated due to the limited life expectancy and presumably increased rate of complications. This is despite multiple reports in the literature of excellent results in this population. To further examine this issue, we compared characteristics of three populations who underwent CEA at our institution: 53–79 year old patients (youngest group), 80–89 years old patients (middle group), and 90–98 year old patients (oldest group).Methods: Medical and financial data were obtained by retrospective review of hospital charts and billing records. We analyzed 266 random CEAs performed in 251 patients in the youngest group, 280 CEAs performed in 247 patients in the middle group and 19 CEA in 16 patients in the oldest group performed between 2/1/90 and 2/5/01. Results: Comparing each CEA group, there were no differences in gender (males: 56% vs. 51% vs. 53%), incidence of preoperative symptoms (43% vs. 43% vs. 42%), hypertension (68% vs. 60% vs. 42%), combined perioperative death and stroke rate (1.8% vs. 2.1% vs. 10%) or other complications (11% vs. 10% vs. 10%). Significant differences (p<0.05) were noted between the groups in incidence of diabetes (33% vs. 51% vs. 5% in each group), and heart disease (28% vs. 38% vs. 21%). Length of stay for admissions for CEA only were also similar in all three groups (2.37 days vs. 2.67 days vs. 2.36 days). A cost analysis of the earliest 230 patients in the entire series examining hospital cost per case revealed similar data for the <80 years old and > 80 year old patients ($7,842 vs. $9,400).Conclusions: Carotid endarterectomy can be performed in the elderly as safely and cost effectively as in the younger population.

Carotid endarterectomy in octogenarians with symptomatic high-grade internal carotid artery stenosis: long-term clinical and duplex follow-up.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical and duplex outcome after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in recently symptomatic patients aged 80 years or older. Information was assembled from a prospective data collection of all CEAs performed from January 1986 to December 1999. Included were all patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis who were aged 80 years or older at time of operation. Thirty-two patients, with a mean age of 82 years, were included. Outcome events were stroke, death, and restenosis (more than 50% diameter reduction) during routine duplex scan follow-up. Conventional surgical technique was used regarding anesthesia and selective shunting or patching. None of the operated-on patients suffered a stroke at any time during follow-up. One patient (3.1%) died in the early postoperative phase (<30 days). An additional 8 patients died during follow-up. None of these deaths were of cerebrovascular origin. Survival at 3 years was 73% (life table analysis). Routine duplex scan follow-up showed 2 patients with a diameter reduction of more than 50%, both 3 months after CEA. Restenosis rate on duplex scan was 7.4% after 1 year. The authors conclude that there seems to be no reason to deny the very elderly the benefits of CEA. Stroke-free survival and survival rates show that carotid surgery is a safe procedure in patients aged 80 and over who are in apparently good health. These findings are supported by a low incidence of restenosis on duplex scan follow-up, indicating a durable repair.

Carotid Endarterectomy In Octogenarians: Is It Worth The Effort?

96 Objective. Safety, effectiveness and cost issues of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in the elderly patient have been debated because of limited life expectancy and presumably increased complications. We compared characteristics of two populations who underwent CEA: 80 or older (older group) and 65–79 year old patients (younger group). Methods. Medical and financial data were obtained by retrospective review of hospital charts and billing records. Recent follow-up was accomplished by telephone interview. Life-table and Chi-square tests were used for statistical analysis. We analyzed 109 CEAs performed in 101 older patients from 2/1/90 to 8/30/97 and 125 CEAs performed in 121 younger patients. Results. Comparing the older with younger groups, there were no differences in gender (50% male vs 59%), incidence of preop CVA (22% vs 17%) history of TIA (23% vs 25%), amaurosis fugax (6% vs 8%), hypertension (62% vs 60%), combined perioperative death and stroke rate (1.8% vs 1.7%) or other complications (11% vs 10%). Significant differences (p&lt;0.05) were noted between older and younger groups in incidence of diabetes (17% in the older group vs 30%) , smoking (39% vs57%) and heart disease (48% vs 28%). Length of stay (2.8 in older group vs 3.0 days) or hospital cost including readmission for treatment of complications ($9,400 in older vs $7,842) were similar. Survival rates were not significantly different at the end of three years of follow up. Conclusions. Carotid endarterectomy can be performed in the elderly as safely and cost effectively as in the younger population.