Comparative Analysis of Patch Angioplasty Versus Selective Primary Closure during Carotid Endarterectomy Performed at a Single Vascular Center in China

Background One of the ongoing debates about carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is the closure technique of arterial wall in the operation. Current guidelines recommend routine patch closure (PAC); this recommendation is based on the evidence reported 10–20 years ago. Therefore, the exact role of PAC and primary closure (PRC) remains uncertain. The objectives of this study were to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent CEA with different closure techniques. Methods From January 2013 and December 2018, one senior vascular surgeon performed CEA for 126 patients in the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University. The closure technique (PAC or PRC) was determined on the characteristics (diameter and level) of carotid arteries. Patient demographics and clinical data were retrospectively collected by two research fellows by reviewing the hospital medical records and relevant radiologic studies, as were carotid duplex reports, indications, intraoperative data, closure technique, and perioperative complications. Data of long-term outcomes were gathered by reviewing outpatient clinic visits and associated supplementary examinations. Results PRC was performed in 78 operations (61.9%), and PAC was performed in 48 operations (38.1%). There were no statistical differences in demographic and clinical data between the two groups. Carotid clamp time (P < 0.001) and operating time (P < 0.001) were significantly longer when performing PAC (P < 0.001), and intraoperative blood loss was significantly more when performing PAC than that of PRC (P < 0.001). The postoperative outcome and the follow-up results showed that there was no significant difference in the short-term and middle-term overall survival rate and restenosis-free survival rate between the two groups. Conclusions There are no differences in postoperative and middle-term outcomes between PAC and selective PRC, whereas PRC technique can save operation time and shorten the intraoperative carotid clamp time. PRC can be safely applied in patients with a greater than 5 mm internal carotid artery (ICA). One of the ongoing debates about carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is the closure technique of arterial wall in the operation. Current guidelines recommend routine patch closure (PAC); this recommendation is based on the evidence reported 10–20 years ago. Therefore, the exact role of PAC and primary closure (PRC) remains uncertain. The objectives of this study were to compare the perioperative and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent CEA with different closure techniques. From January 2013 and December 2018, one senior vascular surgeon performed CEA for 126 patients in the First Affiliated Hospital, Sun Yat-sen University. The closure technique (PAC or PRC) was determined on the characteristics (diameter and level) of carotid arteries. Patient demographics and clinical data were retrospectively collected by two research fellows by reviewing the hospital medical records and relevant radiologic studies, as were carotid duplex reports, indications, intraoperative data, closure technique, and perioperative complications. Data of long-term outcomes were gathered by reviewing outpatient clinic visits and associated supplementary examinations. PRC was performed in 78 operations (61.9%), and PAC was performed in 48 operations (38.1%). There were no statistical differences in demographic and clinical data between the two groups. Carotid clamp time (P < 0.001) and operating time (P < 0.001) were significantly longer when performing PAC (P < 0.001), and intraoperative blood loss was significantly more when performing PAC than that of PRC (P < 0.001). The postoperative outcome and the follow-up results showed that there was no significant difference in the short-term and middle-term overall survival rate and restenosis-free survival rate between the two groups. There are no differences in postoperative and middle-term outcomes between PAC and selective PRC, whereas PRC technique can save operation time and shorten the intraoperative carotid clamp time. PRC can be safely applied in patients with a greater than 5 mm internal carotid artery (ICA).