Home > Riviste > International Angiology > Fascicoli precedenti > International Angiology 2020 December;39(6) > International Angiology 2020 December;39(6):477-84



Opzioni di pubblicazione
Per abbonarsi
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca


Publication history
Per citare questo articolo


ORIGINAL ARTICLE  CAROTID DISEASE Editor’s choice • Free accessfree

International Angiology 2020 December;39(6):477-84

DOI: 10.23736/S0392-9590.20.04427-2


lingua: Inglese

Twelve years of experience in carotid endarterectomy with general anesthesia and preserved consciousness

Alessandro UCCI 1 , Rita M. D’OSPINA 1, Paolo PERINI 1, Claudio BIANCHINI MASSONI 1, Alessandro DE TROIA 1, Matteo AZZARONE 1, Franca BRIDELLI 2, Valentina BELLINI 2, Elena BIGNAMI 2, Antonio FREYRIE 1

1 Section of Vascular Surgery, Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy; 2 ICU Department, Parma University Hospital, Parma, Italy

BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can be performed both under general anesthesia (GA) or local anesthesia (LA) with good results. General anesthesia with preserved consciousness (GAPC) using remifentanil infusion has been already reported in literature and could potentially merge the advantages of GA and LA overcoming the disadvantages of this last technique. Although the good results of GAPC reported in literature, this technique is not widespread in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to report the perioperative results of CEA under GAPC in a large series of consecutive patients.
METHODS: This is a retrospective, single center, observational study including all patients treated for CEA under GAPC in our institution between January 2008 and October 2019. Primary endpoints were neurological complications rate, mortality rate in the perioperative period, need to GAPC conversion to GA during surgery and evaluation of the technique with a specific questionnaire regarding patients’ satisfaction. Secondary endpoints were myocardial infarction (MI) rate, other perioperative complications rate, rate of intraoperative shunting and need of reintervention in the perioperative period.
RESULTS: In the considered period 1290 CEA under GAPC were performed and included in this study. Neurological complications rate was 2.01%, mortality rate in the perioperative period was 0.07%, need of GAPC conversion to GA rate during surgery was 0.46% and patients satisfaction regarding the technique were high with a mean vote of 9.1 in a 0 to 10 scale. In the perioperative period MI rate was 0.23%, other perioperative complications rate was 1.39%, intraoperative shunting rate was 7.1% and reintervention rate after surgery was 2.4%.
CONCLUSIONS: CEA under GAPC may combine the advantages of LA and GA, with a very low rate of conversion to GA during surgery and good patients’ satisfaction. Moreover, it does not increase neurological, cardiologic and systemic complications. For these reasons CEA under GAPC could represents a valid alternative to GA or LA.

KEY WORDS: Carotid arteries; Surgery, Endarterectomy, carotid; Anesthesia, general; Remifentanil

inizio pagina