Непереносимость каротидного перекрестного зажима при каротидной эндартерэктомии в условиях регионарной анестезии
- Авторы: Майд П.1, Галкин П.1, Тайех М.1, Херцманн T.1, Горс М.1, Калмыков Е.1, Ахмад В.2
-
Учреждения:
- Евангелическая больница Бергиш Гладбах
- Университетская больница Кёльна
- Выпуск: Том 29, № 1 (2021)
- Страницы: 66-72
- Раздел: Оригинальные исследования
- Статья получена: 11.02.2021
- Статья одобрена: 14.03.2021
- Статья опубликована: 15.03.2021
- URL: https://journals.eco-vector.com/pavlovj/article/view/60620
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.23888/PAVLOVJ202129166-72
- ID: 60620
Цитировать
Аннотация
Во время хирургической эндартерэктомии для артериотомии и удаления бляшек необходимо поперечное пережатие сонной артерии. Поперечное пережатие сонной артерии уменьшает приток крови к кругу Виллиса, и у некоторых пациентов отмечается непереносимость временной окклюзии внутренней сонной артерии (ВСА).
Цель. Продемонстрировать безопасность локо-регионарной анестезии у пациентов с непереносимостью каротидного перекрестного зажима (КПЗ) и факторами риска, прогнозирующими это состояние.
Материал и методы. Все пациенты, перенесшие хирургическую каротидную эндартерэктомию в период с января 2019 г. по декабрь 2020 г. (n=53, 29 мужчин, возраст (медиана с диапазоном) – 78 (56-90) лет), были включены в ретроспективный анализ. Показанием к хирургическому лечению была выраженность стеноз ВСА 70-99% или симптоматический характер стеноз.
Хирургическая техника. По переднему краю грудино-ключично-сосцевидной мышцы делают разрез и выделяют общую сонную артерию (ОСА) из окружающих тканей с рассечением и продолжением в направлении бифуркации. Далее изолируют внутреннюю и наружную сонные артерии. Гепарин (500 Ед) вводят внутривенно, систолическое артериальное давление поддерживают на уровне более 160 мм рт. ст. На следующем этапе выполняется испытание на допуск поперечного зажима в течение 60 с. Во время пережатия тщательный контроль за неврологическим статусом пациента. В случае непереносимости поперечного зажима операция продолжается с использованием имплантации временного шунта. Артериотомия начинается в общей сонной артерии и продолжается до ВСА. Бляшка полностью удаляется, а артериотомический разрез покрывается пластырем. Перед завершением шва зажимы частично удаляются, чтобы смыть мусор с помощью кровотока. Теперь можно освободить наружную и общую артерии и, наконец, снять зажим ВСА.
Результаты. Восемь пациентов имели непереносимость теста толерантности к перекрестному зажиму, и во всех этих случаях хирургическая процедура была продолжена с помощью шунта. Дальнейший ход операции был рутинным. Госпитальная летальность была нулевой, и только в одном случае произошла транзиторная ишемическая атака. Ишемическая болезнь сердца (ИБС) [отношение шансов (ОШ) 12,65, 95% доверительный интервал (ДИ) 1,43-112,50], цереброваскулярные события в анамнезе [ОШ 10,50, 95% ДИ 1,83-60,30] и контралатеральный стеноз 70% и более [ОШ 26,66, 95% ДИ 2,29-304,37] продемонстрировали значимую ассоциацию с непереносимостью перекрестного зажима и необходимостью шунтирования.
Выводы. Регионарная анестезия является безопасным методом выявления пациентов с непереносимостью перекрестного зажима и безопасного выполнения хирургической процедуры. Контралатеральный стеноз ВСА и наличие в анамнезе цереброваскулярных событий являются значимыми факторами для прогнозирования непереносимости перекрестного зажима.
Полный текст
Introduction
Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is a safe and effective treatment for preventing stroke in patients with significant internal carotid stenosis [1-3]. This method is associated with lower perioperative stroke compared to interventional stenting [2-6].
During the surgical endarterectomy, carotid cross clamping is needed for arteriotomy and plaque removal. Carotid cross clamping reduces the bool flow to the circle of Willis and some patients show intolerance to the temporary occlusion of internal carotid artery [7-9]. In this case the use of a temporary shunt is necessary. Locoregional anesthesia has been the first choice in our department since 2019.
The aim of this study is to demonstrate the safety of the locoregional anesthesia in patients with carotid cross clamping intolerance (CCI) and the risk factors that predict this condition.
Material and methods
All patients who underwent surgical carotid endarterectomy between January 2019 and December 2020 were identified in a retrospective review and analysis of a prospectively maintained database. The degree of internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis and consequently surgical treatment followed the European Carotid Surgery Trial (ESCET) [10]. The Indication for surgical treatment was made for a stenose of ICA between 70% to 99% or in case of symptomatic stenosis.
Technique of locoregional anesthesia
To perform the superficial cervical Plexus Block we rotate the head of the patient approximately 45 to 60 degrees to the contralateral side. By slightly lifting the head in this position the posterior border of the sternocleidomastoid muscle can be identified. The first injection site is located halfway between the mastoid process and the clavicle on the posterior edge of the sternocleidomastoid muscle at the punctum nervosum (Erb´s point). After a local anesthetic skin wheal (3 ml Mepivacaine 1%) the needle is positioned 1 cm to 2 cm below the sternocleidomastoid muscle to inject the rest of the Mepivacaine 1% (7ml). This is followed by a subcutaneous infiltration (up to 40 ml Ropivacaine 0,5% / max. 3mg per kilogram body weight) starting from the initial injection site in the direction of the mastoid, the clavicle and the anterior border of the sternocleidomastoid muscle. To complete the subcutaneous infiltration the second injection site is located at the anterior border of the sternocleidomastoid from which the injection goes to cranial and caudal. Due to the use of a retractor in the area of the lower jaw, which is often perceived as painful, the last injection is made from the angle of the jaw along the mandible. Any needle positioning must be done under aspiration to avoid intravenous administration of the local anesthetic.
Surgical technique
An incision is made at the front edge of the sternocleidomastoid muscle and the common carotid artery (CCA) is identified and isolated from surrounding tissues with sharp dissection and continuing toward the bifurcation. Now the internal and external carotid arteries can be isolated too. Heparin (5.000U) is administrated intravenously and the systolic arterial pressure is increased and kept over 160 mmHg. In the next step the cross-clamping tolerance test for 60 second is performed. During clamping, the patient is neurologically meticulously observed. In case of cross clamping intolerance, the operation is proceeded with the insertion of a temporary shunt. The arteriotomy is started in the common carotid artery and continuing to the internal carotid artery. The plaque is completely removed and the arteriotomy incision is covered with a patch. Before completing the suture, the clamps are partially removed to flush out the debris using the blood flow. Now the external and common artery can be released and finally the clamp of internal carotid artery ca be removed.
Statistical analysis
Continuous variables are described as mean and standard deviation and compared with the Student’s t-test. The chi- squared and Fisher’s exact tests is used for comparing the categorial variables. The threshold of statistically significant difference was p<0.05. The statistical analyses were performed using the IBM SPSS statistical software (version 24; IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA).
Results
During a period from January 2019 to December 2020, 53 patients were identified and included for further analysis. Of the recruited patients,29 were male. The baseline characteristic and risk factors are shown in table I. As we see the arterial hypertension followed by CAD are the most frequent risk factors.
Eight patients (15%) had cross-clamping tolerance test intolerance and in all these cases the surgical procedure was continued with shunt. The further course of the operation remained uncomplicated. The in-hospital mortality was nil and only in one case a transient ischemic attack occured. The result of the univariate regression analysis is presented in table II. Coronary artery disease [odds ratio (OR) 12.65, 95 % CI 1.43–112.50], History of cerebrovascular events [odds ratio (OR) 10.50, 95 % CI 1.83–60.30] and contralateral stenosis of 70% and more [odds ratio (OR) 26.66, 95 % CI 2.29–304.37] presented significant association to the cross-clamping intolerance and the need to shunt. The remaining factors showed no significant association to the intolerance.
Discussion
The carotid endarterectomy is a safe method for preventing stroke in case of internal carotid stenosis. But we know that the carotid cross clamping cannot be tolerated by all the patients. The incidence of cross-clamping intolerance is estimated to be between 7 to 30 % [1]. In our cohort this incidence was15%. The major benefit of locoregional anesthesia is the continuous neurological monitoring of awake patients. The locoregional anesthesia gives us the opportunity to identify the patients who needs a shunt. In all cases we could proceed the open surgical procedure using an arterio-arterial shunt. This method can be particularly difficult in restless patients. Lutz et al. [10] described the carotid endarterectomy in locoregional anesthesia as a safe method with better neurological outcomes. A currently meta-analysis comparing LA with GA showed that LA was associated with significantly less stroke, cardiac complication, and hospital mortality [12]. Our study presented only one transient attack but no stroke or mortality. Some factors that predict cross clamping intolerance are previously discussed in a few literatures. Pifretti et al. [7] identified hypertension and symptomatic lesions as significant predictors, whereas Kretz et al. [13] described renal insufficiency and contralateral carotid occlusion as predicting factors for the clamp intolerance.
We found that Coronary artery disease, history of cerebrovascular events and contralateral stenosis of 70% and more, as significant factors to predict cross clamping intolerance. Other factors remain without significant association.
At this point the importance of the circle of Willis must be mentioned. Statistically significant association between cross clamping intolerance and agenesia in the circle of Willis is reported [8, 9].
The simple size of our study is the main limitation. In addition, the investigating of the circle of Willis could give us more information.
Conclusion
Regional anesthesia is a safe method for identifying patients with CCI and safely performing the surgical procedure. Contralateral stenosis of the ICA and a history of cerebrovascular events are significant factors for predicting CCI.
Data are presented as n (%) for categorical variables and median (range) for continuous variables.
Table 1: Descriptive characteristics of the included patients
Variable
| Value (n=53)
|
Age (median with range)
| 78 (56-90)
|
Male/ Female
| 29 (54.7%) / 24(45.3%)
|
Diabetes
| 14 (26.4%)
|
Hypertension
| 45 (84.9%)
|
Coronary artery disease
| 23 (43.4%)
|
History of cerebrovascular events
| 16 (30.2%)
|
Renal insufficiency
| 10 (18.9%)
|
Dyslipidaemia
| 30 (56.6%)
|
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
| 5 (9.4%)
|
Smoking history
| 20 (37,7%)
|
Table 2: Logistic regression analysis of potential factors associated with perioperative shunt requiring
Variable
| OR
| Lower limit
| Upper Limit
| P value
|
Age
| 0.98
| 0.90
| 1.07
| 0.627
|
Female
| 4.50
| 0.82
| 24.83
| 0.121
|
Diabetes
| 0.35
| 0.039
| 3.149
| 0.333
|
Hypertension
| 1.29
| 0.14
| 12.17
| 0.824
|
Coronary artery disease
| 12.69
| 1.43
| 112.50
| 0.006
|
History of cerebrovascular events
| 10.50
| 1.83
| 60.30
| 0.003
|
Renal insufficiency
| 1.54
| 0.26
| 9.08
| 0.630
|
Dyslipidaemia
| 0.40
| 0.09
| 1.89
| 0.237
|
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
| 1.46
| 0.14
| 15.10
| 0.574 |
Smoking history
| 0.50 | 0.09 | 2.26 | 0.420 |
Contralateral stenosis over 70%
| 26.66
| 2.29
| 304.37
| 0.009
|
Symptomatic lesion
| 3.90
| 0.73
| 20.71
| 0.124
|
Additional Info
Conflict of interests. The authors declare no actual and potential conflict of interests which should be stated in connection with publication of the article.
Participation of authors. P. Majd, P. Galkin, M. Tayeh, T. Herzmann, M. Gores, E. Kalmykov, W. Ahmad – research concept and design, material collection and processing, statistical analysis, text writing, editing.
Об авторах
П. Майд
Евангелическая больница Бергиш Гладбах
Email: mir.majd@uk-koeln.de
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-5835-8318
главный врач, специалист по хирургии, специалист по сосудистой хирургии, эндоваскулярный хирург, Клиника сосудистой хирургии, Отделение сосудистой и эндоваскулярной хирургии, Евангелическая больница Бергиш Гладбах
Германия, Бергиш ГладбахП. Галкин
Евангелическая больница Бергиш Гладбах
Email: p.galkin@uk-koeln.de
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-2666-5337
д.м.н., старший врач, специалист по сосудистой хирургии, Клиника сосудистой хирургии, Отделение сосудистой и эндоваскулярной хирургии, Евангелическая больница Бергиш Гладбах
Германия, Бергиш ГладбахМ. Тайех
Евангелическая больница Бергиш Гладбах
Email: m.tayeh@uk-koeln.de
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5460-8562
помощник врача, Клиника сосудистой хирургии, Отделение сосудистой и эндоваскулярной хирургии, Евангелическая больница Бергиш Гладбах
Германия, Бергиш ГладбахT. Херцманн
Евангелическая больница Бергиш Гладбах
Email: t.herzmann@uk-koeln.de
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7442-9825
старший врач, специалист по хирургии, специалист по сосудистой хирургии, эндоваскулярный хирург, Клиника сосудистой хирургии, Отделение сосудистой и эндоваскулярной хирургии, Евангелическая больница Бергиш Гладбах
Германия, Бергиш ГладбахМ. Горс
Евангелическая больница Бергиш Гладбах
Email: m.gores@uk-koeln.de
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1015-3698
старший врач, специалист по анестезиологии, специальной анестезиологической интенсивной медицине, неотложной медицине, Клиника анестезиологии и интенсивной терапии, Отделение обезболивания, Евангелическая больница Бергиш Гладбах
Германия, Бергиш ГладбахЕ. Калмыков
Евангелическая больница Бергиш Гладбах
Автор, ответственный за переписку.
Email: info@helios-international.com
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6784-2243
д.м.н., Отделение сосудистой и эндоваскулярной хирургии, Евангелическая больница Бергиш Гладбах
Германия, Бергиш ГладбахВ. Ахмад
Университетская больница Кёльна
Email: wael.ahmad@uk-koeln.de
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-5090-3468
врач, личный медицинский ассистент, эндоваскулярный хирург, Клиника и поликлиника сосудистой хирургии, Университетская больница Кельна
Германия, КельнСписок литературы
- Bagan P., Vidal R., Martinod E., et al. Cerebral ische-mia during carotid artery cross-clamping: predictive value of phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging // Annals of Vascular Surgery. 2006. Vol. 20, №6. P. 747-752. doi: 10.1007/s10016-006-9126-8
- 2011 ASA/ACCF/AHA/AANN/AANS/ACR/ASNR/ CNS/SAIP/SCAI/SIR/SNIS/SVM/SVS Guideline on the Management of Patients With Extracranial Carotid and Vertebral Artery Disease: Executive summary // Catheterization & Cardiovascular Interventions. 2013. Vol. 81, №1. P. E76-123. doi: 10.1002/ccd.22983
- Naylor A.R., Ricco J.B., de Borst G.J., et al. Editor's Choice – Management of Atherosclerotic Carotid and Vertebral Artery Disease: 2017 Clinical Practice Guide-lines of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) // European Journal of Vascular and Endovas-cular Surgery. 2018. Vol. 55, №1. P. 3-81. doi: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.06.021
- Kalmykov E.L., Matoussevitch V., Brunkwall J. Letter to editor. Longitudinal and transverse access for carot-id endarterectomy. Commentary and invitation to discussion // Russian Journal of Operative Surgery and Clinical Anatomy. 2019. Vol. 3, №2. P. 34-36. doi: 10.17116/operhirurg2019302134
- Paraskevas K.I., Kalmykov E.L., Naylor A.R. Stroke/Death Rates Following Carotid Artery Stenting and Carotid Endarterectomy in Contemporary Admin-istrative Dataset Registries: A Systematic Review // European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Sur-gery. 2016. Vol. 51, №1. P. 3-12. doi:10. 1016/j.ejvs.2015.07.032
- Ahmad W., Deeb H., Otto C., et al. Long-term out-comes of open and endovascular treatment of recur-rent carotid artery stenosis – a 16-year retrospective single centre case series // Vasa. 2020. Vol. 49, №1. P 23-29. doi: 10.1024/0301-1526/a000824
- Piffaretti G., Tarallo A., Franchin M., et al. Outcome Analysis of Carotid Cross-Clamp Intolerance during Carotid Endarterectomy under Locoregional Anesthe-sia // Annals of Vascular Surgery. 2017. Vol. 43. P. 249-257. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2016.11.024
- Montisci R., Sanfilippo R., Bura R., et al. Status of the circle of Willis and intolerance to carotid cross-clamping during carotid endarterectomy // European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. 2013. Vol. 45, №2. P. 107-112. doi:10.1016/j. ejvs.2012.11.012
- Myrcha P., Lewczuk A., Jakuciński M., et al. The Anatomy of the Circle of Willis Is Not a Strong Enough Predictive Factor for the Prognosis of Cross-Clamping Intolerance during Carotid Endarterec-tomy // Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2020. Vol. 9, №12. P. 3913. doi: 10.3390/jcm9123913
- Randomised trial of endarterectomy for recently symptomatic carotid stenosis: final results of the MRC European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST) // Lancet. 1998. Vol. 351, №9113. P. 1379-1387.
- Lutz H.-J., Michael R., Gahl B., et al. Local versus gen-eral anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy – improv-ing the gold standard? // European Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. 2008. Vol. 36, №2. P. 145-149; discussion 150-151. doi:10.1016/ j.ejvs.2008.03.009
- Harky A., Chan J.S.K., Kot T.K.M., et al. General Anes-thesia Versus Local Anesthesia in Carotid Endarterec-tomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis // Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia. 2020. Vol. 34, №1. P. 219-234. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2019.03.029
- Kretz B., Abello N., Astruc K., et al. Influence of the contralateral carotid artery on carotid surgery outcome // Annals of Vascular Surgery. 2012. Vol. 26, №6. P. 766-774. doi: 10.1016/j.avsg.2011.12.009