Single-center prospective, randomized analysis of conventional and eversion carotid endarterectomy.

AIM Several studies, comparing early and long-term results of the conventional carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and eversion carotid endarterectomy (EEA), were conducted for past 10 years. Nevertheless, it still remaining difficult to choose optimal endarterectomy technique. Choice yet mainly depends of experience of attending surgeon. The aim of this study was the comparison early and long-term results of the EEA and CEA. METHODS Randomly, 103 patients were operated on in the eversion, and 98 patients in the conventional technique; 97 (48.3%) patients were asymptomatic and 104 (51.7%) had symptomatic lesions. All patients underwent preoperative cervical duplex scanning and neurological examination. The surgical procedure was carried out under general anesthesia. In cases with retrograde blood pressure less than 20 mmHg shunt was used; 78.6% of all CEA were finished up with ''patch'' angioplasty and 21.4% by primary suture. The primary outcomes were perioperative and late mortality, perioperative and late central neurological complications, a long-term survival rate and late restenosis incidence. RESULTS The mean follow-up was 38 months. Mortality and long-term survival rate were similar in compared groups. The perioperative central neurological complications incidence were comparable in study groups (3.9% vs 12.1% , odds ratio 3.45, 95% confidence interval 1.1-11.1; P=0.029). The late restenosis incidence was significantly lower in eversion group (0.0% vs 6.1%). CONCLUSION EEA has an advantage over the conventional procedure. The authors recommend CEA in cases when retrograde pressure indicated the use of the intraluminal shunting.