Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T15:23:16.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Delays in Carotid Endarterectomy: The Process is the Problem

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 September 2014

Dylan Blacquiere ,
Michael Sharma  and
Prasad Jetty
Dylan Blacquiere*
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Division of Neurology, The Ottawa Hospital, and the University of Ottawa, Ottawa
Michael Sharma
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Division of Neurology, McMaster University and the Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Prasad Jetty
Affiliation:
Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital, and the University of Ottawa, Ottawa
*
Department of Medicine, Division of Neurology, The Ottawa Hospital, and the University of Ottawa, Civic Campus, 1053 Carling Avenue, Ottawa, Ontario, K1Z 5R7, Canada. Email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Background:

Current recommendations for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for symptomatic carotid stenosis state benefit is greatest when performed within two weeks of symptoms. However, only a minority of cases are operated on within this guideline, and no systematic examinations of reasons for these delays exist.

Methods:

All CEA cases performed at our institution by vascular surgery for symptomatic carotid stenosis after neurologist referral in 2008-2009 were reviewed. Dates of symptom onset, initial presentation, referral to and evaluation by neurology and vascular surgery, vascular imaging, and CEA were collected, and the length of time between each analysed. Reasons for delays were noted where available.

Results:

Of 36 included patients, 34 had CEA more than two weeks after symptom onset. Median time to CEA from onset was 76 days (IQR, 38-105 days). Longest intervals were between surgeon assessment and CEA (14 days; IQR, 9-21 days), neurology referral and neurologist assessment (9 days; IQR, 2-26 days), vascular imaging and referral to vascular surgery (9 days; IQR, 2-35 days) and vascular surgery referral and assessment (8 days; IQR, 6-15 days). Few patients (44.1%) had reasons for delays identified; of these, process-related delays were related to delayed vascular imaging, delayed referral by primary care physicians, or multiple conflicting referrals.

Conclusions:

There are significant delays between symptom onset and CEA in patients referred for CEA, with delay highest between specialist referral and evaluation. Strategies to reduce these delays may be effective in increasing the proportion of procedures performed within two weeks of symptom onset.

Résumé:

RÉsumÉ: Contexte:

Selon les recommandations actuelles pour l'endartérectomie carotidienne (EC) effectuée pour une sténose carotidienne symptomatique, on obtient les meilleurs résultats lorsque l'intervention est effectuée dans les deux semaines suivant l'apparition des symptômes. Cependant, seulement une minorité de patients sont opérés dans le délai recommandé par les lignes directrices et aucun examen systématique des raisons du délai n'a été effectué.

Méthode:

Nous avons revu les dossiers de tous les cas d'EC référés par un neurologue, qui ont subi une chirurgie vasculaire dans notre institution pour une sténose carotidienne symptomatique en 2008-2009. Les dates dedébut des symptômes, de la consultation initiale, de la demande de consultation en spécialité et de l'évaluation en neurologie et en chirurgie vasculaire, de l'imagerie vasculaire et de l'EC ont été colligées et le temps écoulé entre chacune de ces dates a été analysé. Les raisons expliquant les délais ont été notées quand elles étaient disponibles.

Résultats:

Parmi les 36 patients inclus dans l'étude, 34 ont subi une EC plus de deux semaines après le début des symptômes. Le temps médian écoulé entre le début des symptômes et l'EC était de 76 jours (écart interquartile (ÉIQ) 38-105 jours). Les intervalles les plus longs étaient entre l'évaluation par le chirurgien et l'EC (14 jours; ÉIQ 9-21), la demande de consultation en neurologie et l'évaluation par le neurologue (9 jours; ÉIQ 2-26 jours), l'imagerie vasculaire et la demande de consultation en chirurgie vasculaire (9 jours; ÉIQ 2-35 jours) et la demande de consultation en chirurgie vasculaire et l'évaluation par le chirurgien (8 jours; ÉIQ 6-15 jours). Les raisons des délais étaient identifiées chez moins de la moitié des patients (44,1%); parmi eux, des délais dans le processus étaient reliés à l'imagerie vasculaire, à la demande de consultation par le médecin de première ligne ou à plusieurs demandes de consultation conflictuelles.

Conclusions:

Il existe des délais significatifs entre le début des symptômes et l'EC chez les patients référés pour une EC et le délai le plus long se situe entre la demande de consultation au spécialiste et l'évaluation faite par celui-ci. Desstratégies pour diminuer ces délais seraient susceptibles d'augmenter la proportion d'interventions effectuées dans les deux semaines suivant le début des symptômes.

Type
Research Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences , Volume 40 , Issue 4 , July 2013 , pp. 585 - 589
Copyright
Copyright © The Canadian Journal of Neurological 2013

References

1. Giles, MF, Rothwell, PM. Risk of stroke after early transient ischemic attack: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet Neurol. 2007;6(12):1063–72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Rothwell, PM. Prediction and prevention of stroke in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis: the high-risk period and the highrisk patient. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2008;35(3):255–63.Google Scholar
3. Eliaszew, M, Kennedy, J, Hill, MD, Buchan, AM, Barnett, HJ, North American Symptonmatic Carotid Endartrectomy Trial Group. Early risk of stroke after a transient ischemic attack in patients with internal carotid artery disease. CMAJ. 2004;170(7):1105–9.Google Scholar
4. North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators. Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. New Eng J Med. 1991;325(7):445–3.Google Scholar
5. Rothwell, PM, Eliaszw, M, Gutnikov, SA, Warlow, CP, Barnett, HJ. Endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis in relation to clinical subgroups and timing of surgery. Lancet. 2004;363(9413):915–24.Google Scholar
6. Furie, KL, Kasner, SL, Adams, RJ, et al. Guidelines for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke or transient ischemic attack. Stroke. 2011;42(1):227–76.Google Scholar
7. Gladstone, DJ, Oh, J, Fang, J, et al. Urgency of carotid endarterectomy for secondary stroke prevention: results from the registry of the Canadian Stroke Network. Stroke. 2009;40(8):2776–82.Google Scholar
8. Ballotta, E, Menegehetti, G, Da Giau, G, Manara, R, Saladini, M, Carotid, Baracchini C. endarterectomy within 2 weeks of minor stroke: a prospective study. J Vasc Surg. 2008;48(3):595–600.Google Scholar
9. Andgren, S, Sjöberg, L, Norvving, B, Lindgren, A. Time delay between symptom and surgery in patients with carotid artery stenosis. Acta Neurol Scand. 2011;124(5):329–33.Google Scholar
10. Johannson, EP, Wester, P. Delay from symptoms to carotid endarterectomy. J Intern Med. 2008;263(4):404–11.Google Scholar
11. Vikatmaa, P, Sairanen, T, Lindholm, JM, Capraro, L, Lepantalo, M, Veremo, M. Structure of delay in carotid surgery - an observational study. Eur J Endovasc Surg. 2011;42(3):273–9.Google Scholar
12. Fairhead, JF, Mehta, Z, Rothwell, PM. Population-based study of delays in carotid imaging and surgery and the risk of recurrent stroke. Neurology. 2005;65(3):371–5.Google Scholar
13. Khashram, M, Roake, JA, Lewis, DR. Patient flow to carotid endarterectomy: hastening the patient journey. ANZ J Surg. 2010;80(6):406–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Jetty, P, Husereau, D, Kubelik, D, et al. Wait times among patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis requiring carotid endarterectomy for stroke prevention. J Vasc Surg. 2012;56(3):661–7.Google Scholar
15. Purkayastha, D, Grant, SW, Smyth, JV, McCollum, CN. Delayed carotid surgery: what are the causes in the north west of England? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2012;43(6):637–41.Google Scholar
16. Bond, R, Rerkasem, K, Rothwell, PM. Systematic review of the risks of carotid endarterectomy in relation to the clinical indication for and timing of surgery. Stroke. 2003;34(9):2290–301.Google Scholar
17. Strömberg, S, Gelin, J, Österberg, T, Bergström, GML, Karlström, L, Österberg, K. Very urgent carotid endarterectomy confers increased procedural risk. Stroke. 2012;43(5):1331–5.Google Scholar
18. Cappocia, L, Sbarigia, E, Speziale, F, Toni, D, Fiorani, P. Urgent carotid endarterectomy to prevent recurrence and improve neurologic outcome in mild-to-moderate acute neurologic events. J Vasc Surg. 2011;53:622–8.Google Scholar