Carotid Body Baroreceptor Preservation and Control of Arterial Pressure in Eversion Carotid Endarterectomy

Thomas Kotsis; Panagitsa Christoforou; Konstantinos Nastos

doi:10.1055/s-0039-3400478

International Journal of Angiology, Table of Contents

Int J Angiol 2020; 29(01): 033-038
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-3400478

Original Article

Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Carotid Body Baroreceptor Preservation and Control of Arterial Pressure in Eversion Carotid Endarterectomy

Thomas Kotsis

¹Vascular Unit, 2nd Department of Surgery, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens Medical School, Aretaieion University Hospital, Athens, Greece

,

Panagitsa Christoforou

¹Vascular Unit, 2nd Department of Surgery, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens Medical School, Aretaieion University Hospital, Athens, Greece

,

Konstantinos Nastos

¹Vascular Unit, 2nd Department of Surgery, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens Medical School, Aretaieion University Hospital, Athens, Greece

› Author Affiliations

Abstract

The technique of the eversion carotid endarterectomy (ECEA), as an alternative to the conventional endarterectomy with primary or patch angioplasty, is an established technique for managing internal carotid artery stenoses and recently its application has been upgraded through the European Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines (Recommendation 55: Class 1, Level A). However, the typical eversion method has been associated with postoperative hypertension due to loss of the baroreceptor reflex; the standard oblique transection at the bulb performed in the eversion endarterectomy interrupts either the baroreceptor sensoring tissue, which is mostly located in the adventitia at the medial portion of the proximal internal carotid artery, or even the proper Hering nerve, a branch of the glossopharyngeal nerve. These actions deregulate the natural negative feedback of the carotid baroreceptor. Guided by the anatomical location of the baroreceptor sensor we have elaborated a slight modification of the classical ECEA to maintain as much as possible of the viable carotid baroreceptor sensoring surface. By extending the oblique incision distal to the carotid bifurcation in the medial part of the internal carotid artery stem, an eyebrow-like part of the proximal internal carotid artery is maintained and the axis from the sensoring tissue to the nerve of Hering is protected and following the endarterectomy, postoperative arterial blood pressure levels are lower than in the classical ECEA due to the maintenance of the efficiency of the baroreceptor reflex. During the period from September 2016 to November 2018, carotid endarterectomy was performed in 57 patients. Twenty-eight of them underwent the typical ECEA and 29 patients had the modified eyebrow eversion carotid endarterectomy (me-ECEA). The changes of blood pressure baseline during the postoperative course in ECEA and me-ECEA group were analyzed and compared. Postoperative hypertension was defined as an elevation of systolic blood pressure (SBP) greater than 140 mm Hg. Patients who underwent typical ECEA had significantly higher postoperative blood pressure values compared with those who underwent me-ECEA. Actually, the mean postoperative SBP was 172.67 ± 24.59 mm Hg in the typical ECEA group compared with 160.86 ± 12.83 mm Hg in the me-ECEA group (p = 0.023). The mean diastolic blood pressure in the ECEA group was 65.42 ± 11.39 mm Hg compared with 58.06 ± 9.06 mm Hg in the me-ECEA group (p = 0.009). Our proposed me-ECEA technique seems to be related to lower rates of postoperative hypertension compared with the typical ECEA, probably due to the sparing of the main mass of the baroreceptor apparatus; this improved modification (me-ECEA) of the typical eversion procedure could represent an alternative ECEA technique with its inherent advantages.

Keywords

baroreceptor - carotid body - eversion carotid endarterectomy - modified ECEA - post carotid endarterectomy hypertension - blood pressure

Full Text

References

References
1 Halliday A, Mansfield A, Marro J. , et al; MRC Asymptomatic Carotid Surgery Trial (ACST) Collaborative Group. Prevention of disabling and fatal strokes by successful carotid endarterectomy in patients without recent neurological symptoms: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2004; 363 (9420): 1491-1502
2 Newman JE, Bown MJ, Sayers RD. , et al. Post-carotid endarterectomy hypertension. Part 2: Association with peri-operative clinical, anaesthetic, and transcranial Doppler derived parameters. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2017; 54 (05) 564-572
3 Naylor AR, Ricco JB, de Borst GJ. , et al; ESVS Guidelines Committee; ESVS Guideline Reviewers. Editor's choice - management of atherosclerotic carotid and vertebral artery disease: 2017 Clinical Practice Guidelines of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS). Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2018; 55 (01) 3-81
4 Davidovic L, Tomic I, Markovic D. , et al. Carotid Endarterectomy: eversion technique. J US-China Med Sci 2015; 12: 99-104 . doi: 10.17265/1548-6648/2015.03.002
5 Demirel S, Goossen K, Bruijnen H, Probst P, Böckler D. Systematic review and meta-analysis of postcarotid endarterectomy hypertension after eversion versus conventional carotid endarterectomy. J Vasc Surg 2017; 65 (03) 868-882
6 Toorop RJ, Ousrout R, Scheltinga MR, Moll FL, Bleys RL. Carotid baroreceptors are mainly localized in the medial portions of the proximal internal carotid artery. Ann Anat 2013; 195 (03) 248-252
7 Taurino M, Filippi F, Persiani F. , et al. Hemodynamic changes in Chevalier eversion versus conventional carotid endarterectomy. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2014; 48 (05) 514-520
8 Cao P, Giordano G, De Rango P. , et al. Eversion versus conventional carotid endarterectomy: late results of a prospective multicenter randomized trial. J Vasc Surg 2000; 31 (1, Pt 1): 19-30
9 Schneider JR, Helenowski IB, Jackson CR. , et al; Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative and the Mid-America Vascular Study Group. A comparison of results with eversion versus conventional carotid endarterectomy from the Vascular Quality Initiative and the Mid-America Vascular Study Group. J Vasc Surg 2015; 61 (05) 1216-1222
10 Paraskevas KI, Robertson V, Saratzis AN, Naylor AR. Editor's choice - an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of outcomes following eversion vs. conventional carotid endarterectomy in randomised controlled trials and observational studies. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2018; 55 (04) 465-473
11 Zimmer HG. Heinrich Ewald Hering and the carotid sinus reflex. Clin Cardiol 2004; 27 (08) 485-486
12 Shoja MM, Rai R, Lachkar S. , et al. The carotid sinus nerve and the first English translation of Hering's original research on this nerve. Cureus 2019; 11 (01) e3898
13 Porzionato A, Macchi V, Stecco C, De Caro R. The carotid sinus nerve-structure, function, and clinical implications. Anat Rec (Hoboken) 2019; 302 (04) 575-587
14 West CT, Brassett C, Gaunt ME. Variations in carotid sinus anatomy and their relevance to carotid interventions. Folia Morphol (Warsz) 2018; 77 (04) 693-697
15 Hirschl M, Kundi M. Carotid interventions and blood pressure. Wien Med Wochenschr 2014; 164 (23-24): 503-507
16 Reigner B, Reveilleau P, Gayral M, Papon X, Enon B, Chevalier JM. Eversion endarterectomy of the internal carotid artery: midterm results of a new technique. Ann Vasc Surg 1995; 9 (03) 241-246
17 Musicant SE, Guzzetta VJ, Terramani TT. , et al. Modified eversion carotid endarterectomy (mECEA): analysis of clinical and financial outcomes. Ann Vasc Surg 2017; 42: 16-24
18 McBride R, Porter J, Al-Khaffaf H. The modified operative technique of partial eversion carotid endarterectomy. J Vasc Surg 2017; 65 (01) 263-266
19 Kiney R, Hirsch D, Seiller C, Thiranos JS, Petit H. Does carotid eversion endarterectomy and reimplantation reduce the risk of restenosis?. Ann Vasc Surg 1993; 7 (05) 407-413
20 Kasprzak P, Raithel D. Eversion endarterectomy for internal carotid artery. Vasa Suppl 1992; 37: 83-84
21 Vanamale R, Van Schil P, De Maeseneer M. Closure of the internal carotid artery after endarterectomy: the advantages of patch angioplasty without its disadvatages. Ann Vasc Surg 1990; 4 (01) 81-84