Carotid revascularization in patients with ongoing oral anticoagulant therapy: the advantages of stent placement.

PURPOSE

To assess the influence of oral anticoagulant therapy conversion to heparin (OAT-CH) on carotid endarterectomy (CEA) outcomes and the influence of unmodified oral anticoagulant therapy (OAT) on carotid artery stenting (CAS) and to compare the outcomes of CEA in OAT-CH with CAS in ongoing OAT.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The 30-day results from all patients who underwent CEA and CAS in a 6-year period were analyzed for stroke, death, myocardial infarction (MI), and hematoma of the access site requiring surgical evacuation. We evaluated the influence of OAT-CH in CEA and the influence of OAT in CAS and compared CEA and CAS outcomes in patients receiving OAT-CH and OAT.

RESULTS

Among 1,222 carotid revascularizations, there were 711 CEAs (58.1%) and 511 CAS procedures (41.9%). In the CEA group, 31 (4.4%) patients were treated with OAT-CH, and these patients had a significantly higher complication rate compared with patients not receiving OAT, including death (1 [3.2%] vs 4 [0.6%]; P = .04), stroke (4 [12.9%] vs 10 [1.4%]; P = .001), and hematoma (3 [9.6%] vs 11 [1.6%]; P = .02). In CAS, the results were similar in patients receiving OAT (30 [5.8%]) and patients not receiving OAT. Patients receiving OAT who underwent CAS had better outcomes than patients receiving OAT-CH who underwent CEA, including stroke, death, MI, and hematoma combined (0 [0.0%] vs 7 [22.5%]; P =.01).

CONCLUSIONS

OAT management significantly influences the results of carotid revascularization. Because CAS with unmodified OAT had a significantly better outcome than CEA with OAT-CH, carotid revascularization strategies should favor CAS rather than CEA in this setting.