Baronetto Noemi, Brizzi Stefano, Pignataro Arianna, Nisi Fulvio, Giustiniano Enrico, Barillà David, Civilini Efrem
Vascular Surgery Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Via Manzoni 56, 20089 Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Insubria, 21100 Varese, Italy.
J Clin Med. 2025 Jun 17;14(12):4294. doi: 10.3390/jcm14124294.
Fast-track (FT) protocols have been developed to reduce the surgical burden and enhance recovery, but they still need to be established for carotid endarterectomy (CEA). In this scenario, carotid stenting has gained momentum by answering the need for a less invasive treatment, despite a still debated clinical advantage. We aim to propose a FT protocol for CEA and to analyze its clinical outcomes. : This retrospective, monocentric study enrolled consecutive patients who underwent CEA for asymptomatic carotid stenosis using an FT protocol between January 2016 and December 2024. Patients undergoing CEA for symptomatic carotid stenosis, carotid bypass procedures, and combined interventions were excluded. Our FT protocol comprises same-day hospital admission, exclusive use of local anesthesia, non-invasive assessment of cardiac and neurological status, and selective utilization of cervical drainage. Discharge criteria were goal-directed and included the absence of pain, electrocardiographic abnormalities, hemodynamic instability, neck hematoma, or cranial nerve injury, with a structured plan for rapid readmission if required. Postoperative pain was assessed using the numerical rating scale (NRS), administered to all patients. The perioperative clinical impact of the protocol was evaluated based on complication rates, pain control, length of hospital stay, and early readmission rates. : Among 1051 patients who underwent CEA, 853 met the inclusion criteria. General anesthesia was required in 17 cases (2%), while a cervical drain was placed in 83 patients (10%). The eversion technique was employed in 765 cases (90%). Postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) monitoring was necessary for 7 patients (1%). The mean length of hospital stay was 1.17 days. Postoperatively, 17 patients (2%) required surgical revision. Minor stroke occurred in three patients (0.4%), and acute myocardial infarction requiring angioplasty in two patients (0.2%). Inadequate postoperative pain control (NRS > 4) was reported by five patients (0.6%). Hospital readmission was required for one patient due to a neck hematoma. : The reported fast-track protocol for elective carotid surgery was associated with a low rate of postoperative complications. These findings support its clinical value and highlight the need for further validation through controlled comparative studies. Furthermore, the implementation of fast-track protocols in carotid surgery should prompt comparative medico-economic research.
快速通道(FT)方案已被制定用于减轻手术负担并促进康复,但颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)仍需建立相应方案。在这种情况下,颈动脉支架置入术因满足了对侵入性较小治疗的需求而得到发展,尽管其临床优势仍存在争议。我们旨在提出一种CEA的FT方案并分析其临床结果。:这项回顾性、单中心研究纳入了2016年1月至2024年12月期间使用FT方案接受无症状颈动脉狭窄CEA手术的连续患者。因症状性颈动脉狭窄、颈动脉搭桥手术和联合干预而接受CEA的患者被排除。我们的FT方案包括当日入院、仅使用局部麻醉、对心脏和神经状态进行无创评估以及选择性使用颈部引流。出院标准是有针对性的,包括无疼痛、心电图异常、血流动力学不稳定、颈部血肿或颅神经损伤,如有需要有快速再次入院的结构化计划。使用数字评分量表(NRS)对所有患者进行术后疼痛评估。基于并发症发生率、疼痛控制、住院时间和早期再入院率评估该方案的围手术期临床影响。:在1051例行CEA的患者中,853例符合纳入标准。17例(2%)需要全身麻醉,83例(10%)放置了颈部引流管。765例(90%)采用了外翻技术。7例(1%)患者术后需要重症监护病房(ICU)监测。平均住院时间为1.17天。术后,17例(2%)患者需要手术翻修。3例(0.4%)患者发生轻微卒中,2例(0.2%)患者发生需要血管成形术的急性心肌梗死。5例(0.6%)患者报告术后疼痛控制不佳(NRS>4)。1例患者因颈部血肿需要再次入院。:所报告的选择性颈动脉手术快速通道方案与术后并发症发生率低相关。这些发现支持了其临床价值,并强调需要通过对照比较研究进行进一步验证。此外,在颈动脉手术中实施快速通道方案应促使进行比较医学经济学研究。