Carotid artery stenosis (CS) is a major cause of ischemic stroke. Treatment of CS consists of best medical treatment and carotid revascularization (CR), including carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS). Both CR techniques have their own procedural risks. Therefore, selection of the appropriate treatment for patients with CS is relatively complicated. Many studies and guidelines have reported the efficacy of each treatment for both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. However, the results are still controversial, especially concerning the efficacy and safety of CEA and CAS. In this paper, we review and discuss the current evidence and compare results from studies of CEA and CAS, including major randomized trials, meta-analyses and ongoing trials. Moreover, based on the current data, we propose a new comprehensive decision-making for the management of CS.
BACKGROUNDNumerous minimally invasive approaches to the skull base have been successively developed. Knowledge of the surgical nuances of a specific approach may facilitate approach selection. This study sought to compare the nuances of an extended version of the minipterional craniotomy (EMPT) with those of the transorbital endoscopic approach (TOEA) to the anterior and middle cranial fossae (ACF and MCF, respectively).OBJECTIVETo quantitatively analyze and compare the area of exposure and surgical freedom between EMPT and TOEA to the ACF and MCF.METHODSEMPT and TOEA were carried out in 5 latex-injected cadaveric heads, bilaterally (10 sides). For each approach, the area of exposure, surgical freedom, and angle of attack were obtained with neuronavigation and statistically compared.RESULTSNo significant difference was found between the mean area of exposure of EMPT and TOEA at the ACF and MCF (P = .709 and .317, respectively). The mean exposure area at the ACF was of 13.4 ± 2.6 cm2 (mean ± standard deviation) and 13.0 ± 1.9 cm2 for EMPT and TOEA, respectively. Except for the crista galli, EMPT afforded a larger area of surgical freedom at all targets. EMPT also achieved significantly greater attack angles in vertical axis except to the crista galli. The horizontal attack angles to all targets were similar between approaches.CONCLUSIONEMPT and TOEA offer a comparable area of exposure at the ACF and MCF in the cadaver; however, the instrument maneuverability afforded by EMPT is superior. Further studies are necessary to better define their precise surgical application.
The TOEAs, either with or without LOR osteotomy are feasible for CS exposure. Although the incremental effect of maneuverability is attained following the LOR osteotomy, it should be performed selectively. Additional research is needed to further validate the safety and efficacy, as well as for precisely defining the clinical application of these techniques.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.