Management strategy for extracranial carotid artery aneurysms: A single-center experience

Abstract

Abstract: This single-center, retrospective study aimed to describe the anatomic and clinical characteristics of extracranial carotid artery aneurysms (ECAAs) and to compare various ECAA management strategies in terms of outcomes.A total of 41 consecutive patients, who underwent treatment for ECAAs between November 1996 and May 2020, were included in this study. The ECAAs were anatomically categorized using the Attigah and Peking Union Medical College Hospital (PUMCH) classifications. The possible study outcomes were restenosis or occlusion of the ipsilateral carotid artery after treatment and treatment-associated morbidity or mortality.The 41 patients were stratified into three groups according to the management strategies employed: surgical (n = 25, 61.0%), endovascular (n = 10, 24.4%), and conservative treatment (n = 6, 14.6%). A palpable, pulsatile mass was the most common clinical manifestation (n = 16, 39.0%), and degenerative aneurysms (n = 29, 65.9%) represented the most common pathogenetic or etiological mechanism. According to the Attigah classification, type I ECAAs (n = 24, 58.5%) were the most common. Using the PUMCH classification, type I ECAAs (n = 26, 63.4%) were the most common. There was a higher prevalence of Attigah type I ECAAs among patients who underwent surgical treatment compared with those who underwent endovascular treatment (64.0% vs 40.0%, P = .09), whereas patients with PUMCH type IIa aneurysms were more likely to receive endovascular treatment (12.0% vs 30.0%). False aneurysms were more likely to be treated using endovascular techniques (20% vs 70%, P = 0.02). Except for two early internal carotid artery occlusions (one each among patients who underwent surgical and endovascular treatments, respectively), there were no early or late restenoses or occlusions during follow-up. Cranial nerve injuries were noted in three patients after surgical treatment, and late ipsilateral strokes occurred in two patients (one each among patients who underwent endovascular and conservative treatment, respectively). There were no other treatment-associated complications or deaths during the study period. Conclusions: Both surgical and endovascular treatments could be performed safely for ECAAs with good long-term results according to anatomic location and morphology.