Fast-Track Protocol for Carotid Surgery

<b>Background/Objectives:</b> 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. <b>Methods</b>: 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. <b>Results</b>: 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. <b>Conclusions</b>: 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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Published
2025-06-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm14124294
Primary Topic
Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Fast-Track Protocol for Carotid Surgery

Noemi Baronetto, Stefano Brizzi, Efrem Civilini, David Barillà et al.
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
article

Fast-Track Protocol for Carotid Surgery

Noemi Baronetto, Stefano Brizzi, Efrem Civilini, David Barillà, Fulvio Nisi, Arianna Pignataro, Enrico Giustiniano
article en

Abstract

<b>Background/Objectives:</b> 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. <b>Methods</b>: 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. <b>Results</b>: 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. <b>Conclusions</b>: 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.

Journal of Clinical MedicineVol. 14(12)
University of Insubria (IT), Humanitas University (IT), IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital (IT)
Openalex Percentile: Top 76%
Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical Outcomes
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.