Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2010 Mar;51(3):559-64, 564.e1.
doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2009.10.078. Epub 2010 Jan 4.

Protamine reduces bleeding complications associated with carotid endarterectomy without increasing the risk of stroke

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Protamine reduces bleeding complications associated with carotid endarterectomy without increasing the risk of stroke

David H Stone et al. J Vasc Surg. 2010 Mar.

Abstract

Objectives: Controversy persists regarding the use of protamine during carotid endarterectomy (CEA) based on prior conflicting reports documenting both reduced bleeding as well as increased stroke risk. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of protamine reversal of heparin anticoagulation on the outcome of CEA in a contemporary multistate registry.

Methods: We reviewed a prospective regional registry of 4587 CEAs in 4311 patients performed by 66 surgeons from 11 centers in Northern New England from 2003-2008. Protamine use varied by surgeon (38% routine use, 44% rare use, 18% selective use). Endpoints were postoperative bleeding requiring reoperation as well as potential thrombotic complications, including stroke, death, and myocardial infarction (MI). Predictors of endpoints were determined by multivariate logistic regression after associated variables were identified by univariate analysis.

Results: Of the 4587 CEAs performed, 46% utilized protamine, while 54% did not. Fourteen patients (0.64%) in the protamine-treated group required reoperation for bleeding compared with 42 patients (1.66%) in the untreated cohort (P = .001). Protamine use did not affect the rate of MI (1.1% vs 0.91%, P = .51), stroke (0.78% vs 1.15%, P = .2), or death (0.23% vs 0.32%, P = .57) between treated and untreated patients, respectively. By multivariate analysis, protamine (odds ratio [OR] 0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17-0.63; P = .001) and patch angioplasty (OR 0.46, 95% CI, 0.26-0.81; P = .007) were independently associated with diminished reoperation for bleeding. A single center was associated with a significantly higher rate of reoperation for bleeding (OR 6.47, 95% CI, 3.02-13.9; P < .001). Independent of protamine use, consequences of reoperation for bleeding were significant, with a four-fold increase in MI, a seven-fold increase in stroke, and a 30-fold increase in death.

Conclusion: Protamine reduced serious bleeding requiring reoperation during CEA without increasing the risk of MI, stroke, or death, in this large, contemporary registry. In light of significant complications referable to bleeding, liberal use of protamine during CEA appears warranted.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competition of interest: none.

Figures

Fig 1
Fig 1
Reoperation for bleeding. Reoperation for bleeding was reduced three-fold in patients receiving protamine.
Fig 2
Fig 2
Thrombotic complications. There were no observed significant differences in the incidence of major thrombotic complications, including MI, stroke, and death between protamine-treated and untreated patients.
Fig 3
Fig 3
Consequences of reoperation for bleeding. Regardless of protamine use, the consequences of reoperation for bleeding were significant. Patients who required reoperation for bleeding had a significantly higher risk of MI, stroke, and death, compared with patients without this bleeding complication.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Riles TS, Imparato AM, Jacobowitz GR, Lamparello PJ, Giangola G, Adelman MA, Landis R. The cause of perioperative stroke after carotid endarterectomy. J Vasc Surg. 1994;19:206–14. discussion 215–6. - PubMed
    1. Weber CF, Friedl H, Hueppe M, Hintereder G, Schmitz-Rixen T, Zwissler B, Meininger D. Impact of general versus local anesthesia on early postoperative cognitive dysfunction following carotid endarterectomy: GALA Study Subgroup Analysis. World J Surg. 2009;33:1526–32. - PubMed
    1. Lutz HJ, Michael R, Gahl B, Savolainen H. Local versus general anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy-improving the gold standard? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2008;36:145–9. disussion 150–1. - PubMed
    1. AbuRahma AF, Stone PA, Elmore M, Flaherty SK, Armistead L, Abu-Rahma Z. Prospective randomized trial of ACUSEAL (Gore-Tex) vs Finesse (Hemashield) patching during carotid endarterectomy: long-term outcome. J Vasc Surg. 2008;48:99–103. - PubMed
    1. Naylor R, Hayes PD, Payne DA, Allroggen H, Steel S, Thompson MM, et al. Randomized trial of vein versus dacron patching during carotid endarterectomy: long-term results. J Vasc Surg. 2004;39:985–93. discussion 993. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms