This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (29)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Fred A. Weaver, MD; Albert E. Yellin, MD; Willis H. Wagner, MD; Samuel H. Brooks, ScD; Arthur A. Weaver; Mark A. Milford, MD

Arch Surg. 1988;123(9):1106-1111.

Abstract
• The outcome of 80 patients with 85 penetrating injuries to the extracranial carotid artery (CA) were analyzed after three types of treatment: (1) 54 patients, 17 with a neurologic deficit, who underwent arterial reconstruction; (2) 18 patients, eight with a neurologic deficit, who had CA ligation or nonoperative management of a CA occlusion; and (3) eight patients, two with a deficit, who had minimal nonocclusive injuries managed nonoperatively. Outcome was analyzed using a Carotid Neurologic Score (CNS). The CNS is a quantitative measure of neurologic outcome and survival and ranges from – to +3. The higher the CNS, the more favorable the outcome. The conditions of nine patients in group 1 neurologically improved after treatment, 41 were the same, and four were worse. Forty-four patients were neurologically intact and three died. The mean (±SD) CNS was 1.9 ± 0.8. In group 2, one patient's condition improved, 13 stayed the same, and four deteriorated. Ten patients were intact and two died. The mean CNS was 1.3±1.13. In group 3, two patients' conditions improved and six stayed the same. All eight patients were intact; there were no deaths. The mean CNS was 2.3±0.35. There was a significantly higher CNS for groups 1 and 3 compared with group 2. The CNSs of groups 1 and 3 were not significantly different. Arterial reconstruction provides the best outcome for all penetrating CA injuries except nonocclusive limited intimal injuries that require only observation.

(Arch Surg 1988;123:1106-1111.)

Author Affiliations
From the Department of Surgery, Los Angeles County—University of Southern California Medical Center, Los Angeles.

Footnotes
Accepted for publication May 18, 1988.

Read before the 59th Annual Meeting of the Pacific Coast Surgical Association, San Francisco, Feb 23, 1988.

Reprint requests to Department of Surgery, Room 9442, LAC/USC Medical Center, 1200 N State St, Los Angeles, CA 90033 (Dr Weaver).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Management of Blunt Peripheral Arterial Injury
Peck and Rasmussen
PERSPECT VASC SURG ENDOVASC THER 2006;18:159-173.
ABSTRACT  

Noninvasive Imaging of Cervical Vascular Injuries
LeBlang and Nunez
Am. J. Roentgenol. 2000;174:1269-1278.
FULL TEXT  

Penetrating Trauma of the Internal Carotid Artery
Kuehne et al.
Arch Surg 1996;131:942-948.
ABSTRACT  

Selective Management of Nonocclusive Arterial Injuries
Stain et al.
Arch Surg 1989;124:1136-1141.
ABSTRACT