Five-step protocol for carotid endarterectomy in the managed health care era.
BACKGROUND
We developed a protocol combining 5 cost-effective strategies to determine whether elective carotid endarterectomy (CEA) could be performed safely without adversely affecting well-established low morbidity and mortality rates and with significant hospital cost savings.


METHODS
Between April 1, 1995, and December 31, 1996, 109 of 141 patients were prospectively enrolled as candidates into a 5-step CEA protocol: (1) duplex ultrasonography (DU) performed at an accredited vascular laboratory as the sole diagnostic carotid preoperative study, (2) admission the day of operation, (3) cervical block anesthesia to eliminate intraoperative electroencephalogram monitoring, (4) transfer from the recovery room after a 4-hour observation period to the vascular ward, and (5) discharge the first postoperative morning. The other 32 patients were excluded from analysis; 16 patients were treated by vascular surgeons not participating in the protocol, 9 were treated concomitantly for other medical problems, and 7 were admitted emergently.


RESULTS
One patient died of carotid hemorrhage the first postoperative morning, and one had an intraoperative embolic stroke for a combined mortality-stroke rate of 1.8% (2 of 109). Of the 109 patients, 70% (76) underwent operation using DU as the sole diagnostic study, 95% (104) were admitted the day of operation, 76% (83) had cervical block anesthesia, 59% (64) were transferred to the floor the day of operation, and 83% (90) were discharged the morning after operation. None of the 109 patients were adversely affected by these 5 cost-saving strategies except potentially the patient who bled the first postoperative morning. The predicted charges of a patient treated with a perioperative protocol that many vascular surgeons currently use (preoperative arteriography, general anesthesia with intraoperative electroencephalogram monitoring, overnight intensive care unit stay, discharge on postoperative day 2) was $16,073 compared with $10,437 for a patient who completed all 5 steps of the protocol detailed above.


CONCLUSIONS
On the basis of these results documenting significant cost savings and acceptably low morbidity and mortality rates, this 5-step protocol may be considered the standard for performing CEA in this era of cost containment. These results may be compared with endovascular intervention, which has recently been proposed as a less expensive technique to treat carotid disease.
Syrek
J R
JR
Section of Vascular Surgery, Pennsylvania Hospital, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia 19106, USA.
Calligaro
K D
KD
Dougherty
M J
MJ
Doerr
K J
KJ
McAfee-Bennett
S
S
Raviola
C A
CA
Rua
I
I
DeLaurentis
D A
DA
D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D001766:Blindness; D002561:Cerebrovascular Disorders / Q000601:surgery*; D002985:Clinical Protocols; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D003365:Costs and Cost Analysis; D004569:Electroencephalography; D016894:Endarterectomy, Carotid / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000191:economics; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D002546:Ischemic Attack, Transient / Q000601:surgery*; D007902:Length of Stay; D008297:Male; D008329:Managed Care Programs; D008875:Middle Aged; D016343:Monitoring, Intraoperative; D015143:Philadelphia; D011446:Prospective Studies