Primary versus patching versus eversion as carotid endarterectomy closure

The type of closure after carotid endarterectomy (CEA), whether with patching primary closure or eversion resulting optimal results, remains somewhat controversial. We conducted a PubMed literature review search comparing CEA with patching versus CEA with primary closure ver-sus eversion CEA over the past four decades with emphasis on randomized controlled trials and systematic/meta-analysis and large single center or multicenter studies. The data showed that routine carotid patching can be recommended over primary closure (level 1 evidence); however, CEA with primary closure can be used for large internal carotid arteries (ICAs)>6 mm. Moreover, selective patching with CEA lacks level 1 evidence support. No significant differences were noted among the various patch materials used (e.g., synthetic patches like dacron, ACUSEAL, PTFE, pericardial patches and vein patches) and in the stroke/death rates between eversion carotid endarterectomy (ECEA) and conventional CEA (CCEA) with patching. In addition, no significant restenosis rates were noted between CEA with patching and ECEA; however, CEA with primary closure had higher late restenosis rates. There is level 1 evidence to support CEA with patching or eversion over primary closure and there is also no significant difference between the use of various patches.(Cite this article as: AbuRahma AF. Primary versus patching versus eversion as carotid endarterectomy closure. J Cardiovasc Surg 2023;64:174-83. DOI: 10.23736/S0021-9509.23.12618-8)