4.0 Article Proceedings Paper

Preoperative Embolization in Carotid Body Tumor Surgery: Is It Required?

Journal

ANNALS OF OTOLOGY RHINOLOGY AND LARYNGOLOGY
Volume 119, Issue 5, Pages 279-283

Publisher

ANNALS PUBL CO
DOI: 10.1177/000348941011900501

Keywords

blood loss; carotid body tumor; paraganglioma; preoperative embolization

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: We compared estimated blood loss (EBL) in patients who underwent surgical excision of carotid body tumors (CBTs) after preoperative superselective angiography with embolization (PSE) with that in patients who underwent excision of CBTs without PSE. Methods: We performed a retrospective chart review of a consecutive case series in a single surgeon's practice within an academic tertiary care medical center. Twenty-five patients underwent surgical resection of a CBT from 1989 to 2009. From 1989 to 1996, 10 consecutive patients had PSE of the CBT, whereas the subsequent 15 patients (1996 to 2009) had no PSE. Demographic data including age, sex, and tumor size were collected. The EBL was obtained from intraoperative records and operative notes dictated at the time of surgery. Tumor size was based on preoperative radiographic measurements by a senior radiologist and the surgeon. Results: In the 10 patients with PSE, the mean age was 41 years (range, 22 to 72 years) and the mean tumor size was 4.8 cm (range, 2.9 to 8.3 cm). The mean EBL was 305 mL (range, 50 to 1,000 mL); 2 patients had an EBL of more than 400 mL. In the 15 patients without PSE, the mean age was 43.7 years (range, 20 to 75 years) and the mean tumor size was 4.4 cm (range, 2.8 to 7.9 cm). The mean EBL was 265.6 mL (range, 40 to 900 nth); 2 patients had an EBL of more than 400 mL. There were no significant differences between the 2 groups with regard to age, tumor size, or EBL. Conclusions: Preoperative superselective angiography with embolization of a CBT does not lead to a significant reduction in intraoperative EBL.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.0
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available