Comparison of nationwide trends in 30-day readmission rates after carotid artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy

ObjectiveCarotid revascularization procedures, carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA), are among the most common vascular interventions performed in the United States, with significant resource utilization. Whereas multiple studies have reported outcomes after these procedures, data regarding 30-day readmission rates after these interventions remain scant.MethodsThe U.S. Nationwide Readmission Database (2010-2014) was queried to identify all patients ≥18 years who were readmitted within 30 days after a hospital discharge for CEA or CAS.ResultsAmong 476,260 patients included, 13.5% underwent CAS and 86.5% underwent CEA. The combined 30-day readmission rate for all carotid revascularization procedures was 9.2% (10.6% after CAS and 9.0% after CEA). After 1:3 propensity matching, CAS was associated with higher risk of readmission compared with CEA (10.4% vs 9.4%). Neurologic complications and cardiac conditions were the two most common causes of readmission after both CAS (29.7% and 23.7%, respectively) and CEA (28.2% and 21.7%, respectively). The 30-day readmission rates were higher in CAS patients across all age groups as well as in those with a low or high baseline burden of comorbidities.ConclusionsIn this large nationwide study, CAS was associated with higher 30-day readmission rates compared with CEA irrespective of age or baseline burden of comorbidities. Neurologic or cardiac adverse events were responsible for >50% of readmissions after CAS and CEA.     

Periprocedural P2Y12 inhibitors improve perioperative outcomes after carotid stenting by primarily decreasing strokes

ObjectiveThe continuation of antiplatelet agents in the periprocedural period around carotid stenting (CAS) procedures is felt to be mandatory to minimize the risk of periprocedural stroke. However, the optimal antiplatelet regimen is unclear, with some advocating dual antiplatelet therapy, and others supporting the use of P2Y₁₂ inhibitors alone. The objective of this study was to evaluate the periprocedural effect of P2Y₁₂ inhibitors for CAS.MethodsThe Vascular Quality Initiative was used from years 2007 to 2020. All transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TF-CAS) procedures were included. Patients were stratified based on perioperative use of P2Y₁₂ inhibitors as well as symptomatic status. Primary end points were perioperative neurological events (strokes and transient ischemic attacks). Secondary end points were mortality and myocardial infarction.ResultsA total of 31,036 CAS procedures were included for analysis, with 49.8% TCAR and 50.2% TF-CAS cases; 63.8% of patients were male and 82.3% of patients were on a P2Y₁₂ inhibitor. P2Y₁₂ inhibitor use was more common in males, asymptomatic patients, those older than 70 years, and concurrent statin use. P2Y₁₂ inhibitors were more likely to be used in TCAR cases than in TF-CAS cases (87.3% vs 76.8%; P < .001). The rate of periprocedural neurological events in the whole cohort was 2.6%. Patients on P2Y₁₂ inhibitors were significantly less likely to experience a periprocedural neurological event (2.3% vs 3.9%; P < .001) and mortality (0.6% vs 2.1%; P < .001) than those who were not on a P2Y₁₂ inhibitor. There was no effect on the rates of myocardial infarction. On multivariate analysis, both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients on P2Y₁₂ inhibitors were significantly less likely to develop perioperative neurological events. Additionally, the use of P2Y₁₂ inhibitors demonstrated an independent significant effect in reducing of the rate of perioperative stroke (odds ratio, 0.29; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.33). Finally, additional analysis of the types of P2Y₁₂ inhibitors used revealed that all seemed to be equally effective in decreasing the periprocedural neurological event rate.ConclusionsThe use of perioperative P2Y₁₂ inhibitors seems to markedly decrease the perioperative neurological event rate with TCAR and TF-CAS in both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients and should be strongly considered. Patients with contraindications to P2Y₁₂ inhibitors may not be appropriate candidates for any CAS procedure. Additionally, alternative types of P2Y₁₂ inhibitors seem to be equally effective as clopidogrel. Finally, an analysis of the Vascular Quality Initiative demonstrates that, even for TCAR cases, only 87.3% of patients seem to be on P2Y₁₂ inhibitors in the periprocedural period, leaving room for significant improvement.     

Carotid artery angioplasty with stenting and postprocedure hypotension

INTRODUCTION: Although carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has become established as the preferred approach to the management of critical carotid stenosis, carotid angioplasty with stenting (CAS) has arisen as a competitive modality. We report here a nonindustry-supported experience using CAS in a nonselected patient population suffering from critical carotid stenosis. METHODS: All patients suffering from carotid stenosis (>50% symptomatic or >80% asymptomatic) were offered CAS or CEA. The first 36 patients who underwent attempted CAS over this last year are reported here. CAS was performed with the SMART PRECISE (Cordis, Inc, Miami Lakes, FL) or ACCULINK (Guidant, Inc, St Paul, MN) stents. All procedures were performed with cerebral protection. RESULTS: The planned procedure success rate was 97%, and the major adverse event (MAE) rate was 3.0% in 35 patients who underwent successful CAS. This included a minor stroke and a subendocardial myocardial infarction in the same individual. Both events were attributed to sustained postprocedure hypotension. The most frequent intraprocedure complications observed were bradycardia and hypotension. Persistent postprocedure hypotension requiring vasopressor support complicated 23% of cases. The average duration of vasopressor support in this group was 21 hours. CONCLUSION: CAS can be accomplished with an MAE comparable to CEA and will likely become the dominant alternative to CEA for the management of carotid stenosis. Management of periprocedural cardiovascular instability represents one of the most important elements in the safe conduct of CAS.     

Concomitant ipsilateral carotid endarterectomy and stenting is an effective treatment for tandem carotid artery lesions

ObjectiveData regarding the treatment of tandem carotid artery lesions at the bifurcation and ipsilateral, proximal common carotid artery (CCA) are limited. It has been suggested that concomitant treatment with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and proximal ipsilateral carotid artery stenting confers a high risk of stroke and death. The objective of this study was to evaluate the technique and outcomes of this hybrid procedure at a single institution.MethodsA retrospective chart review was performed including patients who underwent CEA + ipsilateral carotid artery stenting for treatment of atherosclerotic carotid artery disease between December 2007 and April 2017. Primary endpoints were postoperative myocardial infarction, neurologic event, and perioperative mortality.ResultsTwenty-two patients (15 male [68%]) underwent CEA + ipsilateral carotid artery stenting with a mean follow-up of 67 ± 77 months. The mean age was 70.0 ± 6.1 years old, all with a prior smoking history (eight current smokers [64%]). Twelve patients (55%) were treated for symptomatic disease and three had a prior ipsilateral CEA (one also with CAS). Computed tomographic angiography imaging was performed preoperatively in 21 patients (95%). CEA was performed first in 18 patients (82%) followed by ipsilateral carotid artery stenting. CEA was performed with a patch in 20 and eversion endarterectomy in two patients. Ipsilateral CCA was stented in 21 patients (96%) and one innominate was stented in a patient with a right CEA. Additional endovascular interventions were performed in three patients: 1 innominate stent, 1 distal ipsilateral internal carotid artery stent, and 1 right subclavian artery stent. All proximal stents were placed with sheath access through the endarterectomy patch in 12 (55%), CCA in 7 (32%), and through the arteriotomy before patching in 3 (14%). Distal internal carotid artery clamping was performed in 18 (90%, available 20) of patients before ipsilateral carotid artery stenting. All proximal lesions were successfully treated endovascularly with no open conversion. One dissection was created and treated effectively with stenting. One perioperative stroke (4.5%) occurred in a patient treated for symptomatic disease, 1 postoperative myocardial infarction (4.5%), and 2 patients (9.1%) with cranial nerve injuries. There was one patient who expired within 30 days, shortly after discharge for unknown reasons. The mean length of stay was 2.6 ± 2.0 days.ConclusionsIn appropriately selected patients, concomitant CEA and ipsilateral carotid artery stenting can be safely performed in high-risk patients with a low risk of myocardial infarction, neurologic events, and perioperative mortality when careful surgical technique is used, using direct carotid access, and distal carotid clamping for cerebral protection before stenting.     

Effect of frailty syndrome on the outcomes of patients with carotid stenosis

BackgroundFrailty syndrome confers a greater risk of morbidity and mortality after operative interventions. The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of frailty on the outcomes after carotid interventions, including both carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS).MethodsWe performed an 8-year (2005-2012) retrospective analysis of the National Surgery Quality and Improvement Program database, including patients who had undergone CEA or CAS for carotid artery stenosis. A modified frailty index score was calculated. Frail status was defined as a modified frailty index score of ≥0.27. The outcome measures were inpatient complications, mortality, failure to rescue (FTR), hospital length of stay, and 30-day readmissions. Multivariable regression analysis was performed to study the association between frailty and the perioperative outcomes.ResultsThe data from 37,875 patients were included. Of the 37,875 patients, 95.7% had undergone CEA, and 27.3% of the patients were frail (27% of the CEA and 26% of the CAS groups had qualified as frail). Overall, 11.7% of the patients had experienced complications, 2.2% had died, and 6.7% had been readmitted after discharge. On regression analysis, after controlling for age, gender, albumin level, type of surgery, and American Society of Anesthesiologists class, frail status was an independent predictor of complications (23.5% vs 7.2%; P < .001), mortality (5.2% vs 1.1%; P = .02), FTR (12.1% vs 4.7%; P = .02), and 30-day readmissions (14.9% vs 3.7%; P = .03). On subanalysis of the patients who had undergone CAS, no association was found between frail status and the occurrence of complications (odds ratio [OR], 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8-3.2), mortality (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.6-2.7), FTR (OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.4-2.3), and 30-day readmission rate (OR, 1.1; 95% CI, 0.5-3.1).ConclusionsFrailty syndrome was associated with morbidity and mortality among patients undergoing surgical interventions for carotid stenosis. In the present study, frailty was associated with significant mortality and morbidity for those who had undergone CEA but not for those who had undergone CAS. However, the present study was not designed to determine the optimal treatment of frail patients. Incorporating frailty status into the treatment algorithm (CEA vs CAS) might provide a more accurate risk assessment and improve patient outcomes.     

Carotid plaque with expansive arterial remodeling is a risk factor for ischemic complication following carotid artery stenting

Background

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is associated with a higher risk of periprocedural stroke than carotid endarterectomy. For better patient selection, more accurate risk factors should be identified. The aim of this study was to determine whether expansive arterial remodeling can predict ischemic complications in patients undergoing CAS.

Methods

This retrospective study included 82 patients with carotid stenosis treated by CAS. The plaque component was evaluated using MR plaque imaging before the procedure. Following the procedure, lesion assessment was performed using MRI diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI), and patients were classified as DWI positive or negative for comparison between groups.

Results

Fifteen patients were classified as DWI positive and 67 patients as DWI negative. The mean expansive remodeling rate was 1.76 ± 0.21 in the DWI-positive group and 1.35 ± 0.18 in the DWI-negative group (P < 0.001). Receiver-operating characteristic analysis revealed that the threshold for the expansive remodeling rate separating the two groups was 1.52 (area under the curve = 0.933). The positive predictive value of postoperative new DWI lesions in the high-intensity plaque associated with a high expansive remodeling rate was 64.3%, and the negative predictive value of the isointensity plaque associated with a low expansive remodeling rate was 97.8%. These values were higher than those of the plaque component alone (32.1% and 81.7%, respectively).

Conclusions

This study revealed that expansive arterial remodeling is a strong risk predictor of ischemic complication in CAS. Expansive remodeling rate measurements are very simple and provide useful information for determining treatment strategies for patients with carotid stenosis.

     

Are there predictive risk factors for complications after carotid artery stenting?

AIM: The aim of this study was to identify predictive risk factors for complications during and after carotid artery stenting (CAS). METHODS: A multivariate analysis was performed on the databases of 4 European high-volume centers regarding risk factor distribution between patients presenting with or without neurological complications 30 days after CAS. The cumulative 30-day neurological complication rate (death, major stroke, minor stroke and transient ischemic attack) was 2.8% in the total examined cohort of 3 179 consecutive CAS procedures. The following risk factors were taken into consideration for statistical analysis: age, symptomatic, male gender, nicotine abuse, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, polyvascular disease, diabetes, restenosis after carotid endarterectomy (CEA)/CAS, calcified internal carotid artery. RESULTS: Symptomatic (P=0.02) or hypercholesterolemic (P=0.02) patients are at significantly increased risk for neurological events 30 days after CAS. Asymptomatic women and men without hypercholesterolemia have the lowest risk on any 30-day neurological complications after CAS. CONCLUSIONS: CAS is a safe technique in experienced hands. Preprocedural neurological complaints and hypercholesterolemia can be defined as predisposing factors for 30-day neurological complications after CAS.     

Carotid Artery Stenting Versus Carotid Endarterectomy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background  The aim of this study was to evaluate and investigate the complications of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) by performing a meta-analysis based on prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Methods  We performed a search of multiple electronic databases for RCTs containing patients with carotid stenosis who underwent CAS or CEA, focusing on studies published during 1995–2008. Results  Eight trials with 2942 patients (1462 with CEA, 1480 with CAS) were analyzed. The pooled relative risk (RR) after CEA for stroke/death 30 days or 1 year was similar to that for CAS. Thirty-day RR = 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.45–1.07, p = 0.10. One-year RR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.43–1.79, p = 0.72. The rates of death, disabling stroke, and nondisabling stroke at 30 days did not differ significantly between CEA and CAS in the subgroup analysis. Compared with CEA, the relative risk of disabling stroke/death within 30 days was not significantly less for CAS with embolic protection devices (EPDs). The relative risk of myocardial infarction within 30 days, myocardial infarction within 1 year, and cervical/peripheral nerve injury within 30 days were significantly higher after CEA; the relative risk of bradycardia/hypotension within 30 days and the 1-year restenosis rate were significantly higher after CAS. Conclusions  CAS is equal to CEA with regard to the incidence of stroke/death. These procedures may be considered complementary rather than competing modes of therapy, each of which can be optimized with careful patient selection. CAS with an EPD may be appropriate in certain patients, and in general CAS should be considered cautiously in symptomatic patients.     

A comparison of carotid artery stenting with neuroprotection versus carotid endarterectomy under local anesthesia

BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) reduce the risk of stroke in patients with high-grade carotid artery stenosis. Despite the known impact of type of anesthesia on outcome after CEA, none of the current studies comparing CEA with CAS addresses the effect of anesthetic choice on perioperative events. In this study, we compare our results of distally protected CAS versus CEA under local anesthesia. METHODS: Clinical data of 345 patients who underwent 372 procedures for carotid artery occlusive disease over a 36-month were retrospectively collected for this analysis. Distal embolic protection was used in CAS procedures. All procedures, both CEA (n = 221, 59%) and CAS (N = 152, 41%), were performed under local anesthesia. The primary outcome measure was aggregate 30-day major ipsilateral stroke and/or death. Follow-up serial Duplex ultrasound examinations were performed. RESULTS: Both patient cohorts were similar in terms of demographic and risk factors, with the exception of a higher incidence of coronary artery disease in the CAS group (59% versus 30%, P <.05). The 30-day stroke and death rates were 3.2% (CAS) and 3.7% (CEA) (P = not significant). Cranial nerve injury only occurred in the CEA patients (2.3%). Perioperative hemodynamic instability was more common among patients in the CAS group (11.9% versus 4.1%, P <.05). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous carotid stenting with neuroprotection provides comparable clinical success to CEA performed under local anesthetic. Further studies are warranted to validate the long-term efficacy of CAS and to elucidate patient selection criteria for endovascular carotid revascularization.     

Carotid angioplasty and stenting for postendarterectomy stenosis: long-term follow-up

BACKGROUND: Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) for recurrent stenosis after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been proposed as an alternative to redo CEA. Although early results are encouraging, the extended durability remains unknown. We present the long-term surveillance results of CAS for post-CEA restenosis. METHODS: Between 1998 and 2004, 57 CAS procedures were performed in 55 patients (36 men) with a mean age of 70 years. The mean interval between CEA and CAS was 83 months (range, 6 to 245). Nine patients (16%) were symptomatic. RESULTS: CAS was performed successfully in all patients. No deaths or strokes occurred. A periprocedural transient ischemic attack (TIA) occurred in two patients. During a mean follow-up of 36 months (range, 12 to 72 months), two patients exhibited ipsilateral cerebral symptoms (1 TIA, 1 minor stroke). In 11 patients (19%), in-stent restenosis (> or =50%) was detected post-CAS at month 3 (n = 3), 12 (n = 3), 24 (n = 2), 36 (n = 1), 48 (n = 1), and 60 (n = 1). The cumulative rates of in-stent restenosis-free survival at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years were 93%, 85%, 82%, and 76%, respectively. Redo procedures were performed in six patients, three each received repeat angioplasty and repeat CEA with stent removal. The cumulative rates of freedom from reintervention at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years were 96%, 94%, 90%, and 84%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Carotid angioplasty and stenting for recurrent stenosis after CEA can be performed with a low incidence of periprocedural complications with durable protection from stroke. The rate of in-stent recurrent stenosis is high, however, and does not only occur early after CAS but is an ongoing process.     

Risk factors associated with microembolization after carotid intervention

BackgroundMicroembolization after carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been documented and may confer risk for neurocognitive impairment. Patients undergoing stenting are known to be at higher risk for microembolization. In this prospective cohort study, we compare the microembolization rates for patients undergoing CAS and CEA and perioperative characteristics that may be associated with microembolization.MethodsPatients undergoing CAS and CEA were prospectively recruited under local institutional review board approval from an academic medical center. All patients also received 3T brain magnetic resonance imaging with a diffusion-weighted imaging sequence preoperatively and within 24 hours postoperatively to identify procedure-related new embolic lesions. Preoperative, postoperative, procedural factors, and plaque characteristics were collected. Factors were tested for statistical significance with logistic regression.ResultsA total of 202 patients were enrolled in the study. There were 107 patients who underwent CAS and 95 underwent CEA. Patients undergoing CAS were more likely to have microemboli than patients undergoing CEA (78% vs 27%; P < .0001). For patients undergoing CAS, patency of the external carotid artery (odds ratio [OR], 11.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-117.6; P = .04), lesion calcification (OR, 5.68; 95% CI, 1.12-28.79; P = .04), and lesion length (OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.08-1.01; P = .05) were all found to be independent risk factors for perioperative embolization. These factors did not confer increased risk to patients undergoing CEA.ConclusionsPatients undergoing CAS are at higher risk for perioperative embolization. The risk for perioperative embolization is related to the length of the lesion and calcification. Identifying the preoperative risk factors may help to guide patient selection and, thereby, reduce embolization-related neurocognitive impairment.     

Percutaneous Endovascular Treatment of Innominate Artery Lesions: A Single-centre Experience on 77 Lesions

PurposeTo assess primary success and safety of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and/or stenting of innominate artery lesions and to compare its 30-day stroke/mortality level with the literature data.MethodsA total of 72 patients (77 stenoses, five recurrent, 58 symptomatic and 39 female) with seven innominate vessel occlusions, nine subocclusive lesions and 61 significant (>60%) stenoses of innominate artery treated between 2000 and 2009 were retrospectively reviewed. With the exception of seven, all procedures were performed using a transfemoral approach. A stent was implanted in 49 (63.6%) cases. Follow-up included neurological examination, carotid duplex scan and office/telephone interview.ResultsPrimary technical success was 93.5% (72/77). There was neither periprocedural (<48 h) death, nor major neurological complication. Minor periprocedural neurological complications consisted of 2/72 (2.6%) ipsilateral TIAs. Access site complications included 4 (5.2%) access site bleedings. Follow-up was achieved in 65/72 (90.3%) of all patients and 68 (88.3%) of all procedures for a mean of 42.3 months and revealed neither major neurological complication, nor additional TIA.The cumulative primary patency rate was 100% at 12 months, 98 ± 1.6% at 24 months, and 69.9 ± 8.5% at 96 months. The cumulative secondary patency rate was 100% at 12 and at 24 months, and 81.5 ± 7.7% at 96 months. Log-rank test showed no significant difference (p = 0.79) in primary cumulative patencies between PTA alone (n = 28) or PTA/stent (n = 49).ConclusionTransfemoral PTA with or without stent appears to be a safe treatment option for innominate artery lesions.     

Duration of asymptomatic status and outcomes following carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting in the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial

BackgroundMost carotid revascularization studies define asymptomatic as symptom-free for more than 180 days; however, it is unknown if intervention carries similar risk among those currently asymptomatic but with previous symptoms (PS) vs those who were always asymptomatic (AA).MethodsWe compared the periprocedural and 4-year risks of PS vs AA patients in the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial (CREST) randomized to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS)/angioplasty. Proportional hazards models adjusting for age, sex, and treatment were used to assess the risk of periprocedural stroke and/or death (S+D; any S+D during periprocedural period), stroke and death at 4 years (any S+D within the periprocedural period and ipsilateral stroke out to 4 years) and the primary end point at 4 years (any stroke, death, and myocardial infarction within the periprocedural period and ipsilateral stroke out to 4 years). Analysis was performed pooling the CEA-treated and CAS-treated patients, and separately for each treatment.ResultsOf 1181 asymptomatic patients randomized in CREST, 1104 (93%) were AA and 77 (7%) were PS. There was no difference in risk when comparing the AA and PS cohorts in the pooled CAS+CEA population for periprocedural S+D (2.0% vs 1.3%), S+D at 4 years (3.6% vs 3.2%), or the primary end point (5.2% vs 5.8%). There were also no differences among those assigned to CEA (periprocedural S+D, 1.5% vs 0%; S+D at 4 years, 2.7% vs 0%; or primary end point, 5.1% vs 2.4%) or CAS (periprocedural S+D, 2.5% vs 2.8%; S+D at 4 years, 4.4% vs 6.9%; or primary end point, 5.3% vs 9.8%) when analyzed separately.ConclusionsIn CREST, only a small minority of asymptomatic patients had previous ipsilateral symptoms. The outcomes of periprocedural S+D, periprocedural S+D, and ipsilateral stroke up to 4 years, and the primary end point did not differ for AA patients compared with PS patients.     

Hemodynamic events during carotid stenting are associated with significant periprocedural stroke and adverse events

BackgroundThere are limited data on the impact of carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS)-related changes in blood pressure, heart rate, and preprocedural medications on periprocedural stroke in contemporary, real-world practice. This study evaluates the risk attributable to the CAS-related hemodynamic events and the impact preprocedural medications have on mitigating this risk in a large, population-based cohort.MethodsWe studied all patients in the Vascular Quality Initiative who underwent CAS between January 2006 and December 2016. Kaplan-Meier, multivariable logistic, and Cox regression analyses were used to evaluate the impact of periprocedural hypertension, hypotension, bradycardia, and medication use on immediate periprocedural stroke (IPPS), 30-day, and 1-year stroke.ResultsOf the 13,698 CAS procedures studied, 1239 (9.1%), 1824 (13.3%), and 1333 (9.7%) patients experienced periprocedural hypertension, hypotension, and bradycardia, respectively. IPPS was 3.2% vs 2.1% vs 0.65% (P < .001), comparing patients with periprocedural hypertension vs hypotension vs normotension and 1.4 vs 1.0% (P = .19) for bradycardic vs nonbradycardic patients. Periprocedural hypertension was associated with a four-fold increase in IPPS (adjusted odd ratio [aOR], 3.97; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.63-5.99; P < .001). periprocedural hypotension and bradycardia were associated with 5.5-fold (aOR, 5.56; 95% CI, 3.24-9.52; P < .001) and 2.3-fold (aOR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.26-4.25; P = .007) increases in IPPS among patients with carotid symptoms. There was 76% decrease in IPPS for patients who did not experience a periprocedural hemodynamic event (aOR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.16-0.35; P < .001). Unlike preprocedural beta-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, prophylactic antibradyarrhythmic agents conferred a 58% reduction in IPPS among patients with carotid symptoms (aOR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23-0.78; P = .006). The periprocedural hemodynamic events were also associated with 7.7-fold increase in myocardial infarction (aOR, 7.70; 95% CI, 4.77-12.45; P < .001), a 2.2-fold increase in 30-day mortality (aOR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.61-3.12; P < .001), and a 16% increase in length of stay (aOR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.04-2.28; P = .042). The occurrence of these hemodynamic events is higher in patients with prior cardiac disease and the difference in periprocedural outcomes extended to 1 year.ConclusionsPeriprocedural hemodynamic events are associated with an increase in periprocedural stroke, myocardial infarction, death, and length of stay. Periprocedural hypertension in all patients; hypotension and bradycardia in patients with symptomatic carotid disease are associated with significant increase in IPPS. Prophylactic antibradyarrhythmic agents are associated with decrease in bradycardia and IPPS. These results heighten the need to anticipate and promptly address these CAS-related hemodynamic events, especially in susceptible patients.     

Outcome After 7 Years of Carotid Artery Stenting and Endarterectomy in Sweden – Single Centre and National Results

ObjectivesThe aim was internal vascular centre quality-control measures to compare single-centre results with the national perspective, as well as analysing the Swedish results from carotid artery stenting (CAS) and comparing a relatively high-volume single centre with the Swedish Vascular Registry (Swedvasc) data. The second aim was to compare CAS and carotid artery endarterectomy (CEA) outcomes for the same 7-year period.DesignRetrospective review of a single high-volume centre (Södersjukhuset (SÖS)) (approximately 30 CAS year^?1 approximately 90 CEA year^?1) versus Swedvasc National data.Materials and methodsAll consecutive selective patients treated with CAS at SÖS for a stenosis of the internal carotid artery (n = 208) or CEA (n = 552) between 2004 and 2011 were compared with all patients in Swedvasc registered for CAS (n = 258) and CEA (n = 6474). Primary outcome was 30-day frequency of stroke or death. Secondary outcome was stroke/death/acute myocardial infarction (AMI).ResultsThe 30-day frequency of any stroke or death after CAS at SÖS compared to the national data was 2.9% and 7.4%, respectively (P = 0.04). The 30-day AMI/stroke/death frequency was 3.4% and 9.5%, respectively (P = 0.01). After CEA during the same time period, the Swedvasc national data had a 4.4% frequency of 30-day stroke and death and 5.8% for AMI/stroke/death.ConclusionsCAS is not as safe as CEA from a national perspective but our results indicate that a single centre can achieve acceptable results with CAS.     

Patients with moderate to severe strokes (NIHSS score >10) undergoing urgent carotid interventions within 48 hours have worse functional outcomes

ObjectiveIncreasing evidence suggests that urgent carotid intervention after a nondisabling stroke is safe. However, the functional outcome of such patients has not been quantified for various degrees of stroke. We aimed to determine whether increased presenting stroke severity and timing to intervention are associated with poor functional outcomes in patients undergoing urgent carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) after an acute transient ischemic attack or stroke.MethodsWe reviewed all urgent carotid interventions from January 2013 through April 2017 at a single tertiary referral center. Preoperative variables analyzed included admission stroke severity, calculated by National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). The primary end point was the patient's neurologic functional independence at discharge, quantified by the modified Rankin scale (mRS) score (≤2, functionally independent; ≥3, dependent). Primary complications were defined as new or worsened stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, and death.ResultsA total of 120 urgent carotid interventions (CEA, n = 96; CAS, n = 22; 1 CEA with middle cerebral artery aspiration thrombectomy and 1 carotid embolectomy) were performed. Bivariate analysis demonstrated a correlation between admission NIHSS score and mRS score when patients were divided into groups with an admission NIHSS score ≤10 and >10 (P = .0029). Patients presenting with larger strokes (NIHSS score >10) were 3.4 times more likely (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-9.6; P = .024) to have functional dependence (mRS score ≥3) at discharge than patients presenting with minor to moderate strokes (NIHSS score ≤10). Patients undergoing CEA or CAS before 48 hours were also associated with a worse discharge mRS score compared with those undergoing carotid interventions after 48 hours (odds ratio, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.4-8.7; P = .007). Even when emergent carotid interventions were excluded from the subgroup of patients undergoing CEA or CAS within 48 hours, discharge mRS correlated with time to procedure (days 1- 2 compared with >2 days). The odds of having discharge functional dependence (mRS score ≥3) were 3.4 times more likely for patients with the procedure performed at 1 to 2 days compared with >2 days (95% CI, 1.3-9.1; P = .014).ConclusionsUrgent carotid intervention performed in patients with moderate or severe strokes (NIHSS score >10) and before 48 hours is associated with functional dependence (mRS score ≥3) on hospital discharge. By demonstrating a clear correlation between admission NIHSS score and interval time to procedure with independent neurologic functional outcomes, these data aid in clinical decision-making for this high-risk subpopulation of patients who present with acute symptomatic carotid lesions.     

Transcervical approach for carotid artery stenting with transitory reversal flow: Case report

IntroductionCarotid artery stenting (CAS) has been indicated as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy in high risk patients. Sometimes, an aortic arch can be anatomically unfavourable for CAS. Herein we report our experience in a case of CAS with transcervical approach.Presentation of caseA 77-year-old male was referred to our hospital for severe subtotal occlusion of the left internal carotid artery. He had a past medical history of radiation to the head and neck for laryngeal cancer. Previous CT-angiography had shown a type III aortic with bovine arch. CAS via transcervical approach was performed with transitory reversal flow during the placement of RX Spider Filter 6 Fr (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN). After release of 7 × 30 mm RX Xact carotid stent (Abbott Vascular, Chicago, IL) and ballooning with a 5.5 × 30 mm Rx Submarine balloon catheter (Medtronic Minneapolis, MN), angiography check showed a good result.DiscussionThe transcervical approach is an innovative technique where usually a shunt is created, either between the common carotid artery and the internal jugular vein or between the common carotid artery and the common femoral vein. This flow reversal reduces the risk of periprocedural embolic events. In our experience a short proximal clamping with transitory reversal flow, reduces the invasiveness of procedure with good outcomes.ConclusionTranscervical carotid access with transitory reversal flow is a valid alternative in complicated patient with anatomy unfit for CAS.     

Clinical impact of sex on carotid revascularization

BackgroundThe impact of sex in the management of carotid disease is unclear in the current literature. Therefore, we evaluated the effect of sex on perioperative outcomes following carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS).MethodsWe included patients who underwent CEA or CAS between 2012 and 2017 in the Vascular Quality Initiative database. Our primary outcome was perioperative stroke/death. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital stroke, 30-day mortality, and in-hospital MI. We compared perioperative outcomes between female and male patients, stratified by treatment modality and symptom status, and used multivariable regression to account for differences in baseline characteristics.ResultsA total of 83,436 patients underwent either a CEA (71,383) or CAS (12,053). Asymptomatic and symptomatic CEA females were less likely to be on a preoperative antiplatelet agent, when compared to males. Females overall, were less likely to be on a preoperative statin and more likely to have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Within the CAS cohort, females were more likely to have a previous ipsilateral CEA. There were no differences between males and females in major adverse events following CEA for asymptomatic disease. Following CEA for symptomatic disease, there was no difference in stroke/death rate or in-hospital stroke. However, females experienced a higher 30-mortality after adjustment (univariate: 1.0% vs 0.7%, P = .04; adjusted: odds ratio [OR], 1.4:1.02-1.94). Following CAS for asymptomatic disease, females experienced a higher rate of perioperative stroke/death (2.9% vs 1.9% P = .02; OR, 1.5: 1.05-2.03) and in-hospital stroke (2.1% vs 1.2% P = .01; OR, 1.8: 1.20-2.60). There were no differences in outcomes for symptomatic females vs males undergoing CAS.ConclusionsFemales with carotid disease less frequently receive optimal medical treatment with antiplatelet agents and statins. This is an important target area for quality improvement issue in both females and males. Furthermore, among symptomatic CEA patients the female sex is associated with higher mortality and among asymptomatic CAS patients, females experience higher rates of stroke/death. These findings suggest that careful patient selection is necessary in the treatment of female patients. Quality improvement projects should be created to further investigate and eliminate the disparities of optimal medical management between the sexes.     

Surgical Treatment for Cervical Carotid Artery Stenosis in the Elderly: Importance of Perioperative Management of Ischemic Cardiac Complications

Ischemic cardiac complication is one of the major perioperative complications of surgical treatment for cervical carotid stenosis, carotid endarterectomy (CEA), and carotid artery stenting (CAS), and may greatly affect surgical outcome, especially in elderly patients aged ≥ 80 years. We retrospectively analyzed the records of 259 patients (34 patients aged ≥ 80 years) treated by CEA and 61 patients (12 patients aged ≥ 80 years) treated by CAS at Aizu Chuo Hospital from January 2000 to September 2010. Preoperative ischemic heart disease screening was performed in all patients. If high risk of coronary atherosclerotic stenosis was detected, treatment for coronary lesion was performed prior to CEA or CAS. There was no preoperative ischemic cardiac complication in both the CEA and CAS groups. Perioperative complications (morbidity + mortality) occurred in 2.9% of patients aged ≥ 80 years and 1.7% of patients aged ≤ 79 years in the CEA group, and 8.3% and 8.1% of patients, respectively, in the CAS group. There was no statistically significant difference by age in either group. CEA could be safely performed with tolerable complication rates even in elderly patients. However, the complication rate in the CAS group was relatively high. New ischemic lesion on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging, both symptomatic and asymptomatic, tended to occur at a higher rate in the CAS group, especially in the elderly patients. Thorough perioperative management may minimize ischemic cardiac complications even in elderly patients. Efforts must be continued to minimize surgical complications, especially for CAS. Noninvasive medical treatment should also be considered for elderly patients.     

No gender influences on clinical outcomes or durability of repair following carotid angioplasty with stenting and carotid endarterectomy

Introduction To determine if gender influences clinical outcomes and durability of repair after carotid angioplasty with stenting (CAS) or carotid endartercetomy (CEA), an analysis of patient records was performed.Methods This study included 89 CAS patients (47 men and 42 women) and 93 CEA patients (53 men and 40 women). Patients underwent duplex scans 6, 12, 24 months postprocedure. The outcomes of periprocedural mortality, major adverse events, strokes, and myocardial infarctions were assessed. Incidence of critical restenosis and recurrence of symptoms was also assessed.Results No significant differences were noted between men and women who had undergone either CAS or CEA (P > .05) for clinical outcomes and durability of repair. No differences for periprocedural mortality, major adverse events, critical restenosis, recurrent neurologic symptoms, and adverse event free survival were found.Conclusions These results do not indicate substantial gender influences on clinical outcomes or durability of repair following CAS and CEA.