Search

Background Flow-diverting stents have demonstrated great promise for the treatment of cerebral aneurysms; however, clinical experience with the devices remains very preliminary. We present two cases of spontaneous delayed complications--one fatal aneurysm rupture and one symptomatic increase in aneurysm volume--following the treatment of intradural aneurysms with the Pipeline Embolization Device (PED). Presentation/intervention Two patients with unruptured, intradural aneurysms of the carotid artery underwent uneventful treatment with the PED (eV3, Irvine, California, USA). One patient, with a giant aneurysm of the carotid terminus, experienced worsening headache 5 days after the procedure and ultimately collapsed and became unresponsive. CT of the head demonstrated acute subarachnoid and intraventricular hemorrhage. The patient died the following day. A second patient with a large left posterior communicating artery aneurysm presented with progressive memory loss 3 months after PED reconstruction of the carotid artery. Although serial CT angiograms showed progressive thrombosis of the aneurysm to near-complete occlusion, MR of the brain demonstrated marked interval growth of the collective aneurysm-intra-aneurysmal thrombus mass with extensive edema throughout the adjacent left temporal lobe. Conclusions Flow-diverting devices have demonstrated tremendous promise for the treatment of complex, unruptured cerebral aneurysms. However, experience with this novel approach to aneurysm treatment is preliminary and the consequences of its application within the cerebrovasculature remain incompletely defined. Mural destabilization resulting in delayed, spontaneous, aneurysm growth and/or rupture may occur in the days to weeks following the application of flow-diverting devices to treat previously unruptured intracranial aneurysms. A better understanding of the incidence and etiology of these complications is essential for this technology to be optimally applied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The impact of carotid artery stent fractures on the incidence of adverse clinical events remains unclear. The objective of this study is to report the stent fracture rate and its association with in-stent restenosis and adverse outcomes in the ACT-1 trial (Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting Versus Endarterectomy in Asymptomatic Subjects Who Are at Standard Risk for Carotid Endarterectomy With Significant Extracranial Carotid Stenotic Disease).Methods: ACT-1 is a prospective multicenter trial of patients who have standard surgical risk with severe asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis randomly assigned to carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy (Abbott Vascular). The primary end point was a composite of death, stroke, or myocardial infarction during the 30 days after the procedure or ipsilateral stroke during the 365 days after the procedure. After 771 patients were enrolled, successively randomly assigned patients were required to undergo annual radiographic (x-ray) analysis for stent fracture. Images were independently adjudicated by a core laboratory.Results: Of 1021 patients treated with carotid artery stenting during a mean follow-up of 3.1±1.6 years, 939 had at least 1 x-ray during the follow-up period. Stent fracture was reported in 51 (5.4%) patients. With a maximum follow-up period of 5 years, adverse clinical outcomes occurred in 39 patients with at least 1 x-ray during the follow-up. Of 826 (80.9%) subjects who underwent both duplex ultrasound and x-ray, 822 (99.5%) were interpretable. There was no association between stent fracture and the primary end point (P=0.86) or with restenosis (P=0.53).Conclusions: In this large, independently adjudicated, multicenter study, the stent fracture rate was low and not associated with major adverse clinical events or in-stent restenosis.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00106938. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: Carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting are the leading approaches to revascularization for carotid stenosis, yet contemporary data on trends in rates and outcomes are limited.Objective: To describe US national trends in performance and outcomes of carotid endarterectomy and stenting among Medicare beneficiaries from 1999 to 2014.Design, Setting, and Participants: Serial cross-sectional analysis of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65 years or older from 1999 to 2014 using the Medicare Inpatient and Denominator files. Spatial mixed models adjusted for age, sex, and race were fit to calculate county-specific risk-standardized revascularization rates. Mixed models were fit to assess trends in outcomes after adjustment for demographics, comorbidities, and symptomatic status.Exposures: Carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting.Main Outcomes and Measures: Revascularization rates per 100 000 beneficiary-years of fee-for-service enrollment, in-hospital mortality, 30-day stroke or death, 30-day stroke, myocardial infarction, or death, 30-day all-cause mortality, and 1-year stroke.Results: During the study, 937 111 unique patients underwent carotid endarterectomy (mean age, 75.8 years; 43% women) and 231 077 underwent carotid artery stenting (mean age, 75.4 years; 49% women). There were 81 306 patients who underwent endarterectomy in 1999 and 36 325 in 2014; national rates per 100 000 beneficiary-years decreased from 298 in 1999-2000 to 128 in 2013-2014 (P < .001). The number of patients who underwent stenting ranged from 10 416 in 1999 to 22 865 in 2006 (an increase per 100 000 beneficiary-years from 40 in 1999-2000 to 75 in 2005-2006; P < .001); by 2014, there were 10 208 patients who underwent stenting and the rate decreased to 38 per 100 000 beneficiary-years (P < .001). Outcomes improved over time despite increases in vascular risk factors (eg, hypertension prevalence increased from 67% to 81% among patients who underwent endarterectomy and from 61% to 70% among patients who underwent stenting) and the proportion of symptomatic patients (all P < .001). There were adjusted annual decreases in 30-day ischemic stroke or death of 2.90% (95% CI, 2.63% to 3.18%) among patients who underwent endarterectomy and 1.13% (95% CI, 0.71% to 1.54%) among patients who underwent stenting; an absolute decrease from 1999 to 2014 was observed for endarterectomy (1.4%; 95% CI, 1.2% to 1.5%) but not stenting (-0.1%; 95% CI, -0.5% to 0.4%). Rates for 1-year ischemic stroke decreased after endarterectomy (absolute decrease, 3.5% [95% CI, 3.2% to 3.7%]; adjusted annual decrease, 2.17% [95% CI, 2.00% to 2.34%]) and stenting (absolute decrease, 1.6% [95% CI, 1.2% to 2.1%]; adjusted annual decrease, 1.86% [95% CI, 1.45%-2.26%]). Additional improvements were noted for in-hospital mortality, 30-day stroke, myocardial infarction, or death, and 30-day all-cause mortality as well as within demographic subgroups.Conclusions and Relevance: Among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries, the performance of carotid endarterectomy declined from 1999 to 2014, whereas the performance of carotid artery stenting increased until 2006 and then declined from 2007 to 2014. Outcomes improved despite increases in vascular risk factors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/purpose: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid artery endarterectomy (CEA) are complementary techniques for management of patients with carotid artery stenosis. This study investigates the impact of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and age on outcomes after carotid artery revascularization.Methods/materials: National Inpatient Sample was surveyed for CAS and CEA among stage 3 and 4 CKD and stage 5/end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients from 2004 to 2012. Primary endpoint was in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) stratified by kidney function and age. Regression analysis and propensity score matching were utilized.Results: There were 3299 patients that underwent CEA and 652 underwent CAS with stage 3 and 4 CKD. Whereas, 1630 patients underwent CEA and 511 patients underwent CAS with stage 5 CKD/ESRD. Patients undergoing CAS had more in-hospital MACCE. Coronary artery disease (OR1.35, 95%CI:1.07-1.70) and CAS (OR1.35, 95%CI:1.02-1.77) were independently associated with MACCE for stage 3 and 4 CKD patients. For the stage 5 CKD/ESRD cohort, CAS (OR1.75, 95%CI:1.29-2.37) was independently associated with MACCE. Stratifying by age, showed no difference in event rates except for higher MACCE among patients <60years old with stage 5 CKD/ESRD undergoing CAS (p<0.001). Propensity score matching showed that treatment type had no significant effect on MACCE rates.Conclusions: Among CKD cohorts studied nationally, in-hospital MACCE were higher for patients that underwent CAS. Overall, age group analyses showed that there was no difference in MACCE rates between CAS and CEA. Although CAS was independently associated with MACCE, propensity score matching showed no risk difference of MACCE between CAS and CEA for either CKD cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We have previously demonstrated an adverse impact of black race and Hispanic ethnicity on the outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS). The current study was undertaken to examine the influence of race and ethnicity on the cost of CEA and CAS. Methods: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2005–2009) was queried using ICD-9 codes for CEA and CAS in patients with carotid artery stenosis. The primary outcome was total hospital charges. Multivariate analysis was performed using a generalized linear model adjusting for age, sex, race, comorbidities (Charlson index), high-risk status, procedure type, symptomatic status, year, insurance type, and surgeon and hospital operative volumes and characteristics. Results: Hispanic and black patients were more likely to have a symptomatic presentation, and were more likely to undergo either CEA or CAS by low-volume surgeons at low-volume hospitals (P < 0.05, all). They were also less likely to have private insurance or Medicare (P < 0.001). Overall, CEA was less expensive than CAS over the 4-y study period ($29,502 ± $104 versus $46,713 ± $409, P < 0.001). Total hospital charges after CEA were increased in both blacks ($39,562 ± $843) and Hispanics ($45,325 ± $735) compared with whites on univariate analysis ($28,403 ± $101, P < 0.001). After CAS, total hospital charges were similarly increased in both blacks ($51,770 ± $2085) and Hispanics ($63,637 ± $2766) compared with whites on univariate analysis ($45,550 ± $412, P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, however, only Hispanic ethnicity remained independently associated with increased charges after both CEA (exponentiated coefficient 1.18; 95% CI [1.15–1.20]; P < 0.001) and CAS (exponentiated coefficient 1.17; 95% CI [1.09–1.24]; P < 0.001). Conclusion: Hispanic ethnicity was independently associated with increased hospital charges after both CEA and CAS. The increased charges seen in black patients were explained, in part, by decreased surgeon operative volume and increased postoperative complications. Further efforts are warranted to contain costs in minorities undergoing carotid revascularization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The ideal anesthetic technique for carotid endarterectomy remains a matter of debate. This study used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program to evaluate the influence of anesthesia modality on outcomes after carotid endarterectomy. Methods: Postoperative outcomes were compared for American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy between 2005 and 2009 with either general or regional anesthesia. A separate analysis was performed on a subset of patients matched on propensity for undergoing carotid endarterectomy with regional anesthesia. Results: For the entire sample of 24,716 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy and the propensity-matched cohort of 8,050 patients, there was no difference in the 30-day postoperative composite stroke/myocardial infarction/death rate based on anesthetic type. Within the matched cohort, the rate of other complications did not differ (2.8% regional vs 3.6% general anesthesia; P = .07), but patients receiving regional anesthesia had shorter operative (99 ± 36 minutes vs 119 ± 53 minutes; P < .0001) and anesthesia times (52 ± 29 minutes vs 64 ± 37 minutes; P < .0001) and were more likely to be discharged the next day (77.0% vs 64.4%; P < .0001). Conclusion: Anesthesia technique does not impact patient outcomes after carotid endarterectomy, but may influence overall cost of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A discrepancy between characteristics of patients treated with carotid angioplasty and stent placement (CAS) within and outside clinical trials, particularly characteristics with direct impact on clinical outcome, may limit generalization of clinical trial results. The objective of this study was to identify differences in demographic and clinical characteristics and outcomes related to CAS in patients treated within clinical trials and those treated outside clinical trials in a large national cohort. Methods: We determined the frequency of CAS performed within and outside clinical trials and associated in-hospital outcomes using data from the Nationwide Inpatient Survey data files from 2005 to 2009. All the in-hospital outcomes were analyzed after adjusting for potential confounders using multivariate analysis. Results: Of the 81,638 patients who underwent CAS, 16,078 (19.6%) underwent the procedure as part of a clinical trial. The mean age of the patients was significantly lower in patients treated with CAS as part of a clinical trial than those treated with CAS outside a clinical trial. The proportion of women and nonwhites was lower among patients treated with CAS as part of a clinical trial. The in-hospital mortality was two-fold higher among patients treated with CAS outside clinical trials (1.12% vs 0.53%; P = .0005). The rate of composite endpoint of stroke, cardiac events, and death was significantly higher among patients treated with CAS outside clinical trials (P = .02). After adjusting for age, gender, presence of renal failure, and hospital bed size, CAS performed as part of a clinical trial was associated with lower rates of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 0.467; 95% confidence interval, 0.290-0.751; P = .0017) and composite endpoint of stroke, cardiac events, and death (odds ratio, 0.752; 95% confidence interval, 0.594-0.952; P = .0180). Conclusions: Our results suggest that CAS procedures performed as part of clinical trials was associated with lower rates of in-hospital mortality and composite endpoint of stroke, cardiac events, and death in United States. These findings highlight the need for strategies that ensure appropriate adoption of CAS to ensure that the benefits observed in clinical trials can be replicated in general practice. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) contains information from discharge abstracts submitted by hundreds of community hospitals across the United States, and it frequently has been used as a resource for population-based research comparing the safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) to that of carotid endarterectomy (CEA). However, at least two findings from the NIS dataset seem open to question. First, several NIS studies have indicated that more than 90% of CEAs and CAS procedures now are being done in asymptomatic patients, a figure that substantially exceeds the prevalence of asymptomatic patients that has been reported elsewhere. Second, these studies also have suggested that the periprocedural stroke rate for CEA and CAS is lower at community hospitals contributing to the NIS than it was in the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial (CREST), even though the surgeons and interventionalists participating in CREST were stringently selected according to their previous experience and results. Neither of these two findings seems to pass the test of face validity. Furthermore, some unexpectedly low stroke-to-death (STD) ratios are present in the NIS data, especially for CAS. These issues may be related to poor documentation of preprocedural symptoms and periprocedural strokes in the medical records and to subsequent coding errors in the hospital discharge abstracts on which the NIS is based. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article highlights a study which examined the use of carotid stenting among elderly Medicare beneficiaries in the U.S. between 2005 and 2007. The results of the study revealed that carotid stenting is being performed by diverse specialists within hospital referral regions (HRRs). The study also showed that the population-based utilization rates are higher in HRRs where cardiologists perform most of the procedure with similar outcomes.

The article discusses a study on outcomes of carotid stenting based on operator experience in the U.S. from 2005 to 2007. The study evaluated the link between outcomes and two variables of operator experience, namely, annual volume and experience at the time of the procedure among new operators who performed carotid stenting for the first time following a national coverage decision by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Administrative data collected from fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years old and above was used under the study. Higher 30-day mortality was observed among patients treated by operators with lower annual volumes and patients treated early during a new operator's experience.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to analyze the CAPTURE 2 (Carotid ACCULINK/ACCUNET Post Approval Trial to Uncover Rare Events) study for physician- or site-related variables associated with differential outcomes for carotid artery stenting (CAS). Background: The CAPTURE 2 trial is an ongoing, prospective, nonrandomized, independently adjudicated, multicenter clinical study enrolling high-surgical-risk patients undergoing CAS. Methods: In this assessment of the CAPTURE 2 study, the American Heart Association carotid endarterectomy guideline limits were used to define acceptable site and physician CAS outcomes; therefore, the resulting population of nonoctogenarian, asymptomatic subjects in this analysis is confined to 3,388 (of the total 5,297) subjects treated at 180 U.S. hospitals by 459 operators between March 2006 and January 2009. Results: The rates of death, stroke, and myocardial infarction and death and stroke (DS) at 30 days were 3.5% and 3.3%, respectively, for the full CAPTURE 2 study cohort and 2.9% and 2.7%, respectively, for the asymptomatic, nonoctogenarian subgroup. In this subgroup, two-thirds of sites (118 of 180, 66%) had no DS events. Within the remaining sites, an inverse relationship between event rates and hospital patient volume as well as between event rates and individual operator volume was observed. The DS rates trended lower for interventional cardiologists compared with other specialties. Conclusions: Outcomes from the largest prospectively gathered, independently adjudicated, multicenter CAS study indicate that CAS can be safely performed in a variety of hospital settings by physicians with various specialties. The most important determinant of perioperative CAS outcomes was both site and operator CAS volume. A threshold of 72 cases was found to be necessary for consistently achieving a DS rate below 3% in this later-phase single arm study; background era and non-study operator experience will affect this determination. (Second Phase of “Carotid RX ACCULINK/RX ACCUNET Post-Approval Trial to Uncover Unanticipated or Rare Events”; NCT00302237) [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been proven to reduce the risk of stroke and death in both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients with carotid occlusive disease. Stroke is the third leading cause of death in the USA. Since up to one-third of stroke patients have a stroke secondary to carotid occlusive disease, it is important to offer CEA to this subgroup of patients that meet indications for surgery. Historically, literature has suggested that the optimal timing to perform CEA is approximately 6 weeks after an acute stroke. This was concluded owing to high perioperative morbidity and mortality if CEA was performed too early. However, data are increasingly showing that some patients do benefit from CEA earlier than 6 weeks after an acute stroke. This article discusses mid-20th Century literature and focuses on more recent 21st Century literature discussing the timing of CEA after acute stroke. Although there are data to support delayed CEA, it is reasonable to perform early CEA in select stroke patient populations. Candidates for early CEA should have complete or near resolution of symptoms, small infarcts on imaging and ipsilateral carotid stenosis. INSETS: ABCD carotid risk scoring system.;Key issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To describe geographic variation in population-based rates of carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) performed in Medicare beneficiaries.Methods and Results: Medicare claims and enrollment data were used to calculate age, sex, and race-adjusted rates of CAS and CEA for Medicare beneficiaries in each of 306 hospital referral regions between 1998 and 2007. Procedures were identified using a combination of Current Procedural Terminology codes as well as diagnostic and procedural ICD-9 codes. Overall, the rate of carotid revascularization has fallen slightly over the last decade (3.8 procedures per 1000 in 1998, 3.1 procedures per 1000 in 2007; P<0.0001). Although the use of CEA decreased, from 3.6 to 2.5 procedures per 1000 beneficiaries in 2007 (P<0.0001), the use of CAS has increased >4-fold between 1998 and 2007, growing from 0.1 to 0.6 CAS procedures per 1000 beneficiaries (P<0.0001). Further, CAS rapidly disseminated across the country over the last decade. In 1998, 66% of hospital referral regions had a hospital that performed CAS; however, by 2007, nearly all (95%) hospital referral regions performed CAS (P<0.0001). Last, in regions with the highest utilization rates of CAS, it appeared that CAS was performed as a substitute for CEA. There was little evidence that CAS was being performed in addition to CEA, as no correlation existed between regional rates of CAS and CEA (r=0.06).Conclusions: Even though CEA was used less frequently in 2007 than 1998, the use of CAS has grown significantly. Although regional variation in the use of CEA has remained fairly constant, regional variation has increased in the use of CAS. Given these changes in practice patterns, careful examination of the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of CAS is necessary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs. Stenting Trial (CREST) completed randomization on July 18, 2008. Sponsored by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS), the trial has enrolled 2,522 participants across North America and is the largest randomized clinical trial (RCT) comparing the efficacy of carotid artery stenting (CAS) to carotid endarterectomy (CEA). It is also the largest RCT to assess carotid revascularization in both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with carotid artery stenosis. Conventional-risk patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis (≥50% by angiography, ≥70% by ultrasound) or asymptomatic carotid stenosis (≥60% by angiography, ≥70% by ultrasound) were randomized to both treatment arms in a 1:1 ratio. Eligibility criteria for CREST were similar to those of the previous NINDS-sponsored CEA RCTs. The investigational devices used in the CAS arm of the study are the RX Acculink stent and the RX Accunet embolic protection system, (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, Calif). The primary aim is to contrast the efficacy of CAS versus CEA in preventing stroke, myocardial infarction, and all-cause mortality during a 30-day peri-procedural period, and ipsilateral stroke over the follow-up period (extending up to four years). The secondary aims are to contrast the efficacy of CAS and CEA in men and women, the restenosis rates of the two procedures, health-related quality of life, and cost effectiveness of CAS and CEA. The conclusion of enrollment in CREST marks the end of a long recruitment period from 117 community and academic hospital centers across the United States and Canada. Each surgeon and interventionalist underwent a rigorous credentialing process that included performance-assessment of prior CEA and CAS procedures. Credentialing of interventionalists also included a review of additional CAS procedures enrolled into a CREST lead-in phase prior to entering patients into the randomized trial; 1564 patients were enrolled in the lead-in, the final pathway for the largest credentialing effort to date for any clinical trial. CREST will provide long-term follow-up after carotid revascularization based on systematic ultrasonographic and neurologic surveillance, and on quality of life and cost-effectiveness comparisons between CAS and CEA in the setting of a RCT. We present a brief description of the CREST protocol, impediments that were overcome during the trial, salient results from the lead-in phase of the trial, a summary of enrollment activities and characteristics of the final cohort, and a timeline for anticipated results from the randomized phase. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Background: Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) following carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) is a rare but potentially devastating complication. The effect of more intense dual antiplatelet therapy required for CAS on the frequency of ICH has not been established. This study was undertaken to evaluate the nationwide occurrence of ICH associated with CAS vs CEA. Methods: The Nationwide Inpatient Sample was used to identify patients discharged after CAS and CEA during 2005. The type of revascularization and major adverse events, ie, in-hospital ICH, postprocedural stroke, and death rates, were determined by cross-tabulating specific procedural codes for CAS and CEA and diagnostic codes for carotid stenosis. Risk stratification was performed using the Charlson Comorbidity Index. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to assess the association between type of revascularization, comorbidities, ICH, and risk-adjusted mortality. Results: In 2005, the estimated number of carotid revascularizations was 135,903. The vast majority of patients underwent CEA (90.4%), whereas CAS was performed in 13,093 (9.6%) patients. Most patients (92.2%) underwent treatment for asymptomatic carotid stenosis. CAS patients had higher postoperative stroke rates (2.1% vs 1.1%; P < .001) and in-hospital mortality (1.1% vs 0.6%; P < .001) than CEA patients. ICH occurred in 19 patients (0.15%) after CAS and in 20 patients (0.016%) after CEA (P < .001). CAS was identified as an independent predictor for postoperative stroke (odds ratio [OR], 1.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.5-2.0; P < .001), in-hospital mortality (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.2-1.8; P < .001) and ICH (OR, 5.9; 95% CI, 3.1-11.1; P < .001) after adjusting for age, gender, symptomatic status, comorbidities, admission, and hospital type using logistic regression. In-hospital mortality was 12.5% among patients developing ICH (OR, 23.2; 95% CI, 9.1-54.4; P < .001). Conclusion: In the United States, patients undergoing CAS have not only significantly increased postoperative stroke and death rates compared with those undergoing CEA, but also a sixfold increased risk of ICH. Although ICH after CAS is extremely rare, its devastating nature and high mortality warrant further investigation to define specific risk factors, prevention, and treatment strategies. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objectives: With the evolution of endovascular techniques, carotid artery stenting (CAS) has been compared to carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Several studies have reported inferior results with CAS in the elderly. The objective of this study was to evaluate national outcomes of CAS and CEA and to compare utilization and outcomes of these procedures in different age groups. Methods: We evaluated the 2005 Nationwide Inpatient Sample for hospitalizations with a procedure of CAS or CEA within 2 days after admission at age 60 years and above. Procedures were analyzed with respect to patient demographics and associated complications. Results: A total of 80,498 carotid interventions (73,929 CEA and 6,569 CAS) were identified. The overall incidence of stroke was 4.16% after CAS and 2.66% after CEA (P < .0001). CAS was more often utilized in octogenarians than in younger patients (8.55% in 80+ vs 7.92% in 60-69 years; P < .0002). Increased age was not associated with greater stroke rates after CAS or CEA (P = .19 and .06, respectively). Octogenarians, compared to younger patients, had greater cardiac, pulmonary, and renal complications after CEA (3.0% vs 1.9%, 1.9% vs 1.0%, and 1.4% vs 0.54%, respectively; P < .0001). When adjusted by age, gender, complications, and Elixhauser comorbidities, patients after CAS were 1.6 times as likely to have a stroke (confidence interval [CI] = 1.37-1.78) when compared to CEA. Significant predictors of postoperative hospital mortality were stroke (odds ratio [OR] = 29.0; 95% CI = 21.5-39.1), cardiac complications (OR = 6.4; 95% CI = 4.4-9.1), pulmonary complications (OR = 3.5; 95% CI = 2.31-5.19), and renal failure (OR = 2.5; 95% CI = 1.6-3.8). With increasing age, overall mortality steadily increased after CAS (from 0.23% to 0.67%; P = .0409) but remained stable after CEA. Conclusion: Octogenarians did not have a higher risk of stroke after CAS when compared to younger patients. Stroke was the strongest predictor of hospital mortality. The increased utilization of CAS in the aged, which had significantly higher stroke rates in all age groups studied, may account for the greater hospital mortality seen after CAS in the elderly. Further studies focused on the aged are needed to define the best management strategies in the elderly. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objective: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) remains the procedure of choice for treatment of patients with severe carotid artery stenosis. The role of carotid artery stenting (CAS) in this patient group is still being defined. Prior single and multicenter studies have demonstrated economic savings associated with CEA compared with CAS. The purpose of this study was to compare surgical outcomes and resource utilization associated with these two procedures at the national level in 2005, the first year in which a specific ICD-9 procedure code for CAS was available. Methods: All patient discharges for carotid revascularization for the year 2005 were identified in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample based on ICD9-CM procedure codes for CEA (38.12) and CAS (00.63). The primary outcome measures of interest were in-hospital mortality and postoperative stroke; secondary outcome measures included total hospital charges and length of stay (LOS). All statistical analyses were performed using SAS version 9.1 (Cary, NC), and data are weighted according to the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) design to draw national estimates. Univariate analyses of categorical variables were performed using Rao-Scott χ2, and continuous variables were analyzed by survey weighted analysis of variance (ANOVA). Multivariate logistic regression was performed to evaluate independent predictors of postoperative stroke and mortality. Results: During 2005, an estimated 135,701 patients underwent either CEA or CAS nationally. Overall, 91% of patients underwent CEA. The mean age overall was 71 years. Postoperative stroke rates were increased for CAS compared with CEA (1.8% vs 1.1%, P < .05), odds ratio (OR) 1.7; (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-2.3). Overall, mortality rates were higher for CAS compared with CEA (1.1% vs 0.57%, P < .05) this difference was substantially increased in regard to patients with symptomatic disease (4.6% vs 1.4%, P < .05). By logistic regression, CAS trended toward increased mortality, OR 1.5; (95% CI .96-2.5). Overall, the median total hospital charges for patients that underwent CAS were significantly greater than those that underwent CEA ($30,396 vs $17,658 P < .05). Conclusions: Based on a large representative sample during the year 2005, CEA was performed with significantly lower in-hospital mortality, postoperative stroke rates, and lower median total hospital charges than CAS in US hospitals. As the role for CAS becomes defined for the management of patients with carotid artery stenosis, clinical as well as economic outcomes must be continually evaluated. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Carotid stent placement received assignment of two Category I Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes in 2005, based on the collaborative efforts of 10 medical, surgical, and radiological specialty societies. One code is used to report stent placement with embolic protection, the other without embolic protection. The codes are unusual for interventional procedures because they include all associated catheterizations, diagnostic imaging, angioplasty, and radiologic supervision and interpretation. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a coverage policy for carotid stenting in March 2005, imposing major limitations on eligibility. First, the Agency will only pay for carotid stents performed with embolic protection. In addition, each patient must meet three separate criteria to achieve Medicare coverage: (1) lateralizing transient ischemic attack, transient monocular blindness, or minor stroke with Rankin score <3; (2) an angiographically documented stenosis ≥70%, and (3) physiologic or anatomic criteria to indicate the patient is at high risk for carotid endarterectomy. No asymptomatic patients are covered under the current Medicare policy, but coverage criteria are currently under reconsideration. Finally, CMS restricts carotid stent coverage to facilities that meet its certification requirements. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Examines the use of patch angioplasty after carotid endarterectomy with primary closure in the United States. Reduction of postoperative recurrent stenosis and ipsilateral stroke; Conduction of carotid duplex ultrasound and magnetic resonance angiography; Application of operative technique and surveillance protocol.

Examines the use of carotid-to-subclavian transposition for treating a patient with coronary-subclavian steal syndrome in Danville, Pennsylvania. Advantages of the transposition over other forms of subclavian revascularization; Symptoms of coronary-subclavian steal syndrome; Details on the surgical morbidity and mortality of carotid transposition.

The author reflects on the controversy regarding who should perform carotid endarterectomy (CEA), the most frequently performed peripheral vascular surgical procedure in the U.S. According to the author, although the operation is conceptually simple, CEA is technically complex. On the other hand, the author noticed the growing evidence that CEA is being performed across a broad spectrum of clinical practice settings with remarkable safety in the country.

Objective: To determine whether carotid endarterectomy provides protection against subsequent cerebral ischemia in men with ischemic symptoms in the distribution of significant (greater than 50%) ipsilateral internal carotid artery stenosis.Design: Prospective, randomized, multicenter trial.Setting: Sixteen university-affiliated Veterans Affairs medical centers.Patients: Men who presented within 120 days of onset of symptoms that were consistent with transient ischemic attacks, transient monocular blindness, or recent small completed strokes between July 1988 and February 1991. Among 5000 patients screened, 189 individuals were randomized with angiographic internal carotid artery stenosis greater than 50% ipsilateral to the presenting symptoms. Forty-eight eligible patients who refused entry were followed up outside of the trial.Outcome Measures: Cerebral infarction or crescendo transient ischemic attacks in the vascular distribution of the original symptoms or death within 30 days of randomization.Intervention: Carotid endarterectomy plus the best medical care (n = 91) vs the best medical care alone (n = 98).Results: At a mean follow-up of 11.9 months, there was a significant reduction in stroke or crescendo transient ischemic attacks in patients who received carotid endarterectomy (7.7%) compared with nonsurgical patients (19.4%), or an absolute risk reduction of 11.7% (P = .011). The benefit of surgery was more profound in patients with internal carotid artery stenosis greater than 70% (absolute risk reduction, 17.7%; P = .004). The benefit of surgery was apparent within 2 months after randomization, and only one stroke was noted in the surgical group beyond the 30-day perioperative period.Conclusions: For a selected cohort of men with symptoms of cerebral or retinal ischemia in the distribution of a high-grade internal carotid artery stenosis, carotid endarterectomy can effectively reduce the risk of subsequent ipsilateral cerebral ischemia. The risk of cerebral ischemia in this subgroup of patients is considerably higher than previously estimated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate therapy with aspirin plus dipyridamole in reducing restenosis after carotid endarterectomy.Patients: A total of 163 patients having 175 surgical carotid endarterectomies.Intervention: Eighty-three patients (90 endarterectomies) were randomly assigned to receive oral aspirin, 325 mg, plus dipyridamole, 75 mg, beginning 12 hours preoperatively, followed by a second dose administered within 8 hours after the operation, and given three times daily thereafter for 1 year. Eighty patients (85 endarterectomies) received placebo medication that was identical in appearance to the study drugs.Measurements: After the adequacy of the surgical procedure was confirmed by intraoperative angiography, restenosis at the endarterectomy sites was evaluated using serial duplex ultrasound studies before hospital discharge and at 3-month intervals postoperatively for 1 year.Results: Based on the time for developing identifiable restenosis and on efficacy analysis, greater than 50% restenosis developed in 11 operated vessels (16%) in the treated group and in 10 arteries (14%) in the placebo group, yielding an observed risk increase of 14% (95% CI, -52% to 167%; P greater than 0.2). By intention-to-treat analysis, greater than 50% restenosis developed in 16 of 90 operated vessels in treated patients and in 10 of 85 arteries in patients receiving placebo (26% for the treated group and 12% for the placebo group; P = 0.18, Mantel-Haenszel statistic), representing an observed risk increase of 110% (CI, -5% to 365%). Similar differences were observed for greater than 20% restenosis and for the comparison of patients rather than operated vessels by either intention-to-treat or efficacy analyses.Conclusions: Because therapy not only failed to reduce carotid restenosis but may have actually increased its frequency, treatment with aspirin plus dipyridamole probably has no clinically important benefit on restenosis in patients having carotid endarterectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the roles of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) in patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid disease. In 2011, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gave its approval to the RX Acculink® Carotid Stent system for average-risk patients. Included is a list of key observations on CAS and CEA, along with unresolved issues surrounding the use of CAS.

The author examines the trends in carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in the U.S. which is characterized by wide geographic variations for three decades. He presents evidence that CEA is both underused and overused in minorities across the country. He presents a commentary on and an overview of a study which investigated CEA use by examining Medicare claims from 2003 to 2006. He also mentions factors which contributed to the wide geographic variations in CEA trends.

The article discusses research on the safety and effectiveness of carotid artery stenting. It references a study sponsored by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, published in the 2010 issue of "Lancet." The study involved 2,502 individuals with asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid artery stenosis to undergo either an endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting. The economics and insurance coverage implications of the Carotid Revascularization Endarerectomy vs. Stenting Trial (CREST) are also examined.

The article comments on the rapid increase in the use of carotid stenting for preventing cerebrovascular diseases in the U.S. despite nonconclusive data. According to several researchers, 70 to 90 percent of carotid stents are now being implanted in asymptomatic patients. Some studies also show an association between carotid stenting and increased risk of stroke and mortality.

This article focuses on the limitations of the SAPPHIRE clinical trial. The findings of the clinical trial had been significant for those in favor of carotid angioplasty and stenting. The clinical trial was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and its findings were published in the "New England Journal of Medicine." Comments regarding the end points chosen for the SAPPHIRE study are highlighted.

Discusses carotid disease and impaired cognition. Findings of Johnston and colleagues in the prevalence of impaired cognition in patients with high-grade stenosis of the left internal carotid artery but not the right internal carotid; Need for more inclusive studies before accepting this finding as evidence that carotid stenosis causes functionally important cognitive impairment; Example of two clinical trails, in USA and Europe; Alternative to carotid endarterectomy as carotid stenting; Recommendation of medical prophylaxis for most persons with asymptomatic carotid disease.

The article presents several articles related to health and medicine published in various medical journals. These articles focus on different topics such as research conducted to determine whether women after menopause could be treated by boosting the level of hormone leptin in the body, medical follow up conducted on people with fractured forearms and whether one could delay the occurrence of relapse of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia in children by introducing extensive initial treatment.

The article discusses the author's views on the impact of carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) on the patients with extracranial carotid stenosis. A study called Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial (CREST) reveals that CAS and CEA do not cause dissimilar results for a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, and death in patients with carotid stenosis at four years.

Objective: In different regions of the United States, highly variable rates have been documented for a wide range of procedures, such as prostatectomy and caesarean section. It is generally held that this variation is due to inconsistent physician practice patterns or other nonmedical considerations. Only limited research has been conducted regarding vascular surgical operations. We examined national data on the utilization of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) to determine the extent and diversity of regional variations. Methods: Medicare discharge data quantified the per capita rate of CEA in 50 states and the District of Columbia in 2003. Multiple metrics pertaining to risk factors, socioeconomic status, access to care, provider density, and local health care capacity were quantified. We performed bivariate analysis, Pearson (PC) or Spearman (SC) correlations, and multiple regression modeling. Results: In 2003, 83,164 CEAs were performed on 28,767,985 enrollees. CEA rates were 28.9 ± 7.8 per 10,000 (range, 5.6-44.7 per 10,000). The rate of CEA was highly correlated with the number of heart disease deaths (PC = 0.575, P < .0001), deaths by stroke (PC = 0.504, P = .0002), and percentage of adult smokers in a state (PC = 0.643, P < .0001). These three factors held the strongest association with variation in CEA rates. Statistically, they explained 51% of the variation in total number of CEAs (R 2 = 0.5074, P < .0001). Median annual income (PC = –0.608, P < .0001) and percentage of college degrees (PC = –0.606, P < .0001) displayed inverse relationships to CEA rates. Per capita hospital beds (SC = 0.540, P < .0001) and rural health care clinics (SC = 0.518, P < .0001) exhibited positive correlations. The number of physicians or vascular surgeons did not predict higher utilization of CEA. Conclusion: The strongest correlations for CEA were three markers associated with atherosclerotic disease: percentage of adult smokers and deaths from heart disease or stroke. Geographic variation in this vascular procedure is chiefly associated with variance in markers of disease prevalence, not physician preference or other nonmedical factors. The increased utilization of carotid stenting, accompanied by the participation of a much wider range of medical specialists, may affect this relationship in the future. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]