Search

Background: Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) is growing in popularity. Although major clinical end-points such as stroke rate and mortality are well-known, patient reported outcomes such as pain, and length of stay are among the purported benefits that are as yet untested. We sought to determine if there are differences in pain and other clinical outcomes when comparing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and TCAR. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of 326 patients undergoing TCAR (n = 50) or CEA (n = 276) from 2019-2023. Primary outcomes of interest were maximum pain numeric rating scales (NRS) reported in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) and on postoperative days (POD) zero and 1, and oral morphine milligram equivalents (OMMEs) received intraoperatively through POD1. Secondary outcomes included length of stay (LOS), complications, and 30-day emergency department (ED) returns/readmissions. Results: Fifty TCAR and 150 CEA patients were included in the propensity score matched cohorts. TCAR patients reported lower pain-NRS in PACU (P <.001) and on POD0 (P =.002), but similar pain scores on POD1 (P =.112). Postoperatively, TCAR patients were less likely to receive opioids (52% vs 75.3%, P =.003) and received less OMME from PACU through POD1 (12.8 ± 16.2 vs 23.2 ± 27.2, P =.001). After adjusting for age, sex, BMI, prior chronic opioid use, and prior carotid surgery, TCAR patients were approximately 70% less likely to receive post-operative opioids. No significant differences in LOS, 30-day ED returns/readmissions, or complications were observed between groups. Conclusions: Compared with CEA, patients undergoing TCAR reported lower pain scores and consumed fewer narcotics overall. However, the absolute difference was modest, and pain scores were low in both cohorts. Differences in pain and post-operative narcotic use may be of less importance when deciding between TCAR and CEA. Total non-opioid protocols may be feasible in both approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Carotid bifurcation stenosis may co-exist simultaneously with more proximal common carotid artery (CCA) atherosclerotic plaquing, primarily at the vessel origin in the aortic arch. This scenario is relatively infrequent and its' management does not have quality randomized data to support medical vs surgical treatment. It is logical to treat any high grade common carotid lesions proximal to a carotid bifurcation endarterectomy (CEA) site both to prevent perioperative emboli or thrombosis as well as future embolization. Prior long-term investigations of the combined treatment paradigm have been low volume analysis. Further, prior studies focus on perioperative outcomes with respect to stroke prevention. The only prior VQI study investigating mid-term outcomes following simultaneous CEA with proximal CCA endovascular therapy provided data on less than 10 patients beyond 1.5 years. The long-term follow-up (LFTU) component initiative within VQI has been emphasized in recent years, now allowing for much more robust LTFU analysis. Methods: Four cohorts were created for perioperative outcome analysis and Kaplan Meier freedom from event analysis: CEA in isolation for asymptomatic disease; CEA in isolation for symptomatic patients; CEA with proximal CCA endovascular intervention for asymptomatic; and, CEA with proximal CCA intervention for symptomatic patients. Binary logistic multivariable regression was performed for perioperative neurological event and 90-day mortality risk determination and Cox multivariable regression analysis was performed for long term freedom from cumulative ischemic neurological event and long-term mortality analysis. Symptomatology and type of surgery (CEA with or without CCA intervention) were individual variables in the multivariable analysis. Neurological ischemic event in this study encompassed transient ischemic attack (TIA) and stroke combined. Results: We noted a statistically significant (P <.001) escalation in rates of perioperative neurological event, myocardial infarction (MI), carotid re-exploration, 90 day mortality and combined neurological event and 90 day mortality moving from: A) asymptomatic CEA in isolation to B) symptomatic CEA in isolation to C) asymptomatic CEA combined with proximal CCA intervention to D) symptomatic CEA in combination with proximal CCA intervention. The positivity rate for the combined outcome of perioperative ischemic neurological event and 90 day mortality was 2.2% amongst asymptomatic CEA in isolation, 4.1% amongst symptomatic CEA in isolation, 4.4% amongst asymptomatic CEA in combination with proximal CCA intervention; and 8.8% in patients with symptomatic lesions undergoing combined CEA with proximal CCA intervention. On multivariable analysis patients undergoing CEA with proximal CCA endovascular intervention experienced greater risk for perioperative neurological ischemic event (aOR 2.03, 1.43-2.90, P <.001), combined perioperative neurological ischemic event and 90 day mortality (aOR 2.13, 1.62-2.80, P <.001), long term mortality (HR 1.62, 1.12-2.29, P <.001), and cumulative neurological ischemic event in long term follow up (HR 1.62, 1.12-2.29, P =.007). Amongst 4395 cumulative ischemic neurological events in all study patients, 34% were TIA. Conclusions: Carotid bifurcation endarterectomy in combination with proximal endovascular common carotid artery intervention caries an over two fold higher perioperative risk of neurologic ischemic event and 90 day mortality relative to CEA in isolation for asymptomatic and symptomatic cohorts respectively. After surgery, freedom from cerebral ischemia and mortality for patients undergoing dual intervention is closely aligned with patients undergoing CEA in isolation. Despite high adverse perioperative event rates for the combined CEA and CCA treatment, there is likely long term stroke reduction and mortality benefit to this approach in symptomatic patients based on the event free rates seen herein after initial hospital discharge. The benefit of treating asymptomatic tandem ICA and CCA lesions remains vague but the 4.4% perioperative neurologic event and death rate suggests that these patients would be better managed with medical therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Several studies suggest that females have higher perioperative adverse events and decreased benefit from carotid artery revascularization with transfemoral carotid artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) compared to males. However, there are limited data of sex-based outcomes for transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR). Methods: A retrospective review of prospectively maintained system-wide TCAR databases was performed between December 2015-January 2022. Patients who underwent TCAR were stratified based on sex. Relevant demographics, medical conditions, anatomical characteristics, intra- and postoperative courses, and adverse events were captured. Results: 729 patients underwent TCAR, 486 (66.6%) male and 243 (33.3%) female. Males were more likely to be diagnosed with coronary artery disease (56.9% vs 47.7%, P<.01) and were active smokers (30.4% vs 21.4%, P <.01). Age, symptomatic status, BMI, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, arrhythmia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, history of myocardial infarction, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction <30%, end-stage renal disease and Charlson Comorbidity Index were similar. In the perioperative period, there was no significant difference in reintervention rates (1.6% vs 1.2%, P =.75), cranial nerve palsy (.6% vs.4%, P >.99), ipsilateral stroke (1.9% vs 3.3%, P =.29), stent thrombosis (.4% vs.8%, P >.99), myocardial infarction (0% vs 0%, P >.99) and death (1.2% vs 1.2%, P >.99). In follow-up, no significant difference was found in reintervention, ipsilateral stroke, contralateral stroke, myocardial infarction, in-stent restenosis >50%, stent thrombosis, and death. Conclusions: Males and females did not have a statistically significant difference in outcomes when comparing ipsilateral stroke, in-stent thrombosis, conversion to CEA, and death after TCAR. However, our cohort comprised predominantly male patients and may conceal statistical significance as the females in our cohort did have a higher tendency toward developing complications. Future studies with a larger female cohort should be conducted to determine whether there is a true disparity of outcomes between the males and females undergoing TCAR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction is presented in which author discusses articles on topics including focuses on recurrent carotid stenosis rates after eversion carotid endarterectomy, after primary carotid angioplasty and stenting and after stenting for carotid restenosis following previous eCEA.

Objectives: The aim of our study was to evaluate the near-infrared spectroscopy monitoring system to detect cerebral ischaemia, find indications for selective shunting during carotid endarterectomy and compare it with an internal carotid artery stump pressure monitoring technique in patients operated under local anaesthesia.Methods: During January 2015 and November 2018, 131 patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy under local anaesthesia were prospectively included in the study. Near-infrared spectroscopy as intraoperative monitoring was applied and compared with stump pressure.Results: Carotid endarterectomy was performed successfully in 106 patients operated under local anaesthesia. Meanwhile, 25 patients developed neurological changes (motor or consciousness impairment, weakness of extremities, cognitive decline) during clamping, and all of them received a shunt. ΔrSO2, stump pressure and rSO2 (-11 ± 8%, 31 ± 6mmHg, 58 ± 11) values were smaller in the group of shunted subjects versus non-shunted group subjects (-2 ± 5%, 61 ± 17 mmHg, 64 ± 8) after 1 min of internal carotid artery clamping (p < 0.05). Statistical analysis showed a sensitivity of 90% (95% CI: 0.85-0.95) and a specificity of 70% (95% CI: 0.62-0.78) for a ≥10% drop in ΔrSO2 to predict ischaemia symptoms during carotid clamping. Using stump pressure with a cut-off value of ≤40 mmHg for predicting symptoms, the sensitivity was 82% and specificity 54%.Conclusions: Near-infrared spectroscopy is a suitable non-invasive cerebral oxygenation monitoring method during carotid endarterectomy. A 10% decrease of ΔrSO2 had a good correlation with clinical cerebral ischaemia signs and matched well with the stump pressure cut-off value of ≤40 mmHg. There is a possibility of near-infrared spectroscopy to replace stump pressure in cerebral oxygenation monitoring during carotid endarterectomy. However, we need larger prospective multicentre studies to identify the optimal threshold for shunt requirement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The treatment of patients with symptomatic tandem lesions of their carotid artery is challenging. One solution is carotid endarterectomy with retrograde ipsilateral proximal endovascular intervention, but it is associated with a higher postoperative risk of stroke. Unfortunately, symptomatic patients with tandem lesions often present with stenotic, calcified supra-aortic arch vessels and require multiple modalities to adequately revascularize including staged approaches or hybrid procedures. Herein, we report the successful treatment of a symptomatic 76-year-old female with a calcific severe stenosis of her innominate artery treated by a prosthetic bypass graft from her ascending aorta to proximal common carotid artery, interval ligation, and use of TransCarotid artery revascularization with reverse-flow to treat her proximal internal carotid artery stenosis via this bypass graft. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Carotid artery endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) are 2 effective treatment options for carotid revascularization and stroke prevention. The long-term outcomes of Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial (CREST) reported similar stroke and death rate between the 2 procedures. This study presents the short- and long-term outcomes of CEA and CAS of all risk patients performed by a single vascular surgeon in a real-world setting. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent CEA and CAS from September 2005 to June 2017 at our institute. Student t test, χ2, and Fisher exact tests were used to compare patient's characteristics. Multivariate logistic, cox regression models and survival analysis were used to compare postoperative and long-term outcomes between the 2 groups. Results: Over 2000 patients were evaluated for carotid artery stenosis during the study period, and 313 revascularization procedures were performed (CEA: 47%, CAS: 53%). Patients' age (Mean [95% confidence interval, CI] 68.8 [67.2-70.4] vs 69.7 [68.2-71.3], P = .40) was similar between CEA and CAS. Patients who underwent CAS had significantly higher comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD], chronic heart failure [CHF], hyperlipidemia, and prior ipsilateral intervention, all P < .05). No difference was found in 30-day complications after CEA versus CAS including stroke (2.0% vs 1.2%), myocardial infarction (MI; 0.7% vs 1.2%), death (0% vs 1.2%) as well as combined major adverse events (stroke/death/MI; 2.7% vs 3.0%; all P > .05). Overall 7-year survival, stroke-free survival and restenosis-free survival were similar between the 2 groups (P > .5). Significant predictors of mortality were diabetes (hazard ratio, HR [95% CI]: 2.41 [1.15-5.08]), chronic kidney disease (HR [95% CI]: 4.89 [1.97-12.13]), and COPD (HR [95% CI]: 3.31 [1.43-7.71]; all P values <.05). Statin use was protective with 71% reduction in risk of mortality (HR [95% CI]: 0.29 [0.12-0.67], P = .004). Conclusion: Our experience showed comparable short- and long-term outcomes of CAS and CEA performed for carotid artery stenosis by vascular surgeon. There was no difference between single institutional long-term outcomes and CREST outcomes following CEA and CAS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: In case of highly atherosclerotic carotid process, carotid graft replacement might be a potential solution for successful procedure. Many studies evaluated the results of vein and polytetrafluorethilen (PTFE) graft usage at the carotid bifurcation, while the experience on the Dacron graft due to extensive atherosclerotic process is missing. The aim of our study was to evaluate 30-day and long-term results of the Dacron graft on carotid artery used in patients with extensive atherosclerotic disease.Material and Methods: This retrospective study analysed early and long-term neurological outcome as well as Dacron graft patency in patients operated with carotid reconstruction. Early results were confirmed by follow-up clinical examination, whereas late results were assessed by follow-up clinical examination as well as duplex sonographic examination at least 1 year after the surgery. As for statistical methods we used descriptive analysis tests, Chi-square test, and logistic regression.Results: Carotid graft replacement was performed in 292 patients, before endarterectomy in 155 (53.09%), or after already attempted unsuccessful eversion endarterectomy in 137 (46.91%). Nineteen (6.5%) patients had a stroke due to ipsilateral and contralateral ischaemia or haemorrhagic in 17 (5.8%), 1 (0.3%) and 1 (0.3%) patients, respectively. Significantly higher rate of strokes occurred when the graft reconstruction was used after the failure of endarterectomy (8.5% vs. 3.5%, p = 0.029). Stroke and death rate was 7.19%. Factors that increased risk of early stroke were the length of plaque in the internal carotid artery measured intraoperatively (p = 0.025) and the surgical tactic to perform graft reconstruction after attempted extensive endarterectomy (p = 0.029).Conclusion: Low number of patients with carotid stenosis has extensive atherosclerotic process longer than 4 cm that might jeopardise eversion endarterectomy. Carotid graft replacement with Dacron graft provide early results that are comparable with other conduits; however, in such patients reconstruction should be selected individually based on surgical experience and anatomical distribution of stenotic disease. Due to high risk of stroke, only symptomatic patients with such extensive atherosclerotic disease should be operated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cognitive and emotional outcomes after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting with embolic protection device (CAS + EPD) are not clear. Patients were entered prospectively into a United States Food and Drug Administration-approved single-center physician-sponsored investigational device exemption between 2004 and 2010 and received either CEA or CAS + EPD. Patients underwent cognitive testing preprocedure and at 6, 12, and 60 months postprocedure. Cognitive domains assessed included attention, memory, executive, motor function, visual spatial functioning, language, and processing speed. Beck Depression and anxiety scales were also compared. There were a total of 38 patients that met conventional indications for carotid surgery (symptomatic with ≥50% stenosis or asymptomatic with ≥70% stenosis)-12 patients underwent CEA, whereas 26 patients underwent CAS + EPD. Both CEA and CAS + EPD patients showed postprocedure improvement in memory and executive function. No differences were seen at follow-up in regards to emotional dysfunction (depression and anxiety), attention, visual spatial functioning, language, motor function, and processing speed. Only two patients underwent neuropsychiatric testing at 60 months-these CAS + EPD patients showed sustained improvement in memory, visual spatial, and executive functions. In conclusion, cognitive and emotional outcomes were similar between CEA and CAS + EPD patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To compare postoperative morphological and rheological conditions after eversion carotid endarterectomy versus conventional carotid endarterectomy using computational fluid dynamics.Basic Methods: Hemodynamic metrics (velocity, wall shear stress, time-averaged wall shear stress and temporal gradient wall shear stress) in the carotid arteries were simulated in one patient after conventional carotid endarterectomy and one patient after eversion carotid endarterectomy by computational fluid dynamics analysis based on patient specific data.Principal Findings: Systolic peak of the eversion carotid endarterectomy model showed a gradually decreased pressure along the stream path, the conventional carotid endarterectomy model revealed high pressure (about 180 Pa) at the carotid bulb. Regions of low wall shear stress in the conventional carotid endarterectomy model were much larger than that in the eversion carotid endarterectomy model and with lower time-averaged wall shear stress values (conventional carotid endarterectomy: 0.03-5.46 Pa vs. eversion carotid endarterectomy: 0.12-5.22 Pa).Conclusions: Computational fluid dynamics after conventional carotid endarterectomy and eversion carotid endarterectomy disclosed differences in hemodynamic patterns. Larger studies are necessary to assess whether these differences are consistent and might explain different rates of restenosis in both techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) has challenged carotid endarterectomy (CEA) as the therapy of choice for carotid disease. This meta-analysis aims at summarizing the most current body of evidence. Methods: All prospective, controlled clinical trials comparing CEA versus CAS were included. The outcome measures of interest were relative risk (RR) of 30-day stroke, 30-day stroke/death, long-term risk of stroke, and risk of restenosis. Results: The RR of 30-day stroke for CAS was 1.6 times that of CEA (RR 1.6; 95%CI 1.2-2.0, P = .001). The 30-day RR of stroke/death was 1.5 times higher for CAS (RR 1.5; 95%CI 1.1-2.1, P = .008). There was a higher risk of long-term stroke (RR 1.2; 95%CI 1.0-1.5, P = .043). The risk of restenosis was twice for CAS (RR 1.8; 95%CI 1.1-3.1, P = .04). Conclusion: The 30-day RR of stroke, stroke/death, long-term risk of stroke, and risk of restenosis are consistently higher for carotid artery stenting (CAS). [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: It remains controversial whether patients with concomitant carotid and coronary disease should undergo operative repair separately or in combination. Methods: Patients with documented cerebrovascular disease undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) alone were matched by propensity scoring with patients undergoing combined carotid endarterectomy (CEA)/CABG procedures and compared for the occurrence of stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and mortality. Results: Of the 4943 patients undergoing CABG, 908 had known cerebrovascular disease. Among these, 134 underwent concomitant CEA, and these were propensity matched with 134 patients undergoing CABG only. No differences were observed in the perioperative risks of stroke (4% vs 3%, odds ratio [OR] 1.5, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.4-5.5), MI (0.7% vs 0.7%, not significant [NS]), or combined cardiovascular events (6% vs 10%, OR 0.5, 95% CI [0.2-1.3]), although mortality (1% vs 8%, OR 0.2, 95% CI [0.04-0.8] was higher with CABG only. Discussion: Addition of CEA to CABG did not significantly alter the risk of perioperative stroke relative to propensity-matched patients undergoing CABG alone. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Purpose: The aim of the study was to compare the outcome after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Methods: We prospectively recorded the data from patients who underwent CEA. A patient was considered diabetic when he reported the use of antidiabetic medication. De novo diagnosis of diabetes was defined as the first demonstration of a fasting glucose serum concentration >126 mg/dL or >200 mg/dL after glucose load. An early adverse outcome was defined as the occurrence of ipsilateral minor or major stroke and/or death during the 30-day postoperative period. Results: The stroke and death rate was significantly higher in diabetic patients (n = 380) compared to the controls (n = 971; 4.5% versus 1.5%, P = .002). Multivariate analysis showed a significant association between the presence of diabetes and 30-day stroke and death rate (OR 2.94, CI 1.46-5.97, P = .003). Conclusions: Diabetic patients are at greater risk for perioperative stroke and death. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article focuses on a study regarding carotid endarterectomy and transfemoral carotid artery stenting with distal filters and transcervical carotid artery stenting with dynamic flow reversal.

Because cardiac complications may predict long-term survival after carotid endarterectomy (CEA), this study evaluates contemporary outcome, including cardiac complications, after CEA. Patients in Connecticut hospitals undergoing CEA between 1991 and 2002 were identified using the state discharge database (Chime, Inc.; ). Of the 12,618 CEAs performed, there were 53 (0.4%) deaths, 155 (1.2%) neurologic complications, and 300 (2.4%) cardiac complications. Despite an increase in patient age (p < .0001, Kruskal-Wallis test) over time, there were decreases in mortality (p = .0001, chi-square), postoperative stroke (p = .001), and cardiac complications (p = .0003). Vascular surgeons performed a minority of the procedures in the state (11%), but there were fewer cardiac complications after CEA performed by vascular surgeons than general surgeons (0.8% vs 3.0%; p < .0001). Multivariable logistic regression demonstrated that the risk of a cardiac complication was elevated in patients operated on by a nonvascular surgeon, patients with previous heart disease or stroke, and the elderly. In a state with very high performance of CEA by general and nonvascular surgeons, postoperative mortality and neurologic complications remain low. However, there were fewer cardiac complications when a vascular surgeon performed the procedure. These results suggest that increased referral to vascular surgeons could improve procedural safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]