Predictors of perioperative outcomes after carotid revascularization

Non-White Patients Have a Higher Risk of Stroke Following Transcarotid Artery Revascularization

INTRODUCTION

Carotid artery revascularization has traditionally been performed by either a carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stent. Large data analysis has suggested there are differences in perioperative outcomes with regards to race, with non-White patients (NWP) having worse outcomes of stroke, restenosis and return to the operating room (RTOR). The introduction of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) has started to shift the paradigm of carotid disease treatment. However, to date, there have been no studies assessing the difference in postoperative outcomes after TCAR between racial groups.

METHODS

All patients from 2016 to 2021 in the Vascular Quality Initiative who underwent TCAR were included in our analysis. Patients were split into two groups based on race: individuals who identified as White and a second group that comprised all other races. Demographic and clinical variables were compared using Student's t-Test and chi-square test of independence. Logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the impact of race on perioperative outcomes of stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), death, restenosis, RTOR, and transient ischemic attack (TIA).

RESULTS

The cohort consisted of 22,609 patients: 20,424 (90.3%) White patients and 2185 (9.7%) NWP. After adjusting for sex, diabetes, hypertension, coronary artery disease, history of prior stroke or TIA, symptomatic status, and high-risk criteria at time of TCAR, there was a significant difference in postoperative stroke, with 63% increased risk in NWP (odds ratio = 1.63, 95% confidence interval: 1.11-2.40, P = 0.014). However, we found no significant difference in the odds of MI, death, postoperative TIA, restenosis, or RTOR when comparing NWP to White patients.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that NWP have increased risk of stroke but similar outcomes of death, MI, RTOR and restenosis following TCAR. Future studies are needed to elucidate and address the underlying causes of racial disparity in carotid revascularization.

Hemodynamic Instability Predicts In-Hospital and One-Year Mortality After TransCarotid Artery Revascularization and TransFemoral Carotid Stenting

OBJECTIVES

Blood pressure fluctuations are a common hemodynamic alteration following carotid artery stenting either with transfemoral (TFCAS) or transcarotid (TCAR) approach and are thought to be related to alteration in baroreceptor function due to angioplasty and stent expansion. These fluctuations are particularly worrisome in the high-risk patient population referred for CAS. This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of patients who required the administration of intravenous blood pressure medication (IVBPmed) for hypotension or hypertension after CAS.

METHODS

All patients undergoing carotid revascularization in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database between 2016-2021 were included. we compared outcomes of patients who required postoperative IVBPmed to treat hyper- or hypotension with normotensive patients. In-hospital outcomes were compared using multivariable logistic regression. One-year outcomes were assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analyses.

RESULTS

We identified 38,510 patients undergoing CAS (57.7% TCAR and 42.3% TFCAS), of which, 30% received IVBPmed for treatment of either postoperative hypertension (12.6%) or hypotension (16.4%). In multivariable analysis, postoperative hypotension was associated with a higher risk of stroke, death, or MI (OR: 3.1, 95%CI (2.6-3.6), P<.001), stroke or death (OR: 2.9, 95%CI (2.4-3.5), P<.001), stroke (OR: 2.6, 95%CI (2.1-3.2), P<.001), death (OR: 3.5, 95%CI (2.6-4.8), P<.001), MI (OR: 4.7, 95%CI (3.3-6.7), P<.001), and bleeding (OR: 1.96, 95%CI (1.4-2.7), P<.001) compared to normotensive patients. Postoperative hypertension was associated with a higher risk of stroke, death, or MI (3.6, 95%CI (3-4.4), P<.001), stroke or death (OR: 3.3, 95%CI (2.7-4.1), P<.001), stroke (OR: 3.7, 95%CI (3-4.7), P<.001), death (OR: 2.7, 95%CI (1.9-3.9), P<.001), MI (OR: 5.7, 95%CI (3.9-8.3), P<.001), and bleeding (OR: 1.9, 95%CI (1.4-2.7), P<.001) compared to normotensive patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative hypertension or hypotension requiring IVBPmed after CAS is associated with an increased risk of in-hospital stroke, death, MI, and bleeding. Postoperative hypertension is associated with worse survival at one year. This study indicates that the need for IVBPmed after CAS is not benign, therefore, these patients necessitate aggressive perioperative medical management and safe techniques to avoid hypo and hypertension. Close follow-up and continue medical management is needed to maximize these patients' survival.

Qualitative Analysis of Length of Stay and Readmission after Carotid Endarterectomy

BACKGROUND

Length of stay (LOS) and readmissions are common measures to evaluate quality of health care. The objective of this study was to evaluate factors related to hospital LOS and readmission within 90 days following carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients who have not had a stroke.

METHODS

Using a single institution database, patients who underwent CEA for carotid stenosis between 2014 and 2019 were identified. Asymptomatic carotid stenosis (no history of any stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) within 6 months prior to CEA), and patients who had a TIA without stroke were included. Demographic and perioperative factors were collected. Primary outcomes analyzed were increased LOS (>1 day) and readmission within 90 days after surgery.

RESULTS

There were 125 patients identified who underwent CEA for 133 carotid stenosis, and 8 patients had bilateral CEA; of which 36.8% were asymptomatic carotid stenosis with the remaining being operated on for TIA without any stroke. The mean age was 68 years old and 36.1% of cases were female. The median postoperative LOS was 2 days. Increased LOS occurred in 81 cases (60.9%). Increased LOS, compared to no increased LOS, occurred more often in patients with diabetes (48.1% vs. 30.8%, P = 0.047), in those with operations starting after 12:00 pm (45.7% vs. 21.2%, P = 0.004) and those with any minor complications such as neck swelling, neck pain, and urinary retention (30.9% vs. 15.4%, P = 0.044). Readmission within 90 days after CEA occurred in 24 (18%) of cases. Readmission within 90 days, compared to no readmission within 90 days, occurred more often in patients with a history of coronary artery disease (58.3% vs. 27.5%, P = 0.004), congestive heart failure (37.5% vs. 11%, P = 0.001), and atrial fibrillation (29.2% vs. 8.3%, P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

More than half of patients undergoing CEA for carotid stenosis were discharged after postoperative day 1. Interventions on modifiable clinical risk factors, such as morning CEA scheduling and management of comorbidities, may decrease LOS and 90-day readmission rates.

Comparing Outcomes of Transfemoral Versus Transbrachial or Transradial Approach in Carotid Artery Stenting (CAS)

BACKGROUND

While Transfemoral Carotid Artery Stenting (TFCAS) is a valid minimally invasive option for patients who also might be suitable for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR), alternative access sites such as transbrachial (TB) or transradial (TR) are only utilized when anatomic factors preclude direct carotid or transfemoral access. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the outcomes of TR/TB access in comparison to TF for percutaneous carotid artery revascularization.

METHODS

All patients undergoing non-TCAR carotid artery stenting (CAS) from January 2012 to June 2021 in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) Database were included. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on the access site for CAS: TF or TR/TB. Primary outcomes included stroke/death, technical failure and access site complications (hematoma, stenosis, infection, pseudoaneurysm and AV fistula). Secondary outcomes included stroke, TIA, MI, death, non-home discharge, extended length of postoperative stay (LOS) (>1 day), and composite endpoints of stroke/MI and stroke/death/MI. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess postoperative outcomes, and results were adjusted for relevant potential confounders including age, gender, race, degree of stenosis, symptomatic status, anesthesia, comorbidities, and preoperative medications.

RESULTS

Out of the 23,965 patients, TR/TB approach was employed in 819 (3.4%) while TF was used in 23,146 (96.6%). Baseline characteristics found men were more likely to undergo revascularization using TR/TB approach (69.4% vs. 64.9%, P = 0.009). Patients undergoing TR/TB approach were also more likely to be symptomatic (49.9% vs. 28.6%, P < 0.001). Guideline directed medications were more frequently used with TR/TB including P2Y12 inhibitor (80.3% vs. 74.7%, P < 0.01), statin (83.8% vs. 80.6%), and aspirin (88.3% vs. 84.5%, P = 0.003) preoperatively. On univariate analysis, patients with TB/TR approach experienced higher rates of adverse outcomes. After adjusting for potential confounders, TR/TB patients had no significant increase in the risk of stroke/death [aOR 1.10 (0.69-1.76), P = 0.675]; however, the use of TR/TB access was associated with a more than 2-fold increase in risk for in-hospital MI [aOR 2.39 (1.32-4.30), P = 0.004] and 2-fold increase in risk of technical failure [aOR 2.21 (1.31-3.73) P = 0.003]. The use of TR/TB access was also associated with a 50% reduction in the risk of access site complications [aOR 0.53 (0.32-0.85), P = 0.009].

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that although technically more challenging, TR or TB approach serves as a reasonable alternative with lower access site complications for CAS particularly in patients where anatomic factors preclude revascularization by TFCAS or TCAR. However, TR/TB is associated with an increased risk of technical failure and myocardial infarction, which requires further study.

External Validation of Risk Prediction Models to Improve Selection of Patients for Carotid Endarterectomy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The net benefit of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is determined partly by the risk of procedural stroke or death. Current guidelines recommend CEA if 30-day risks are <6% for symptomatic stenosis and <3% for asymptomatic stenosis. We aimed to identify prediction models for procedural stroke or death after CEA and to externally validate these models in a large registry of patients from the United States.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search in MEDLINE and EMBASE for prediction models of procedural outcomes after CEA. We validated these models with data from patients who underwent CEA in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2011-2017). We assessed discrimination using C statistics and calibration graphically. We determined the number of patients with predicted risks that exceeded recommended thresholds of procedural risks to perform CEA.

RESULTS

After screening 788 reports, 15 studies describing 17 prediction models were included. Nine were developed in populations including both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, 2 in symptomatic and 5 in asymptomatic populations. In the external validation cohort of 26 293 patients who underwent CEA, 702 (2.7%) developed a stroke or died within 30-days. C statistics varied between 0.52 and 0.64 using all patients, between 0.51 and 0.59 using symptomatic patients, and between 0.49 to 0.58 using asymptomatic patients. The Ontario Carotid Endarterectomy Registry model that included symptomatic status, diabetes, heart failure, and contralateral occlusion as predictors, had C statistic of 0.64 and the best concordance between predicted and observed risks. This model identified 4.5% of symptomatic and 2.1% of asymptomatic patients with procedural risks that exceeded recommended thresholds.

CONCLUSIONS

Of the 17 externally validated prediction models, the Ontario Carotid Endarterectomy Registry risk model had most reliable predictions of procedural stroke or death after CEA and can inform patients about procedural hazards and help focus CEA toward patients who would benefit most from it.

Female Gender Increases Risk of Stroke and Readmission after CEA and CAS

OBJECTIVES

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has historically demonstrated a higher rate of perioperative adverse events for female patients. However, recent evidence suggests similar outcomes for CEA between genders. In contrast, fewer studies have examined gender in carotid artery stenting (CAS). Using contemporary data from the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database, we aim to determine if gender impacts differences in postoperative complications in patients who undergo CEA or CAS.

METHODS

The ACS NSQIP database was queried from 2005-2017 using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes for retrospective review. Patients with carotid intervention (CEA or CAS) were stratified into asymptomatic vs symptomatic cohorts to determine the effect of gender on 30-day postoperative outcomes. Symptomatic patients were defined as those with perioperative transient cerebral ischemic attack or stenosis of carotid artery with cerebral infarction. Descriptive statistics were calculated. Risk-adjusted odds of 30-day postoperative outcomes were calculated using multivariate regression analysis with fixed effects for age, race, and comorbidities.

RESULTS

There were 106,568 patients with CEA or CAS (104,412 CEA and 2,156 CAS). Average age was 70.9 years old and female patients accounted for 39.9% of the population. For asymptomatic patients that underwent CEA or CAS, female gender was associated with significantly higher rates of CVA/stroke (13%, p=0.005), readmission (10%, p=0.004), bleeding complication (32%, p=0.001), and UTI (54%, p=0.001) as well as less infection (26%, p=0.001). In the symptomatic cohort, female gender was associated with significantly higher rates of CVA/stroke (32%, p=0.034), bleeding complication (203%, p=0.001), and UTI (70%, p=0.011), while female gender was associated with a lower rate of pneumonia (39%, p=0.039). Subset analysis found that, compared to male patients, female patients <75yo have an increased rate of CVA/stroke (21%, p=0.001) and readmission (15%, p<0.001), while female patients ≥75yo did not. In asymptomatic and symptomatic patients that underwent CEA, female gender was associated with significantly higher rates of CVA/stroke (13%, p=0.006 and 31%, p=0.044, respectively), but this finding was present not in patients undergoing CAS.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing carotid intervention, female gender was associated with significantly increased rates of postoperative CVA/stroke in the asymptomatic and symptomatic cohorts as well as readmission in the asymptomatic cohort. Female gender was associated with higher rates of CVA/stroke following CEA, but not CAS. We recommend that randomized control trials ensure adequate representation of female patients to better understand gender-based disparities in carotid intervention.

Differences in Perioperative Outcomes after Carotid Revascularization between White and Non-white Patients

BACKGROUND

Racial disparities in carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) continue to persist. We aimed to provide a large-scale analysis of racial disparities in perioperative outcomes of carotid revascularization in a nationally representative cohort of patients, with sub-analyses stratifying by procedure type and symptomatic status.

METHODS

We studied all patients undergoing carotid revascularization between 2011 and 2018 in the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) Database. Univariate methods were used to compare patients' demographic and medical characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to compare adjusted perioperative outcomes between white patients (WP) and non-white patients (NWP). Sub-analysis was performed stratifying by method of revascularization and symptomatic status.

RESULTS

A total of 31,356 carotid revascularizations were performed in 26,550 (84.7%) white patients and 4,806 (15.3%) non-white patients. On adjusted analysis, NWP had increased odds of stroke (OR:1.2, 95%CI:1.1-1.5, P = 0.0496), unplanned return to the OR (OR:1.4, 95%CI:1.1-1.6, P < 0.001) and restenosis (OR:2.6, 95%CI:1.7-3.9, P < 0.001). On sub-analysis, NWP undergoing CAS had increased odds of stroke/death (OR:2.2, 95%CI:1.1-4.3, P = 0.025), stroke (OR:2.9, 95%CI:1.3-6.0, P = 0.007), and stroke/TIA (OR:2.1, 95%CI:1.0-4.2, P = 0.025). NWP undergoing CEA had increased odds of unplanned return to the OR (OR:1.4, 95%CI:1.2-1.6, P < 0.001) and restenosis (OR:2.7, 95%CI:1.7-4.0, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

NWP had higher rates of 30-day stroke, driven primarily by higher rates of perioperative stroke/death in NWP undergoing CAS. NWP undergoing CEA did not have higher rates of stroke/death after adjusted analysis, although they had higher rates of unplanned return to OR and restenosis. Upon stratification for symptomatic status, the stroke/death rate between NWP and WP was shown to be non-significant.

Role of pre-operative frailty status in relation to outcome after carotid endarterectomy: a systematic review

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is a surgical treatment option to prevent ischemic cerebrovascular accidents. Patients that present with pre-operative frailty might have an elevated risk for unfavorable outcomes after the CEA. A systematic search, using Medline, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Database, was performed for relevant literature on frailty in patients undergoing CEA. The study protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020190345). Eight articles were included. The pooled prevalence for pre-operative frailty was 23.9% (95% CI: 12.98-34.82). A difference in the incidence of complications between frail and non-frail patients (6.4% vs. 5.2%, respectively) and a difference in hospital length of stay [2 (IQR: 2-3) days vs. 1 (IQR: 1-2) day, respectively] were described. The 30-day mortality after CEA was 0.6% for non-frail patients, 2.6% for frail patients, and 4.9% for very frail patients (P<0.001). For 3-year mortality, a >1.5-fold increased risk was found for frail patients (OR 1.7, 95% CI: 1.4-2.0) and a >2.5-fold increased risk for very frail patients (OR 2.6, 95% CI: 2.2-3.1). In conclusion, this review shows the impact of frailty on outcome after CEA. Pre-operative frailty assessment with a validated, multi-domain tool should be implemented in the clinical setting as it will provide information on post-operative surgical outcomes and mortality risk but also frailty trajectory and cognitive decline.

Frailty as a predictor of outcomes for patients undergoing carotid artery stenting

OBJECTIVE

The concept of frailty has been proposed to capture the vulnerability resulting from aging and has been implemented for the prediction of perioperative outcomes. Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is considered an appropriate minimally invasive procedure for patients considered to high risk to undergo carotid endarterectomy. Recently, the predictive accuracy for perioperative outcomes using the five-item modified frailty index (5mFI) has been reported to be relatively poor for cardiovascular surgery compared with other surgeries. The effects of functional status and the 5mFI on the outcomes after CAS remain unknown. Thus, in the present study, we investigated the relationship between 5mFI, functional status, and perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

All the patients who had undergone CAS in the Vascular Quality Initiative from November 15, 2016 to December 31, 2018 were included. Good functional status was defined as the ability to perform all predisease activities without restriction using a new variable added to the Vascular Quality Initiative from November 15, 2016 onward. The 5mFI was calculated using functional status and a history of diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, and hypertension. The perioperative outcomes included in-hospital stroke or death within 30 days after CAS, a prolonged postoperative stay (≥2 days), and non-home discharge. The associations between functional status, 5mFI, and perioperative outcomes were examined using univariate and multivariable logistic regression, adjusting for sex, age, race, degree of stenosis, symptomatic status, and the usage of preoperative medications. An analysis stratified by functional status was also performed.

RESULTS

Of the 7836 patients, 188 (2.4%) had experienced perioperative stroke or death, 765 (9.8%) had required a non-home discharge, and 2584 (33.0%) had required a prolonged postoperative stay. A higher (≥0.6 vs <0.6) 5mFI score was associated with greater odds of perioperative stroke or death (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.42-5.28; P = .003), non-home discharge (aOR, 2.70; 95% CI, 1.89-3.85; P < .001), and a prolonged postoperative length of stay (aOR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.56-2.46; P < .001). For the predictive accuracy of the perioperative outcomes, the 5mFI model had an area under the curve for in-hospital stroke or death, non-home discharge, and prolonged postoperative length of stay of 0.714, 0.767, and 0.668, respectively. The functional status model was not inferior to the 5mFI model for any of these outcomes. In the subgroup analysis, of the asymptomatic patients, a higher 5mFI score was associated with greater odds of perioperative stroke or death (aOR, 7.08; 95% CI, 2.02-24.48; P = .002), non-home discharge (aOR, 5.87; 95% CI, 2.45-13.90; P < .001), and a prolonged postoperative stay (aOR, 2.60; 95% CI, 1.82-3.71; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Frailty, as measured using the 5mFI, and functional status were independent predictors of perioperative stroke or death, non-home discharge, and an increased length of stay for patients undergoing CAS. These results were greatly pronounced in asymptomatic patients. The results from the present study, thus, caution against the use of CAS for asymptomatic frail patients.

Comparison of open- and closed-cell stent design outcomes after carotid artery stenting in the Vascular Quality Initiative

BACKGROUND

The association between stent design and outcomes after carotid artery stenting (CAS) has remained controversial. The available data are conflicting regarding the superiority of any specific stent design. The present study investigated the association between cell design and outcomes after carotid artery stenting (CAS) in a real world setting.

METHODS

Patients who had undergone CAS with distal embolic protection in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database from 2016 to 2018 were included in the present study. Patients undergoing CAS for trauma or dissection or more than two treated lesions were excluded. We also excluded lesions for which more than two carotid stents had been used and lesions confined to the common or external carotid artery. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to compare the outcomes after CAS between the open- and closed-cell stent designs.

RESULTS

Of the 2671 CAS procedures included in the present analysis, 1384 (51.8%) had used closed-cell stents and 1287 (48.2%) had used open-cell stents. On univariable analysis, no significant differences were noted between the closed- and open-cell stents in in-hospital mortality (1.8% vs 1.4%; P = .40), stroke (1.8% vs 2.4%; P = .28), and stroke/death (3.3% vs 3.5%; P = .81). After adjusting for potential confounders (ie, age, symptomatic status, previous major amputation, statin and antiplatelet use, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, elective procedures, approach, and post-stent dilatation), no difference was noted in in-hospital stroke/death between the two stent designs (odds ratio [OR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-1.74; P = .74). However, the interaction between stent design (open vs closed) and lesion location (bifurcation vs internal carotid artery [ICA]) was statistically significant (P = .02). Closed-cell stents were associated with five times the odds of in-hospital stroke/death when used in carotid artery bifurcation (OR, 5.5; 95% CI, 1.3-22.2; P = .02). However, when the stent was limited to the ICA, no differences were noted (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.51-1.45; P = .62). One-year follow-up data were available for 19% of patients. No differences in ipsilateral stroke or death at 1 year were noted between the open- and closed-cell stents, except when the lesion was located in the carotid bifurcation (hazard ratio, 6.7; 95% CI, 1.4-31.4; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Closed-cell stents were associated with an increased odds of in-hospital stroke/death for carotid bifurcation lesions, which might be related to the relatively lower conformability of closed-cell stents in the tortuous and diameter-mismatched bifurcation anatomy vs the relatively linear uniform diameter of the ICA. Improved follow-up and in-depth analysis of lesion-specific characteristics that might influence the outcomes of these two designs are needed to validate these results.

Safety of carotid artery revascularization procedures in patients with atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND

Atrial fibrillation (Afib) is a major contributor to cerebrovascular events. Coexisting carotid artery disease is not uncommon in Afib patients, yet they have been excluded from major randomized clinical trials. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) in Afib patients.

METHODS

The Premier Healthcare Database was queried (2009-2015). Patients who underwent CEA or CAS were captured by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Multivariable logistic modeling was implemented to examine the outcomes: in-hospital stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), mortality, and stroke/death.

RESULTS

There were 86,778 patients included. The majority were asymptomatic (n = 82,128 [94.6%]). Afib was reported in 6743 patients (7.8%). In terms of absolute outcomes in both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, Afib patients (vs non-Afib patients) had higher mortality and stroke/death (asymptomatic: mortality, 0.4% vs 0.2%; stroke/death, 1.7% vs 1.2%; symptomatic: mortality, 6.9% vs 2.1%; stroke/death, 10.6% vs 4.5%; all P < .05). Adjusted analysis yielded higher odds of ICH (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.67), mortality (aOR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.11-2.26), and stroke/death (aOR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.08-1.58) in Afib patients. Although univariable analysis found Afib to be a statistically significant predictor of ischemic stroke, similar results could not be elucidated in the multivariable analysis (aOR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.93-1.47). In Afib patients, important predictors of stroke/death included CAS (aOR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.21-2.68) and symptomatic presentation (aOR, 5.00; 95% CI, 3.20-7.83). Other important predictors were type of preoperative medication use, age, and hospital size.

CONCLUSIONS

Afib was associated with worse postoperative outcomes in patients with carotid artery disease. Symptomatic status in Afib patients is associated with a stroke/death risk that is higher than in recommended guidelines for CEA and particularly for CAS. Overall, CEA was associated with lower periprocedural ICH, mortality, and stroke/death in Afib patients compared with CAS.

Socioeconomic Disparities in Carotid Revascularization Procedures

OBJECTIVES

Several studies have demonstrated healthcare disparities in postoperative outcomes after carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting, including increased hospital mortality, postoperative stroke, and readmission rates. The objective of the present study was to examine the intersectionality between race/ethnicity, insurance status, and postoperative outcomes in carotid procedures.

DESIGN

Records of adults from 2007 to 2014 were retrospectively identified, and patients with appropriate International Classification of Diseases Ninth Revision Clinical Modification codes for carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting were identified. Primary outcomes were unadjusted rates and adjusted odds ratios (aORs) of postoperative in-hospital mortality, stroke, combined stroke/mortality, and cardiovascular complications.

SETTING

Data were sourced from the State Inpatient Databases data from California, Florida, Kentucky, Maryland, and New York during the years 2007 to 2014.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients undergoing carotid revascularization procedures.

INTERVENTIONS

The effects of race and insurance status as independent variables and as effect modifiers on postoperative outcomes.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Multivariable logistic regression models were used to examine the associations between race and/or insurance status with respect to study outcomes. Race, but not payer status, was significantly associated with adverse outcomes after carotid artery procedures, with blacks, Hispanics, and other non-Caucasian races demonstrating a significantly greater risk of postoperative stroke and mortality (aOR range 1.24-1.59). This relationship persisted even when stratified by procedure type (aOR range 1.25-1.56) and symptomatology (aOR range 1.51-1.63).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that disparities in postoperative outcomes after carotid artery procedures are associated with race but not with primary insurance status. Multiple contributing factors exist, including racial inequities in prevalence of comorbidities, health literacy, and procedure type performed.

Contemporary outcomes after carotid endarterectomy in high-risk anatomic and physiologic patients

OBJECTIVE

Current guidelines state that the acceptable 30-day postoperative stroke/death rate after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is <3% for asymptomatic patients and <6% for symptomatic patients. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has identified certain high-risk characteristics used to define patients at highest risk for CEA for whom carotid artery stenting would be reimbursed. We evaluated the impact of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services physiologic and anatomic high-risk criteria on major adverse event rates after CEA in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed all patients undergoing CEA from 2011 to 2017 in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program vascular targeted database. Patients with high-risk anatomic or physiologic characteristics were identified by a predefined variable and were compared with normal-risk patients. The primary outcome was 30-day stroke/death, stratified by symptom status.

RESULTS

We identified 25,788 patients undergoing CEA, of whom 60% were treated for asymptomatic carotid disease. Among all patients, high-risk physiology or anatomy was associated with higher rates of 30-day stroke/death compared with normal-risk patients (physiologic risk, 4.6% vs 2.3% [P < .001]; anatomic risk, 3.6% vs 2.3% [P < .001]). Patients who met criteria for high-risk physiology or anatomy also had higher rates of cardiac events (physiologic risk, 3.1% vs 1.6% [P < .001]; anatomic risk, 2.3% vs 1.6% [P < .01]), but only patients with high-risk anatomy had higher rates of cranial nerve injury (physiologic risk, 2.4% vs 2.5% [P = .81]; anatomic risk, 4.3% vs 2.5% [P < .001]). Asymptomatic patients with high-risk physiology or anatomy had higher rates of 30-day stroke/death, especially in the physiologic high-risk group (physiologic risk, 4.7% vs 1.5% [P < .001]; anatomic risk, 2.6% vs 1.5% [P < .01]), compared with normal-risk patients. However, among symptomatic patients, differences in stroke/death were seen only with high-risk anatomic patients and not with high-risk physiologic patients (physiologic risk, 4.6% vs 3.4% [P = .12]; anatomic risk, 4.8% vs 3.4% [P = .01]).

CONCLUSIONS

As currently selected, contemporary real-world outcomes after CEA in asymptomatic carotid disease patients meeting high-risk physiologic criteria show an unacceptably high 30-day stroke/death rate, well above the 3% threshold. These results suggest the need for better selection of patients and preoperative optimization before elective CEA.

Thirty-day Readmission Rates for Carotid Endarterectomy Versus Carotid Artery Stenting

BACKGROUND

Because of the emergence of readmission-related Medicare penalties, efforts are being made to identify and reduce patient readmissions. The purpose of this study was to compare rates and risk factors for 30-d readmission and hospital length of stay (LOS) after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) among patients treated for carotid artery stenosis in Pennsylvania.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were from the Pennsylvania Health Care Cost Containment Council (PHC4). We identified 15,966 patients who underwent CEA (n = 13,557) or CAS (n = 2409) in Pennsylvania between 2011 and 2014. Logistic regression was used to determine risk factors for 30-d readmission, whereas linear regression was used to model factors influencing LOS. Propensity score analysis was used to control for imbalanced covariates between procedures.

RESULTS

Thirty-day readmission rates in Pennsylvania after CEA and CAS for carotid artery stenosis were similar (9.8% and 9.6%, respectively; P = 0.794). Not home discharge destination, Charlson comorbidity index ≥2, and LOS >1 d were all significantly associated with readmission risk. Procedure type (CEA or CAS) did not significantly influence risk. A significant difference in LOS was found between CEA and CAS, but the magnitude of the difference was small (2.38 for CAS versus 2.59 for CEA; P = 0.007). Black race, urgent and emergent cases, and not home discharges significantly increased LOS by notable amounts (1, 1.5, 3.9, and 1.9 d, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Carotid artery stenosis patients in Pennsylvania undergoing CEA or CAS had similar 30-d readmission rates. Although LOS was significantly different, the magnitude of the difference was not large.

The Dutch Audit of Carotid Interventions: Transparency in Quality of Carotid Endarterectomy in Symptomatic Patients in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

The Dutch Audit for Carotid Interventions (DACI) registers all patients undergoing interventions for carotid artery stenosis in the Netherlands. This study describes the design of the DACI and results of patients with a symptomatic stenosis undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA). It aimed to evaluate variation between hospitals in process of care and (adjusted) outcomes, as well as predictors of major stroke/death after CEA.

METHODS

All patients with a symptomatic stenosis, who underwent CEA and were registered in the DACI between 2014 and 2016 were included in this cohort. Descriptive analyses of patient characteristics, process of care, and outcomes were performed. Casemix adjusted hospital procedural outcomes as (30 day/in hospital) mortality, stroke/death, and major stroke/death, were compared with the national mean. A multivariable logistic regression model (backward elimination at p > 0.10) was used to identify predictors of major stroke/death.

RESULTS

A total of 6459 patients, registered by 52 hospitals, were included. The majority (4,832, 75%) were treated <2 weeks after their first hospital consultation, varying from 40% to 93% between hospitals. Mortality, stroke/death, and major stroke/death were, respectively, 1.1%, 3.6%, and 1.8%. Adjusted major stroke/death rates for hospital comparison varied between 0 and 6.5%. Nine hospitals performed significantly better, none performed significantly worse. Predictors of major stroke/death were sex, age, pulmonary disease, presenting neurological symptoms, and peri-operative shunt.

CONCLUSION

CEA in The Netherlands is associated with an overall low mortality and (major) stroke/death rate. Whereas the indicator time to intervention varied between hospitals, mortality and (major) stroke/death were not significantly distinctive enough to identify worse practices and therefore were unsuitable for hospital comparison in the Dutch setting. Additionally, predictors of major stroke/death at population level could be identified.

Complication-Specific In-Hospital Costs After Carotid Endarterectomy vs Carotid Artery Stenting

Purpose: To quantify and compare the incremental cost associated with in-hospital stroke, death, and myocardial infarction (MI) after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) vs carotid artery stenting (CAS). Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of 100,185 patients (mean age 70.7±9.5 years; 58.3% men) who underwent CEA (n=86,035) or CAS (n=14,150) between 2009 and 2015 and were entered into the Premier Healthcare Database. Multivariate logistic models and generalized linear models were used to analyze binary outcomes and hospitalization costs, respectively. Outcomes are presented as the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: CAS was associated with 1.6 times higher adjusted odds of stroke [aOR 1.55 (95% CI 1.36 to 1.77), p<0.001] and with 2.6 times higher odds of death [aOR 2.60 (95% CI 2.14 to 3.17), p<0.001] compared with CEA. There was no significant difference in MI risk between the 2 procedures. The adjusted incremental cost of death and MI were similar between the 2 procedures. However, the adjusted incremental cost of stroke was significantly higher in CEA compared with CAS by an estimated $2000. When stratified with respect to symptomatic status, the increased adjusted incremental cost of stroke in CEA was mainly seen in asymptomatic patients ($5284 vs $2932, p<0.01). Conclusion: The incremental cost of in-hospital stroke is relatively higher in CEA compared to CAS. However, CEA remains a more cost-effective carotid intervention due to lower complication rates and baseline costs compared with CAS. Long-term cost-effectiveness studies are needed before definite conclusions are made.

Risk Factors for Failure of Bone Grafting of Tibia Nonunions and Segmental Bone Defects: A New Preoperative Risk Assessment Score

OBJECTIVE

To develop a clinically useful prediction model of success at the time of surgery to promote bone healing for established tibial nonunion or traumatic bone defects.

DESIGN

Retrospective case controlled.

SETTING

Level 1 trauma center.

PATIENTS

Adult patients treated with surgery for established tibia fracture nonunion or traumatic bone defects from 2007 to 2016. Two hundred three patients met the inclusion criteria and were available for final analysis.

INTERVENTION

Surgery to promote bone healing of established tibia fracture nonunion or segmental defect with plate and screw construct, intramedullary nail fixation, or multiplanar external fixation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Failure of the surgery to promote bone healing that was defined as unplanned revision surgery for lack of bone healing or deep infection. No patients were excluded who had a primary outcome event.

RESULTS

Multivariate logistic modeling identified 5 significant (P < 0.05) risk factors for failure of the surgery to promote bone healing: (1) mechanism of injury, (2) Increasing body mass index, (3) cortical defect size (mm), (4) flap size (cm), and (5) insurance status. A prediction model was created based on these factors and awarded 0 points for fall, 17 points for high energy blunt trauma (OR = 17; 95% CI, 1-286, P = 0.05), 22 points for industrial/other (OR = 22; 95% CI, 1-4, P = 0.04), and 28 points for ballistic injuries (OR = 28; 95% CI, 1-605, P = 0.04). One point is given for every 10 cm of flap size (OR = 1; 95% CI, 1-1.1, P < 0.001), 10 mm of mean cortical gap distance (OR = 1; 95% CI, 1-2, P = 0.004), and 10 units BMI, respectively (OR = 1.5; 95% CI, 1-3, P = 0.16). Two points are awarded for Medicaid or no insurance (OR = 2; 95% CI, 1-5, P = 0.035) and 3 points for Medicare (3; 95% CI, 1-9, P = 0.033). Each 1-point increase in risk score was associated with a 6% increased chance of requiring at least 1 revision surgery (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents a clinical score that predicts the likelihood of success after surgery for tibia fracture nonunions or traumatic bone defects and may help clinicians better determine which patients are likely to fail these procedures and require further surgery.