Defining the high-risk patient for carotid endarterectomy: An analysis of the prospective National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database

Carotid Endarterectomy in the Very Elderly: Short-, Medium-, and Long-Term Outcomes

Purpose

: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has an established effect on stroke-free survival in patients with carotid artery stenosis. Most landmark trials excluded patients ≥80 years of age due to their perceived high risk and uncertainty regarding the benefits of CEA. Despite the ongoing global increase in life expectancy, guidelines have not changed. The current study aimed to assess CEA outcomes in patients ≥80 years of age.

Materials and Methods

: Data from patients ≥80 years of age, who underwent CEA between April 2016 and April 2022, were collected. Demographic information, comorbidities, surgical details, operative details, outcomes, and post-CEA survival were reviewed, and long-term data up to April 2023 were collected.

Results

: Over the 6-year study period, 258 CEA procedures were recorded, of which 70 (27.1%) were performed in patients ≥80 years of age; the mean age was 84 years (range, 80-96 years), 47 (67.1%) were males, and 69 (98.6%) were symptomatic. Twenty-three (32.9%) patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade 2, and 47 (67.1%) were grade 3. The 30-day stroke and mortality rates were 4.3% and 1.4%, respectively. At 1, 3, and 5 years, the cumulative freedom-from-stroke rates were 95.7%, 92.9%, and 91.4%, respectively, and the cumulative survival rates were 94.3%, 75.7%, and 61.4%, respectively. No risk factors affected early or late stroke or early mortality rates. Patients with ASA grade 3 had significantly lower cumulative survival than those with grade 2 (HR, 5.29; 95% CI, 1.590-17.603; P<0.01).

Conclusion

: CEA was safe and effective in average-risk, elderly patients. Higher risk patients (i.e., ASA 3) showed no increased 30-day risk for stroke or mortality but exhibited significantly worse long-term survival. Hence, careful consideration of the benefits before performing CEA is crucial.

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.

Hypoalbuminemia is Associated with Mortality in Patients Undergoing Lower Extremity Amputation

BACKGROUND

Poor nutritional status is common among patients undergoing lower extremity amputation (LEA). In this study, the association between preoperative hypoalbuminemia, a marker for malnutrition, and postoperative mortality in patients undergoing LEA was explored.

METHODS

Data on patients undergoing LEA between 2005 and 2017 were retrospectively analyzed from the prospectively collected American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients were divided into clinically relevant categories based on their serum albumin level (<2.5, 2.5-3.39, ≥3.4 g/dl) and were further stratified according to amputation level. Operative death was compared across groups and multivariable logistic regression was performed to estimate risk-adjusted odds ratio (AOR).

RESULTS

In 35,383 patients, the rate of 30-day postoperative mortality was 7.6% (n = 2693). Mortality rate was highest in patients with very low albumin levels (11%) as compared to low (6.8%) and normal levels (3.9%). On multivariable analysis, lower albumin levels emerged as a risk-adjusted independent predictor of mortality. After risk-adjustment, patients with very low albumin levels (AOR [95% CI]: 2.25 [1.969-2.56], P < 0.001) and low albumin levels (AOR [95% CI]: 1.42 [1.239-1.616], P < 0.001) had higher odds of mortality when compared to patients with normal albumin levels. On sensitivity analysis, a similar trend was seen in patients undergoing above knee amputation but not in patients undergoing minor amputations.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing major LEA, hypoalbuminemia is associated with an increased risk of postoperative mortality in a dose response manner, specifically in above knee amputations. Monitoring and optimizing patients' nutritional status before surgery, when possible, may be warranted and should be further explored.

Regional Anesthesia is Underutilized for Carotid Endarterectomy Despite Improved Perioperative Outcomes Compared with General Anesthesia

BACKGROUND

The choice of anesthetic for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) continues to be controversial. Recent literature suggests improved outcomes with the use of regional anesthesia (RA) compared with general anesthesia (GA). The objective of this study was to examine the utilization and outcomes of RA for CEA using a national database.

METHODS

The targeted CEA files of the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2011-2017) were reviewed. Patients were stratified based on anesthesia type into RA and GA, and patients' characteristics were compared between the 2 groups. The outcomes of CEA under GA and RA were compared after 2:1 propensity matching.

RESULTS

There were 26,206 CEAs, and 14% (n = 3,664) were performed under RA, with no change in relative utilization during the study period (P = 0.557). Patients treated under RA were more likely to be older than 65 years (80.6% vs. 75.8%; P < 0.001) and White (90.8% vs. 83.5%; P < 0.001) but less likely to have diabetes (28.2% vs. 31.2%; P = 0.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (10.2% vs. 10.5%; P < 0.001), and heart failure (1.0% vs. 1.5%; P = 0.02) and be symptomatic (37.4% vs. 42.7%; P < 0.001). After matching, there was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between the 2 groups. Patients undergoing RA were less likely to experience the combined end point of stroke, myocardial infarction, or mortality compared with GA. GA patients were more likely to have longer operating time and hospital length of stay.

CONCLUSIONS

CEA performed under RA is associated with improved outcomes compared with GA. RA is underutilized in carotid surgery, and strategies to optimize its use are needed.

The SAPPHIRE criteria, history of myocardial infarction and diabetes predict adverse outcomes following carotid endarterectomy similar to stenting

AIMS

Identifying factors associated with worse outcome following carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is important to improve prevention of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), yet rarely used for registries. We intended to identify predictors of MACCE following CEA as recently analysed for stenting.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients undergoing CEA at 2 centers over 13 years were entered into a database. Baseline clinical characteristics, procedural factors and a panel of clinical and lesion-related high-risk features (SHR) and exclusion criteria (SE), empirically compiled for stratification in the SAPPHIRE trial, were differentially analysed using Cox regressions. The analysis included 748 operations; 262 (35%) asymptomatic, 208 (28%) with previous strokes, and 278 (37%) with transient ischemic attacks (TIA). The overall 30-day MACCE rate was 6.7%, 5.0% in asymptomatic and 7.6% in symptomatic patients. Previous MI (HR 2.045, p = 0.022), diabetes (HR 2.111, p = 0.011) and symptomatic patients (HR 2.045, p = 0.044) were independently associated with MACCE. SE patients (n = 81) had a MACCE rate of 13.6%; the MACCE rate of the remainder dropped to 5.8% (4.7% in asymptomatic and 6.5% in symptomatic patients). Hazard ratio for SHR patients was 2.069 (CI 1.087-3.941) and 2.389 for SE (CI 1.223-4.666), each compared to all patients with lower risk and adjusted for symptomatic status. Among SHR and SE criteria NYHA 3-4, contralateral occlusions and intraluminal thrombus were significant determinants and MI < 4 weeks before CEA showed a strong trend (p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Patients identified by SHR and SE criteria, prior MI and diabetes warrant increased attention to prevent MACCE following CEA.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of complication rates after carotid procedures performed by different specialties

OBJECTIVE

Different competencies and skills are required and obtained during medical specialization. However, whether these have an impact on procedural outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) is unclear. We assessed the reported association between operator specialization and procedural outcomes after CEA or CAS to determine whether CEA and CAS should be performed by specific specialties.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed and Embase up to August 21, 2017, for randomized clinical trials and observational studies that compared two or more specialties performing CEA or CAS for symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. The composite primary outcome was procedural stroke or death (ie, occurring within 30 days of the procedure or before discharge). Risk estimates were pooled with a generic inverse variance random effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 35 studies (26 providing data on CEA, 8 providing data on CAS, and 1 providing data on both CEA and CAS) were included, describing 256,033 CEA and 38,605 CAS procedures. For CEA, decreased risk of procedural stroke or death for operations performed by vascular surgeons was found with pooled unadjusted relative risk (RR) of 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-0.86; seven studies) compared with neurosurgeons and RR of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.66-0.99; six studies) compared with general surgeons. An increased risk of procedural stroke or death for operations performed by neurosurgeons compared with cardiothoracic surgeons was found with a pooled unadjusted RR of 1.22 (95% CI, 1.02-1.46). No studies adjusted for potential confounding, and no significant unadjusted associations were found in other comparisons of operator specialty for the primary outcome. For CAS, no differences in procedural stroke or death were found by operator specialty.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies were at high risk of bias mainly because of potential confounding by patient selection for CEA and CAS. Current evidence is insufficient to restrict CEA or CAS to specific specialties.

Comparison of outcomes after carotid endarterectomy between type 2 diabetic and non-diabetic patients with significant carotid stenosis

BACKGROUND

We aimed to compare early and late outcomes after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) between Korean type 2 diabetic and non-diabetic patients and to investigate the impact of diabetes on the overall incidence of cardiovascular events after CEA.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 675 CEAs, which were performed on 613 patients with significant carotid stenosis between January 2007 and December 2014. The CEAs were divided into a type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) group (n = 265, 39.3%) and a non-DM group (n = 410, 60.7%). The study outcomes included the incidence of major adverse events (MAEs), defined as fatal or nonfatal stroke or myocardial infarction or all-cause mortality, during the perioperative period and within 4 years after CEA.

RESULTS

Patients in the DM and non-DM groups did not differ significantly in the incidence of MAEs or any of the individual MAE manifestations during the perioperative period. However, within 4 years after CEA, the difference in the MAE incidence was significantly greater in the DM group (P = 0.040). Analysis of the individual MAE manifestations indicated a significantly higher risk of stroke in the DM group (P = 0.006). Multivariate analysis indicated that diabetes was not associated with MAEs or individual MAE manifestations during the perioperative period, whereas within 4 years after CEA, diabetes was an independent risk factor for MAEs overall (hazard ratio [HR], 1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-2.48; P = 0.026) and stroke (HR, 2.55; 95% CI 1.20-5.41; P = 0.015) in particular.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetic patients were not at greater risk of perioperative MAEs after CEA; however, the risk of late MAE occurrence was significantly greater in these patients. Within 4 years after CEA, DM was an independent risk factor for the occurrence of MAEs overall and stroke in particular.

Impact of diabetes mellitus on early outcome of carotid endarterectomy

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus increases the risk of ischaemic stroke in the general population but its impact on early outcome after the carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is controversial with conflicting results.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective study includes 902 consecutive CEAs. Patients were divided into non-diabetic and diabetic groups and subsequently analysed. Early outcomes in terms of 30-day stroke and death rates were then analysed and compared.

RESULTS

There were 606 non-diabetic patients. Among 296 diabetic patients, 83 were insulin-dependent. The cumulative TIA/stroke rate was statistically higher in the diabetic group (2.6 vs. 5.7 %, P = 0.02). Stroke was more frequent in the diabetic group (2.0 vs. 4.4 %, P = 0.04) comparedto TIA (0.7 vs. 1.4 %, P = 0.45). Mortality was statistically more frequent in diabetic patients (0.2 vs. 1.7 %, P = 0.01). The 30-day stroke/death rate (2.6 vs. 5.7 %, P = 0.02) was also statistically higher in the diabetic group. Factors that were identified to increase risk of death and stroke in multivariate analysis were: use of insulin for blood glucose control (OR = 2.47, 95 % CI 1.61-4.68, P = 0.01), higher low-density lipoprotein cholesterol value (OR = 1.52, 95 % CI 1.15-2.22, P < 0.01), presence of coronary disease (OR = 2.04, 95 % CI 1.40-3.31, P = 0.03), peripheral artery disease (OR = 2.14, 95 % CI 1.34-3.65, P = 0.02), complicated plaque (OR = 1.77, 95 % CI 1.11-3.68, P = 0.03), contralateral carotid artery occlusion (OR = 2.37, 95 % CI 1.25-4.74, P = 0.02), shunt use (OR = 3.46, 95 % CI 1.18-7.10, P < 0.01), and among diabetic patients higher HbA1c levels (OR = 1.28, 95 % CI 1.05-1.66, P = 0.03). Clamp toleration was associated with lower risk of death and stroke rates (OR = 0.43, 95 % CI 0.23-0.76, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In our study, perioperative neurological complications and mortality were statistically higher in diabetic patients compared to non-diabetic patients during CEA. Further research will have to show whether other treatment modalities of carotid artery stenosis and better glycaemia and dyslipidaemia controlling in diabetics can reduce this risk.

Is diabetes a marker of higher risk after carotid revascularization? Experience from a single centre

PURPOSE

This single centre study investigates the influence of diabetes mellitus on outcomes following carotid artery endarterectomy or stenting.

METHODS

In total, 752 carotid revascularizations (58.2% carotid artery stenting and 41.8% carotid endarterectomy) were performed in 221 (29.4%) patients with diabetes and 532 (70.6%) patients without diabetes. The study outcomes were death, disabling and non-disabling stroke, transient ischaemic attack and restenosis within 36 months after the procedure.

RESULTS

Patients with diabetes had higher periprocedural risk of any stroke or death (3.6% diabetes vs 0.6% no diabetes; p < 0.05), transient ischaemic attack (1.8% diabetes vs 0.2% no diabetes; p > 0.05) and restenosis (2.7% diabetes vs 0.6% no diabetes; p < 0.05). During long-term follow-up, there were no significant differences in Kaplan-Meier estimates of freedom from death, any stroke and transient ischaemic attack, between people with and without diabetes for each carotid artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy subgroup. Patients with diabetes showed higher rates of restenosis during follow-up than patients without diabetes (36-months estimate risk of restenosis: 21.2% diabetes vs 12.5% no diabetes; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The presence of diabetes was associated with increased periprocedural risk, but no further additional risk emerged during longer term follow-up. Restenosis rates were higher among patients with diabetes.

An Accumulated Deficits Model Predicts Perioperative and Long-term Adverse Events after Carotid Endarterectomy

BACKGROUND

There is increasing recognition that decreased reserve in multiple organ systems, known as accumulated deficits (AD), may better stratify perioperative risk than traditional risk indices. We hypothesized that an AD model would predict both perioperative adverse events and long-term survival after carotid endarterectomy (CEA), particularly important in asymptomatic patients.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing CEA between 1st January 2000 and 31st December 2010 were retrospectively identified. Seven of the deficit items from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging-frailty index (coronary disease, renal insufficiency, pulmonary disease, peripheral vascular disease, heart failure, hypertension, and diabetes) were tabulated for each patient. Predictors of perioperative and long-term outcomes were evaluated using regression analysis.

RESULTS

About 1,782 CEAs in 1,496 patients (mean age: 71.3 ± 9.3 years, 56.3% male, 35.4% symptomatic) were included. The risk of major adverse events (stroke, death, or myocardial infarction) at 30 days for patients with ≤3 deficits was 2.53% vs. 8.81% for patients with ≥4 deficits (P < 0.001). For patients with ≥5 deficits, the risk was 15.18%. Each additional deficit increased the odds of a 30-day major adverse event and hospital stay >2 days by 1.64 (P < 0.001) and 1.15 (P < 0.001), respectively. In multivariate analysis, the presence of ≥4 deficits was more predictive of perioperative major adverse events (odds ratio [OR] = 3.62, P < 0.001) than symptomatology within 6 months (OR = 1.57, P = 0.08) or octogenarian status (OR = 2.00, P = 0.02). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed significantly decreased survival over time with accumulating deficits (P < 0.001). Patients with ≥4 deficits have a hazards ratio for death of 2.6 compared to patients with ≤3 deficits (P < 0.001). Overall survival is estimated at 79.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.77-0.82) at 5 years in patients with ≤3 deficits versus 52.4% (95% CI: 0.46-0.58) in patients with ≥4 deficits, respectively. In subgroup analysis of asymptomatic patients, 5-year survival for octogenarian male patients with ≥4 deficits was only 26.8%. For asymptomatic males aged 70-79 years with ≥4 deficits, 5-year survival was 59.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

An AD model is more predictive of perioperative adverse events after CEA than age or symptomatic status. This model remains predictive of long-term survival. In asymptomatic male octogenarians with 4 or more AD, 5-year survival is severely limited.

Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis: Surgery, Stenting, or Medical Therapy?

Symptomatic carotid artery disease is a significant cause of ischemic stroke, and these patients are at high risk for recurrent vascular events. Patients with symptoms of stroke or transient ischemic attack attributable to a significantly stenotic vessel (70–99% luminal narrowing) should be treated with intensive medical therapy. Intensive medical therapy is a combination of pharmacologic and lifestyle interventions consistent with best-known practices as follows: initiation of antiplatelet agent or anticoagulation if medically indicated, high potency statin medication, blood pressure control with goal blood pressure of greater than 140/90, Mediterranean-style diet, exercise, and smoking cessation. Further, patients who have extracranial culprit lesions should be considered for revascularization with either carotid endarterectomy or carotid angioplasty and stenting depending on several factors including the patient’s anatomy, age, gender, and procedural risk. Based on current evidence, patients with symptomatic intracranial stenosis should be managed with intensive medical therapy, including the use of dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel for the first 90 days following the ischemic event. While the literature has shown a stronger benefit of revascularization of extracranial symptomatic disease among certain subgroups of patients with greater than 70% stenosis, there is less benefit from revascularization with endarterectomy in patients with moderate stenosis of 50–69% if the surgeon’s risk of perioperative stroke or death rate is greater than 6%.

Hypoalbuminemia Predicts Perioperative Morbidity and Mortality after Infrainguinal Lower Extremity Bypass for Critical Limb Ischemia

BACKGROUND

Poor nutritional status has been associated with a higher risk of morbidity and mortality in general surgery patients; however, outcomes in vascular surgery patients are unclear. Our goal was to determine the effect of poor nutritional status on perioperative morbidity and mortality after lower extremity bypass (LEB).

METHODS

The 2005-2012 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was analyzed to determine associated complications, mortality, length of stay (LOS), and readmissions for patients with hypoalbuminemia (serum albumin <3.5 g/dL and <2.8 g/dL) undergoing infrainguinal lower extremity bypass for critical limb ischemia. Multivariable analyses were performed to assess associated risk factors while adjusting for possible confounders.

RESULTS

There were 5,110 LEB identified with an albumin level recorded. There were 2,327 (45.5%) patients with a low preoperative albumin. Patients with a low albumin were more likely to have diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, previous myocardial infarction, renal failure, dialysis dependence, hypertension, history of transient ischemic attack or stroke, steroid use, impaired functional status, dyspnea at rest, anemia, prior operations within 30 days, preoperative wounds or infections, and a tibial target (P < 0.05). Multivariable analyses showed that low albumin was independently associated with increased mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 1.8, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 1.3-2.6, P = 0.001), return to the operating room (OR: 1.4, 95% CI: 1.2-1.6, P < 0.001), and increased LOS (MR: 1.2, 95% CI: 1.1-1.2, P < 0.001). When compared with patients with normal albumin, patients with more severe hypoalbuminemia, less than 2.8 g/dL, showed further increased risk of mortality (OR: 2.5, 95% CI: 1.6-3.8), return to the operating room (OR: 1.6, 95% CI: 1.3-2.0), and prolonged LOS (MR: 1.2, 95% CI: 1.2-1.3).

CONCLUSIONS

Poor preoperative hypoalbuminemia is associated with morbidity and mortality after infrainguinal lower extremity bypass for critical limb ischemia. Evaluation and optimization of nutritional status should be performed preoperatively in this high risk population.

Diabetes Mellitus with Chronic Complications in Relation to Carotid Endarterectomy and Carotid Artery Stenting Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting are effective treatment procedures for carotid artery stenosis. Although diabetes mellitus is highly prevalent among patients undergoing these revascularization procedures, few studies have examined their impact on periprocedural outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to determine whether perioperative outcomes among patients undergoing carotid artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy varied depending on the presence of diabetes with or without chronic complications.

METHODS

We examined adults aged 45 and above hospitalized between 2007 and 2011 in U.S. hospitals who underwent carotid artery revascularization procedures. We used data from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project's Nationwide Inpatient Sample and evaluated the influence of diabetes with or without chronic complications on outcomes.

RESULTS

Among patients receiving carotid artery stenting, diabetic patients with chronic complications had significantly increased odds of acute kidney injury (odds ratio [OR]: 3.17, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.31-4.35) and longer hospital stay (β: 1.98, 95% CI: 1.58-2.38) compared with nondiabetic patients. Diabetic patients with chronic complications receiving carotid endarterectomy experienced increased odds of myocardial infarction (OR: 1.12, 95% CI: .90-1.40), stroke (OR: 1.29, 95% CI: .97-1.72), perioperative infection (OR: 2.45, 95% CI: 1.29-4.65), mortality (OR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.01-2.16), and longer hospital stay (β (days): 2.05, 95% CI: 1.90-2.20) compared with nondiabetic patients. No significant increased odds of perioperative outcomes were observed among diabetic patients without chronic complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Uncomplicated diabetes did not appear to convey a higher odds of perioperative outcomes among patients undergoing revascularization. However, the presence of diabetes with chronic complications is an important risk factor in the carotid endarterectomy category.

The perioperative outcomes of eversion carotid endarterectomy in diabetic patients aged 80 years or older

BACKGROUND

Uncertainty exists about the influence of advanced age and diabetes mellitus on the clinical effect of carotid endarterectomy (CEA). This study analyzed the perioperative (30-day) outcomes of CEA in diabetic patients aged ≥80 years.

METHODS

Data of 1872 consecutive patients who underwent 2125 primary eversion CEAs from 1990 to 2014 at our institution were prospectively stored in a vascular surgery registry. Risk factors, medication, and indication for surgery were recorded. The 354 patients (387 CEAs) aged ≥80 years formed the study base; of whom, 207 (219 CEAs) were diabetic and 147 (168 CEAs) were not. A neurologist assessed all patients preoperatively, on waking from the anesthesia, and before discharge from the hospital. All procedures were eversion CEA performed by the same surgeon under general anesthesia with routine electroencephalographic monitoring for selective shunting.

RESULTS

Diabetic patients were more likely to have arterial hypertension (P = .033), cardiac disease (P = .038), peripheral aneurysmal/atherosclerotic disease (P = .046), and contralateral carotid occlusion (P = .042) than their nondiabetic counterparts. Overall, there were no deaths, two (0.51%) perioperative strokes (both in diabetic patients), and 13 nonfatal cardiac complications (3.3%), of which 10 occurred in diabetic patients, but the difference failed to reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this study show that CEA is safe and effective for stroke prevention in diabetic patients aged ≥80 years, with a negligible incidence of perioperative adverse events and no deaths.

Risk Factors for Developing Postprocedural Microemboli following Carotid Interventions

Purpose:

To determine risk factors predictive of microemboli found on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) following carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) with distal protection and carotid endarterectomy (CEA).

Methods:

A retrospective review was conducted of all carotid interventions at a single institution between 2004 and 2006. In that time frame, 64 carotid interventions (34 CAS, 30 CEA) were performed in 63 male patients (mean age 69.5 years, range 52 to 91) with DW-MRI scans available for review. Patient characteristics, including age, gender, smoking history, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, obesity (body mass index >30), coronary artery disease (CAD), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, peripheral vascular disease, and atrial fibrillation, were documented. For the CAS patients, anatomical and procedural characteristics, including fluoroscopy time, contrast volume, performance of an arch angiogram, and lesion anatomy, were recorded. Bivariate analyses were performed to determine which parameters were associated with the occurrence of acute postprocedural microemboli found on DW-MRI by 2 blinded neuroradiologists.

Results:

Twenty-four (71%) of the 34 CAS patients and 1 (3%) of the 30 CEA patients demonstrated new cerebral microemboli postoperatively. In the bivariate analyses of all patient, anatomical, and procedural characteristics, only a history of CAD was associated with an increased risk of microemboli; 20 (80%) of the 25 patients who had postprocedure microemboli had CAD compared to 18 (46%) of 39 patients without microemboli (p=0.007). Twenty (53%) of the 38 (59%) patients with CAD developed microemboli compared to 5 (19%) of the 26 patients without CAD (p=0.007). All other patient, procedural, and anatomical characteristics were not found to be independent risk factors predictive of postprocedure microemboli.

Conclusion:

CAS with distal protection carries a significantly greater risk for developing new microemboli compared to CEA. Of all the risk factors analyzed, only a history of CAD emerged as an independent risk factor for the development of microemboli following carotid intervention. This finding may influence the decision to perform CAS in patients deemed high risk solely due to the presence of CAD.

Preoperative Coronary Stenosis Is a Determinant of Early Vascular Outcome after Carotid Endarterectomy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

The benefit of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is directly influenced by the risk of perioperative adverse outcomes. However, patient-level risks and predictors including coronary stenosis are rarely evaluated, especially in Asian patients. The aim of this study was to determine the relationship between the vascular risk factors underlying CEA, including coronary stenosis, and postoperative outcome.

METHODS

One hundred and fifty-three consecutive CEAs from our hospital records were included in this analysis. All patients underwent coronary computed tomography angiography before CEA. Data were analyzed to determine the vascular outcomes in patients with mild-to-moderate vs. severe coronary stenosis and high vs. standard operative risk, based on the criteria for high operative risk defined in the Stenting and Angioplasty with Protection in Patients at High Risk for Endarterectomy (SAPPHIRE) trial. The vascular outcome was defined as the occurrence of postoperative (≤30 days) stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), or death.

RESULTS

An adverse vascular outcome occurred in 8 of the 153 CEAs, with 6 strokes, 2 MIs, and 3 deaths. The vascular outcome differed significantly between the groups with mild-to-moderate and severe coronary stenosis (p=0.024), but not between the high- and standard-operative-risk groups (stratified according to operative risk as defined in the SAPPHIRE trial). Multivariable analysis adjusting for potent predictors revealed that severe coronary stenosis (odds ratio, 6.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-39.22) was a significant predictor of the early vascular outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe coronary stenosis was identified herein as an independent predictor of an adverse early vascular outcome.

Carotid Disease Management: Surgery, Stenting, or Medication

Internal carotid artery stenosis accounts for about 7-10 % of ischemic strokes. Conventional risk factors such as aging, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and smoking increase the risk for carotid atherosclerosis. All patients with carotid stenosis should receive aggressive medical therapy. Carotid revascularization with either endarterectomy or stenting can benefit select patients with severe stenosis. New clinical trials will examine the contemporary role of carotid revascularization relative to optimal medical therapy.

Temporal trends in safety of carotid endarterectomy in asymptomatic patients: systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review temporal changes in perioperative safety of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in asymptomatic individuals in trial and registry studies.

METHODS

The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched using the terms "carotid" and "endarterectomy" and "asymptomatic" from 1947 to August 23, 2014. Articles dealing with 50%-99% stenosis in asymptomatic individuals were included and low-volume studies were excluded. The primary endpoint was 30-day stroke or death and the secondary endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality. Statistical analysis was performed using random-effects meta-regression for registry data and for trial data graphical interpretation alone was used.

RESULTS

Six trials (n = 4,431 procedures) and 47 community registries (n = 204,622 procedures) reported data between 1983 and 2013. Registry data showed a significant decrease in postoperative stroke or death incidence over the period 1991-2010, equivalent to a 6% average proportional annual reduction (95% credible interval [CrI] 4%-7%; p < 0.001). Considering postoperative all-cause mortality, registry data showed a significant 5% average proportional annual reduction (95% CrI 3%-9%; p < 0.001). Trial data showed a similar visual trend.

CONCLUSIONS

CEA is safer than ever before and high-volume registry results closely mirror the results of trials. New benchmarks for CEA are a stroke or death risk of 1.2% and a mortality risk of 0.4%. This information will prove useful for quality improvement programs, for health care funders, and for those re-examining the long-term benefits of asymptomatic revascularization in future trials.

Characteristics that define high risk in carotid endarterectomy from the Vascular Study Group of New England

OBJECTIVE

The Stenting with Angioplasty and Protection in Patients at High Risk for Endarterectomy (SAPPHIRE) trial compared carotid endarterectomy (CEA) to carotid artery stenting (CAS) among high-risk patients using a model of risk that has not been validated by previous publications. The objective of our study was to determine the accuracy of this high-risk model and to determine the true risk factors that result in patients being at high risk for CEA.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data for 3098 CEAs between 2003 and 2011 at 20 Vascular Surgery Group of New England (VSGNE) centers were used. SAPPHIRE general inclusion criteria and primary outcomes were assessed. Factors that were associated with the primary outcome by analysis of variance (P < .10) and not linearly dependent, as determined by a Pearson correlation analysis, were further assessed for an independent association by multivariate logistic regression. A risk index model was developed for these significant predictors to accurately define high-risk CEA.

RESULTS

The average patient age was 69.9 ± 9.5 years, 60% were male, and 45.7% were asymptomatic. The 1-year composite outcome event rate, defined as postoperative myocardial infarction and stroke or death, was 14.2%. Multivariate analysis (P < .05) found the following independently significant risk factors: age in years (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-1.1; P < .001), preadmission living in a nursing home (95% CI, 1.2-6.6; P = .020), congestive heart failure (95% CI, 1.4-2.8; P < .001), diabetes mellitus (DM; 95% CI, 1.1-1.3; P < .001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (95% CI, 1.2-1.5; P < .001), any previous cerebrovascular disease (95% CI, 1.1-1.9; P = .003), and contralateral internal carotid artery stenosis (95% CI, 1.0-1.2; P = .001). Three of the SAPPHIRE high-risk criteria-abnormal stress test, recurrent stenosis after CEA, and previous radiotherapy to the neck-were not independently associated with an adverse outcome. Independently significant risk factors not included in the SAPPHIRE criteria are inclusion of ages <80 years, preadmission living in a nursing home, DM, contralateral carotid stenosis, and any previous cerebrovascular accident. The risk index predictors are age in years (40-49: 0 points; 50-59: 2 points; 60-69: 4 points; 70-79: 6 points; 80-89: 8 points), living in a nursing home (4 points), any cardiovascular disease (2 points), congestive heart failure (5 points), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (3 points), DM (2 points), degree of contralateral stenosis (<50%: 0 points; 50%-69%: 1 point; 70%-near occlusion: 2 points; occlusion: 3 points). High-risk CEA is defined as >13 points, representing adverse outcome rate of 22.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

SAPPHIRE and other previously reported high-risk CAS inclusion criteria do not include all of the factors found to be independently associated with outcomes. Further studies are required to determine whether CAS is inferior to CEA in high-risk patients using a validated model of risk. In addition, this preoperative assessment includes novel criteria that can be used to stratify risks.

A randomised comparison of transradial and transfemoral approach for carotid artery stenting: RADCAR (RADial access for CARotid artery stenting) study

AIMS

Limited data exist on radial access in carotid artery stenting. This multicentre prospective randomised study was performed to compare the outcome and complication rates of transradial and transfemoral carotid artery stenting.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The clinical and angiographic data of 260 consecutive patients with high risk for carotid endarterectomy, treated between 2010 and 2012 by carotid stenting with cerebral protection, were evaluated. Patients were randomised to transradial (n=130) or transfemoral (n=130) groups and several parameters were evaluated. Primary combined endpoint: major adverse cardiac and cerebral events, rate of access-site complications. Secondary endpoints: angiographic outcome of the procedure, fluoroscopy time and X-ray dose, procedural time, crossover rate to another puncture site and hospitalisation in days. Procedural success was achieved in all 260 patients (100%), the crossover rate was 10% in the TR and 1.5% in the TF group (p<0.05). A major access-site complication was encountered in one patient (0.9%) in the TR group and in one patient (0.8%) in the TF group (p=ns). The incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebral events was 0.9% in the TR and 0.8% in the TF group (p=ns). Procedure time (1,620 [1,230-2,100] vs. 1,500 [1,080-2,100] sec, p=ns) and fluoroscopy time (540 [411-735] vs. 501 [378-702] sec, p=ns) were not significantly different, but the radiation dose was significantly higher in the TR group (195 [129-274] vs. 148 [102-237] Gy*cm2, p<0.05) by per-protocol analysis. Hospitalisation days were significantly lower in the TR group (1.17±0.40 vs. 1.25±0.45, p<0.05). By intention-to-treat analysis there was a significantly higher radiation dose in the TR group (195 [130-288] vs. 150 [104-241], p<0.05), but no difference in major events (0.9 vs. 0.8, p=ns) and length of hospitalisation in days (1.4±2.6 vs. 1.25±0.45, p=ns).

CONCLUSIONS

The transradial approach for carotid artery stenting is safe and efficacious; however, the crossover rate is higher with transradial access. There are no differences in the total procedure duration and fluoroscopy time between the two approaches but the radiation dose is significantly higher in the radial group, and the hospitalisation is shorter with the use of transradial access by per-protocol analysis. By evaluating the patient data according to intention-to-treat analysis we found no difference in major adverse events and hospitalisation. In both groups, vascular complications rarely occurred.

Management of extracranial carotid artery disease

Stroke is the third leading cause of death in developed nations. Up to 88% of strokes are ischemic in nature. Extracranial carotid artery atherosclerotic disease is the third leading cause of ischemic stroke in the general population and the second most common nontraumatic cause among adults younger than 45 years. This article provides comprehensive, evidence-based recommendations for the management of extracranial atherosclerotic disease, including imaging for screening and diagnosis, medical management, and interventional management.

[A role of carotid endarterectomy in prevention of cerebral ischemic damage]

Authors present a literature review on the prevalence, clinical presentations, diagnosis and outcome of surgical treatment of atherosclerotic stenosis of the internal carotid artery.

Toward hemodynamic diagnosis of carotid artery stenosis based on ultrasound image data and computational modeling

The ability of using non-expensive ultrasound (US) image data together with computer fluid simulation to access various severities of carotid stenosis was inquired in this study. Subject-specific hemodynamic conditions were simulated using a developed finite element solver. Individual structured meshing of the common carotid artery (CCA) bifurcation was built from segmented longitudinal and cross-sectional US images; imposed boundary velocities were based on Doppler US measurements. Simulated hemodynamic parameters such as velocities, wall shear stress (WSS) and derived descriptors were able to predict disturbed flow conditions which play an important role in the development of local atherosclerotic plaques. Hemodynamic features from six individual CCA bifurcations were analyzed. High values of time-averaged WSS (TAWSS) were found at stenosis site. Low values of TAWSS were found at the bulb and at the carotid internal and external branches depending on the particular features of each patient. High oscillating shear index and relative residence time values assigned highly disturbed flows at the same artery surface regions that correlate only moderately with low TAWSS results. Based on clinic US examinations, results provide estimates of flow changes and forces at the carotid artery wall toward the link between hemodynamic behavior and stenosis pathophysiology.

Outcomes after carotid endarterectomy: is there a high-risk population? A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program report

OBJECTIVE

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is the standard treatment of carotid stenosis for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS), however, has been proposed as alternative therapy for patients deemed at high-risk for CEA. This study examined 30-day adjudicated outcomes in a contemporary series of CEAs and assessed the validity of criteria used to define a potential high-risk patient population for CEA.

METHODS

Patients undergoing isolated CEA in private sector hospitals between Jan 1, 2005, and Dec 31, 2006, were identified using the prospectively gathered National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. The primary study end points were 30-day stroke and death rates. Demographic, preoperative, and intraoperative variables were examined using multivariate models to identify variables associated with the study end points. Variables used to define systemic "high-risk" patients in the Stenting and Angioplasty with Protection in Patients at High Risk for Endarterectomy (SAPPHIRE) study (active cardiac disease, severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and octogenarian status) were examined individually and in composite fashion for association with study endpoints.

RESULTS

Of the 3949 CEAs performed, 59% were in men, 30% were "high-risk" (19% age >80), and 43% had a previous neurologic event. The 30-day stroke rate was 1.6%, the death rate was 0.7%, and combined stroke/death rate was 2.2%. Multivariate analysis showed that intraoperative transfusion (odds ratio [OR], 5.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.71-20.66; P = .005), prior major stroke (OR, 5.34; 95% CI, 2.96-9.64; P < .0001), shorter height (surrogate for small artery size; OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02-1.16; P = .010), and increased anesthesia time (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.03; P = .008) were predictive of stroke. Critical limb ischemia (OR, 12.72; 95% CI, 3.49-46.40; P < .0001) and poor functional status (OR, 7.05; 95% CI, 2.95-16.82; P < .0001) were independent correlates of death. Systemic high-risk variables, either combined or individually, did not increase risk of stroke or death on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

CEA is associated with favorable 30-day outcomes across a spectrum of patient comorbidity features including octogenarian status. Anatomic and technical features are the important predictors of perioperative stroke, whereas critical limb ischemia and poor functional status are important predictors of death for patients undergoing CEA. These data refute the concept that CAS is preferred for patients deemed high-risk by virtue of systemic comorbidities.

Predictors of 30-day postoperative stroke or death after carotid endarterectomy using the 2012 carotid endarterectomy-targeted American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database

OBJECTIVE

This study used a recently released procedure-targeted multicenter data source to determine independent predictors of postoperative stroke or death in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for carotid artery stenosis.

METHODS

The 2012 CEA-targeted American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database was used for this study. Patient, disease, and procedure characteristics of patients undergoing CEA were assessed. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine independent risk factors for 30-day postoperative stroke/death or other major complications.

RESULTS

The analysis included 3845 patients undergoing CEA (58.1% with asymptomatic and 41.9% with symptomatic carotid disease). The overall 30-day postoperative stroke/death rate was 3.0% (1.9% in asymptomatic patients, 4.6% in symptomatic patients). The variables that maintained an independent association with postoperative stroke/death after adjustment for other known patient-related and procedure-related factors were age ≥80 years, active smoking, contralateral internal carotid artery stenosis of 80% to 99%, emergency procedure status, preoperative stroke, presence of one or more ACS NSQIP-defined high-risk characteristics (including any or all of New York Heart Association class III/IV congestive heart failure, left ventricular ejection fraction <30%, recent unstable angina, or recent myocardial infarction), and operative time ≥150 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

After adjustment for a comprehensive array of patient-related and procedure-related variables of particular import to patients with carotid artery stenosis, we have identified several factors that are independently associated with early stroke or death after CEA. These factors are generally related to the comorbid condition of CEA patients and to specific characteristics of their carotid disease, and not to technical features of the CEA procedure. Knowledge of these factors will assist surgeons in selecting appropriate patients for this procedure.

Evidence for the prevention and treatment of stroke in dialysis patients

The risks of both ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke are particularly high in dialysis patients of any age and outcomes are poor. It is therefore important to identify strategies that safely minimize stroke risk in this population. Observational studies have been unable to clarify the relative importance of traditional stroke risk factors such as blood pressure and cholesterol in those on dialysis, and are affected by biases that usually make them an inappropriate source of data on which to base therapeutic decisions. Well-conducted randomized trials are not susceptible to such biases and can reliably investigate the causal nature of the association between a potential risk factor and the outcome of interest. However, dialysis patients have been under-represented in the cardiovascular trials which have proven net benefit of commonly used preventative treatments (e.g., antihypertensive treatments, low-dose aspirin, carotid revascularization, and thromboprophylaxis for atrial fibrillation), and there remains uncertainty about safety and efficacy of many of these treatments in this high-risk population. Moreover, the efficacy of renal-specific therapies that might reduce cardiovascular risk, such as modulators of mineral and bone disorder, online hemodiafiltration, and daily (nocturnal) hemodialysis, have not been tested in adequately powered trials. Recent trials have also demonstrated how widespread current practices could be causing stroke. Therefore, it is important that reliable information on the prevention and treatment of stroke (and other cardiovascular disease) in dialysis patients is generated by performing large-scale randomized trials of many current and future treatments.

Guidelines for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: a guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

The aim of this updated guideline is to provide comprehensive and timely evidence-based recommendations on the prevention of future stroke among survivors of ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack. The guideline is addressed to all clinicians who manage secondary prevention for these patients. Evidence-based recommendations are provided for control of risk factors, intervention for vascular obstruction, antithrombotic therapy for cardioembolism, and antiplatelet therapy for noncardioembolic stroke. Recommendations are also provided for the prevention of recurrent stroke in a variety of specific circumstances, including aortic arch atherosclerosis, arterial dissection, patent foramen ovale, hyperhomocysteinemia, hypercoagulable states, antiphospholipid antibody syndrome, sickle cell disease, cerebral venous sinus thrombosis, and pregnancy. Special sections address use of antithrombotic and anticoagulation therapy after an intracranial hemorrhage and implementation of guidelines.

The current national criteria for carotid artery stenting overestimate its efficacy in patients who are symptomatic and at high risk

BACKGROUND

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) have established guidelines that outline patients who are considered "high risk" for complications after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for which carotid artery stenting (CAS) may provide benefit. The validity of these high-risk criteria are yet unproven. In this study, we stratified patients who underwent CAS or CEA by CMS high-risk criteria and symptom status and examined their 30-day outcomes.

METHODS

A nonrandomized, retrospective cohort study was performed by chart review of all patients undergoing CEA or CAS from January 1, 2005, to December 31, 2010, at our institution. Demographic data and data pertaining to the presence or absence of high-risk factors were collected. Patients were stratified using symptom status and high-risk status as variables, and 30-day adverse events (stroke, death, myocardial infarction [MI]) were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 271 patients underwent CAS, with 30-day complication rates of stroke (3.0%), death (1.1%), MI (1.5%), stroke/death (3.7%), and stroke/death/MI (5.2%). A total of 830 patients underwent CEA with 30-day complication rates of stroke (2.0%), death (0.1%), MI (0.6%), stroke/death (1.9%), and stroke/death/MI (2.7%). Among symptomatic patients, physiologic high-risk status was associated with increased stroke/death (6 of 42 [14.3%] vs 2 of 74 [2.7%]; P < .01), and anatomic high-risk status was associated with a trend toward increased stroke/death (5 of 31 [16.1%] vs 0 of 20 [0.0%]; P = .14) in patients who underwent CAS vs CEA. Analysis of asymptomatic patients showed no differences between the two groups overall, except for a trend toward a higher rate of MI after CAS than after CEA (3 of 71 [4.2%] vs 0 of 108 [0.0%]; P = .06) in those who were physiologically at high risk. Among symptomatic patients who underwent CAS, patients with physiologic and anatomic high-risk factors had a higher rate of stroke/death than non-high-risk patients (6 of 42 [14.3%] vs 0 of 24 [0.0%] and 5 of 31 [16.1%] vs 0 of 24 [0.0%], respectively; both P ≤ .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Physiologic high-risk status was associated with increased stroke/death, whereas anatomic high-risk status showed a trend toward increased stroke/death in symptomatic patients undergoing CAS compared with non-high-risk patients undergoing CAS or physiologically high-risk patients undergoing CEA. Our results suggest that the current national criteria for CAS overestimate its efficacy in patients who are symptomatic and at high risk.

In-hospital versus postdischarge adverse events following carotid endarterectomy

OBJECTIVE

Most studies based on state and nationwide registries evaluating perioperative outcome after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) rely on hospital discharge data only. Therefore, the true 30-day complication risk after carotid revascularization may be underestimated.

METHODS

We used the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database 2005-2010 to assess the in-hospital and postdischarge rate of any stroke, death, cardiac event (new Q-wave myocardial infarction or cardiac arrest), and combined stroke/death and combined adverse outcome (S/D/CE) at 30 days following CEA. Multivariable analyses were used to identify predictors for in-hospital and postdischarge events separately, and in particular, those that predict postdischarge events distinctly.

RESULTS

A total of 35,916 patients who underwent CEA during 2005-2010 were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database; 59% were male, median age was 72 years, and 44% had a previous neurologic event. Thirty-day stroke rate was 1.6% (n = 591), death rate was 0.8% (n = 272), cardiac event rate was 1.0% (n = 350), stroke or death rate was 2.2% (n = 794), and combined S/D/CE rate was 2.9% (n = 1043); 33% of strokes, 53% of deaths, 32% of cardiac events, 40% of combined stroke/death, and 38% of combined S/D/CE took place after hospital discharge. Patients with a prior stroke or transient ischemic attack had similar proportions of postdischarge events compared with patients without prior symptoms. Independent predictors for postdischarge events, but not for in-hospital events were female sex (stroke [odds ratio (OR), 1.6; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.2-2.1] and stroke/death [OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.7]), renal failure (stroke [OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.4-6.2]) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (death [OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.6-3.7], stroke/death [OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.4-2.4], and S/D/CE [OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.4-2.3]).

CONCLUSIONS

With 38% of perioperative adverse events after CEA happening posthospitalization, regardless of symptoms status, we need to be alert to the ongoing risks after discharge particularly in women, patients with renal failure, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. This emphasizes the need for reporting and comparing 30-day adverse event rates when evaluating outcomes for CEA, or comparing carotid stenting to CEA.

Variability in carotid endarterectomy practice patterns within a metropolitan area

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Previous clinical studies have suggested that patients with carotid stenosis with high surgical risk features may fare better with carotid artery stenting or aggressive medical therapy. The extent to which carotid endarterectomy is still being performed in this group of patients is unclear.

METHODS

A retrospective audit was performed among 4 hospitals over a 2-year period. The proportion of high surgical risk patients was compared and the in-hospital stroke, myocardial infarction, and death rates were compared among conventional and high surgical risk patients.

RESULTS

Three hundred thirty-five carotid endarterectomy operations were performed (63% asymptomatic) with 37.9% being high surgical risk subjects. The stroke, myocardial infarction, and death rate was 4.6% in conventional risk subjects and 10.2% in high surgical risk patients (P<0.05). The only hospital with multidisciplinary carotid conferences had the lowest proportion of carotid endarterectomy operations in asymptomatic patients.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial proportion of carotid endarterectomy operations are performed in patients with high surgical risk features. These patients experienced a 2-fold increase in major in-hospital complications, raising doubts about whether they benefit from carotid surgery. The use of preintervention multidisciplinary conferences may improve patient safety.

Characterization of resident surgeon participation during carotid endarterectomy and impact on perioperative outcomes

INTRODUCTION

The impact of resident surgeon participation during vascular procedures on postoperative outcomes is incompletely understood. We characterized resident physician participation during carotid endarterectomy (CEA) procedures within the 2005-2009 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Participant Use Datafile and evaluated associations with procedural characteristics and perioperative adverse events.

METHODS

CEAs were identified using primary current procedural terminology codes; those performed simultaneously with other major procedures or unknown resident participation status were excluded. Group-wise comparisons based on resident participation status were performed using χ(2) or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and t tests or nonparametric methods for continuous variables. Associations with perioperative adverse events (major = stroke, death, myocardial infarction, or cardiac arrest; minor = peripheral nerve injury, bleeding requiring transfusion, surgical site infection, or wound disruption) were assessed using multivariable logistic regression models adjusting for other known risk factors.

RESULTS

A total of 25,280 CEA procedures were analyzed, of which residents participated in 13,705 (54.2%), while residents were absent in 11,575 (45.8%). Among CEAs with resident physician participation, resident level was categorized as junior (postgraduate year [PGY] 1-2) in 21.9%, senior (PGY 3-5) in 52.7%, and fellow (PGY ≥6) in 25.3%. Major adverse event rates with and without resident participation were 1.9% versus 2.1%, and minor adverse event rates with and without resident participation were 0.9% versus 1.0%, respectively. In multivariable models, resident physician participation was not associated with perioperative risk for major adverse events (odds ratio [OR], 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-1.08) or minor adverse events (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.72-1.21).

CONCLUSIONS

Resident surgeon participation during CEA is not associated with risk of adverse perioperative events.

Cardiovascular disease in chronic kidney disease. A clinical update from Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO)

Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is high, and the presence of CKD worsens outcomes of cardiovascular disease (CVD). CKD is associated with specific risk factors. Emerging evidence indicates that the pathology and manifestation of CVD differ in the presence of CKD. During a clinical update conference convened by the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO), an international group of experts defined the current state of knowledge and the implications for patient care in important topic areas, including coronary artery disease and myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, cerebrovascular disease, atrial fibrillation, peripheral arterial disease, and sudden cardiac death. Although optimal strategies for prevention, diagnosis, and management of these complications likely should be modified in the presence of CKD, the evidence base for decision making is limited. Trials targeting CVD in patients with CKD have a large potential to improve outcomes.