Evaluating postoperative outcomes in patients with hostile neck anatomy undergoing transcarotid artery revascularization versus transfemoral carotid artery stenting

Preoperative protective stenting of the carotid artery in severe complex head and neck cancer resection

OBJECTIVE

To investigate effects of preoperative protective carotid artery (CA) stenting in complex head and neck cancer (HNC) resection.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

HNC that encases the CA is complex. Fifty-five patients diagnosed with complex HNC from 2018 to 2021 were enrolled, and were divided into Control group (general complex cases) and carotid artery stent (CAS) group (severe complex cases). All patients underwent standard tumor resection, while patients in the CAS group also underwent preoperative covered CA stenting. Medical information was retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

CA stenting and tumor resection were successfully performed. Baseline demographics were recorded. CAS and Control groups had similar results for complete tumor resection rate, operation time, and intraoperative blood loss, although the CA was obviously more involved in CAS group than in Control group. However, recurrence rate in the CAS group was significantly lower than Control group, indicating that preoperative CA stent implantation facilitates complete tumor removal. Furthermore, perioperative CA-associated complications including common/internal CA ligation were more frequent in Control group. Overall survival and disease-free survival rate in CAS group and Control group was 87.5% and 69.2%, respectively. Disease-free survival rate in CAS group and Control group was 87.5% and 42.3%, respectively. No postoperative cerebral infarction was observed in either group. Overall hospitalization cost was recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative protective CA stenting facilitates more thorough tumor removal while better preserving the CA during complex HNC resection, reducing the surgical difficulty. Preoperative CA stenting may be a safe and effective therapeutic option for resection of HNC encasing the CA.

A Prosthetic Conduit can be Used Safely for TransCarotid Artery Revascularization Under Local Anesthesia in High-Risk Patients

Surgical management of carotid stenosis has evolved from open carotid endarterectomy (CEA) to include multiple alternative procedures including transfemoral carotid artery stenting (tfCAS) and transcarotid artery stenting. In recent years, Transcarotid Artery Revascularization (TCAR) has emerged as a third option, combining open cut down to the common carotid artery (CCA) with endovascular stenting and neuroprotection via reversal of cerebral blood flow. In this case series, a modified TCAR procedure using a prosthetic conduit was successfully performed exclusively under local anesthesia in a total of 10 patients with carotid artery stenosis, high cardiac risk, and anatomical contraindications to a traditional TCAR.

What Is the Best Technique for Treating Carotid Disease?

This is a comprehensive review of carotid artery revascularization techniques: Carotid Endarterectomy (CEA), Transfemoral Carotid Artery Stenting (TFCAS), and Transcarotid Artery Revascularization (TCAR). CEA is the gold standard and is particularly effective in elderly and high-risk patients. TFCAS, introduced as a less invasive alternative, poses increased periprocedural stroke risks. TCAR, which combines minimally invasive benefits with CEA's neuroprotection principles, emerges as a safer option for high-risk patients, showing comparable results to CEA and better outcomes than TFCAS. The decision-making process for carotid revascularization is complex and influenced by the patient's medical comorbidities and anatomic factors.

"TCAR or nothing": the only options for some complex carotid stenosis

Transcervical carotid artery revascularization has emerged as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy and transfemoral carotid artery stenting. We present four cases for which we believe transcervical carotid artery revascularization was the only option to treat the lesions. Each case presented with specific technical challenges that were overcome by intraoperative planning that allowed for safe deployment of the Enroute stent (Silk Road Medical) with resolution of each patient's stenosis.

Surgical Specialty Impacts Quality of Operative Training in Carotid Endarterectomy

BACKGROUND

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is currently performed by multiple surgical specialties. The impact of surgical specialty and operative volume on post-CEA outcomes has been well described. However, it is unclear whether trainees of different surgical specialties have similar quality of operative training.

METHODS

Data from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education annual reports were collected and compared between graduating vascular surgery (VS) residents, VS fellows, and neurological surgery (NS) residents. Only cases reported as chief/senior/lead resident, surgeon junior, or surgeon fellow were included in analysis. Linear regression analysis was utilized to evaluate trends in case-mix and volume.

RESULTS

From 2013 to 2022, total CEA case volume was higher among VS residents and fellows, compared to NS residents (52.8 ± 0.8 vs. 44.3 ± 1.4 vs. 12.9 ± 0.6, P < 0.0001). Additionally, VS residents and fellows performed other carotid operations including transfemoral or transcarotid artery stenting (11.1 ± 0.9 vs. 11.2 ± 0.8 vs. 0), carotid body tumor resection (0.7 ± 0.1 vs. 0.7 ± 0.0 vs. 0), and extracranial cervical bypass (6.7 ± 0.3 vs. 6.3 ± 0.3 vs. 0) that were not reported by the NS resident cohort (P < 0.0001 each). On linear regression analysis, total CEA procedures did not change for VS residents (R2 = 0.03, P = 0.62), decreased for VS fellows (-1.29 cases/yr, R2 = 0.75, P < 0.0001), and decreased among NS residents (-0.41 cases/yr, R2 = 0.44, P = 0.01) over the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

Although residents of multiple surgical specialties are trained in CEA, vascular training offers significantly greater numbers and diversity of extracranial carotid cases. It also appears that CEA volume is decreasing among neurosurgical trainees. In light of recent reports on the volume-outcome effect in carotid surgery, these data may have implications for future practice patterns in the domain of extracranial carotid artery disease.

Modality-specific outcomes of patients undergoing carotid revascularization in the setting of recent myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVE

Recent myocardial infarction (MI) represents a real challenge in patients requiring any vascular procedure. There is currently a lack of data on the effect of preoperative MI on the outcomes of carotid revascularization methodology (carotid enterectomy [CEA], transfemoral carotid artery stenting [TFCAS], or transcarotid artery revascularization [TCAR]). This study looks to identify modality-specific outcomes for patients with recent MI undergoing carotid revascularization.

METHODS

Data was collected from the Vascular Quality Initiative (2016-2022) for patients with carotid stenosis in the United States and Canada with recent MI (<6 months) undergoing CEA, TFCAS, or TCAR. In-hospital outcomes after TFCAS vs CEA and TCAR vs CEA were compared. TCAR vs TFCAS were compared in a secondary analysis. We used logistic regression models to compare the outcomes of these three procedures in patients with recent MI, adjusting for potential confounders. Primary outcomes included 30-day in-hospital rates of stroke, death, and MI. Secondary outcomes included stroke/death, stroke/death/MI, postoperative hypertension, postoperative hypotension, prolonged length of stay (>2 days), and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

The final cohort included 1217 CEA (54.2%), 445 TFCAS (19.8%), and 584 TCAR (26.0%) cases. Patients undergoing CEA were more likely to have prior coronary artery bypass graft/percutaneous coronary intervention and to use anticoagulant. Patients undergoing TFCAS were more likely to be symptomatic, have prior congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease, and undergo urgent operations. Patients undergoing TCAR were more likely to have higher rates of American Society of Anesthesiologists class IV to V, P2Y12 inhibitor, and protamine use. In the univariate analysis, CEA was associated with a lower rate of ipsilateral stroke (P = .079), death (P = .002), and 30-day mortality (P = .007). After adjusting for confounders, TFCAS was associated with increased risk of stroke/death (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.36-5.35; P = .005) and stroke/death/MI (aOR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.07-2.60; P = .025) compared with CEA. However, TCAR had similar outcomes compared with CEA. Both TFCAS and TCAR were associated with increased risk of postoperative hypotension (aOR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.18-2.23; P = .003 and aOR, 1.74; 95% CI, 1.31-2.32; P ≤ .001, respectively) and decreased risk of postoperative hypertension (aOR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.36-0.95; P = .029 and aOR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.36-0.71; P ≤ .001, respectively) compared with CEA.

CONCLUSIONS

Although recent MI has been established as a high-risk criterion for CEA and an approved indication for TFCAS, this study showed that CEA is safer in this population with lower risk of stroke/death and stroke/death/MI compared with TFCAS. TCAR had similar stroke/death/MI outcomes in comparison to CEA in patients with recent MI. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm our findings.

Propensity-Score Matched Analysis of Three Years Survival of Trans Carotid Artery Revascularization Versus Carotid Endarterectomy in the Vascular Quality Initiative Medicare-Linked Database

OBJECTIVE

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) remains the gold standard procedure for carotid revascularization. Transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) was introduced as a minimally invasive alternative procedure in patients who are at high risk for surgery. However, TFCAS was associated with an increased risk of stroke and death compared to CEA.

BACKGROUND

Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) has outperformed TFCAS in several prior studies and has shown similar perioperative and 1-year outcomes compared with CEA. We aimed to compare the 1-year and 3-year outcomes of TCAR versus CEA in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI)-Medicare-Linked [Vascular Implant Surveillance and Interventional Outcomes Network (VISION)] database.

METHODS

The VISION database was queried for all patients undergoing CEA and TCAR between September 2016 to December 2019. The primary outcome was 1-year and 3-year survival. One-to-one propensity-score matching (PSM) without replacement was used to produce 2 well-matched cohorts. Kaplan-Meier estimates, and Cox regression was used for analyses. Exploratory analyses compared stroke rates using claims-based algorithms for comparison.

RESULTS

A total of 43,714 patients underwent CEA and 8089 patients underwent TCAR during the study period. Patients in the TCAR cohort were older and were more likely to have severe comorbidities. PSM produced two well-matched cohorts of 7351 pairs of TCAR and CEA. In the matched cohorts, there were no differences in 1-year death [hazard ratio (HR)=1.13; 95% CI, 0.99-1.30; P =0.065]. At 3-years, TCAR was associated with slight increased risk of death (HR=1.16; 95% CI, 1.04-1.30; P =0.008). When stratifying by initial symptomatic presentation, the increased 3-year death associated with TCAR persisted only in symptomatic patients (HR=1.33; 95% CI, 1.08-1.63; P =0.008). Exploratory analyses of postoperative stroke rates using administrative sources suggested that validated measures of claims-based stroke ascertainment are necessary.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large multi-institutional PSM analysis with robust Medicare-linked follow-up for survival analysis, the rate of death at 1 year was similar in TCAR and CEA regardless of symptomatic status. The slight increase in the risk of 3-year death in symptomatic patients undergoing TCAR is likely confounded by more severe comorbidities despite matching. A randomized controlled trial comparing TCAR to CEA is necessary to further determine the role of TCAR in standard-risk patients requiring carotid revascularization.

What Is the Role of Transcarotid Artery Revascularization?

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is the gold-standard method of carotid revascularization in symptomatic patients with ≥50% and in asymptomatic patients with ≥70% stenosis. Transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) has been associated with higher perioperative stroke rates compared to CEA in several studies. On the other hand, transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) has outperformed TFCAS in patients who are considered high risk for surgery. There is increasing data that supports TCAR as a safe and efficient technique with outcomes similar to those of CEA, but additional level-one studies are necessary to evaluate the long-term outcomes of TCAR in high- and standard-risk patients.