Developing a fast-track discharge protocol for patients with cerebral aneurysms treated via neuroendovascular techniques

INTRODUCTION

As we emerge from the current pandemic, hospitals, staff, and resources will need to continue to adjust to meet ongoing healthcare demands. Lessons learned during past shortages can be used to optimize peri-procedural protocols to safely improve the utilization of hospital resources.

METHODS

Retrospective review of patients who underwent elective endovascular intracranial aneurysm treatment was performed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with patients who were able to be discharged within 24 h of elective procedures. Rates of complications (particularly readmission) were determined.

RESULTS

330 patients underwent elective endovascular aneurysm treatment with 86 (26.1%) discharged within 24 h. Factors associated with earlier discharge included procedure years (2019-2021) and male sex. Patients were more likely to be discharged later (after 24 h) if they underwent stent-coil embolization or flow-diversion. There was no association between discharge timing and likelihood of readmission.

DISCUSSION

Our review highlights the safety of earlier discharge and allowed us to prepare a fast-track protocol for same-day discharge in these patients. This protocol will be studied prospectively in the next phase of this study. As we gain more comfort with emerging, minimally invasive endovascular therapies, we hope to safely achieve same-day discharge on a protocolized and routine basis, reducing the demand of elective aneurysm treatments on our healthcare system.

CONCLUSION

We retrospectively demonstrate that early discharge following elective aneurysm treatment is safe in our cohort and provide a fast-track pathway based on these findings for other centers developing similar protocols.

Transradial versus transfemoral access for embolization of intracranial aneurysms with the Woven EndoBridge device: a propensity score-matched study

OBJECTIVE

Transradial access (TRA) is commonly utilized in neurointerventional procedures. This study compared the technical and clinical outcomes of the use of TRA versus those of transfemoral access (TFA) for intracranial aneurysm embolization with the Woven EndoBridge (WEB) device.

METHODS

This is a secondary analysis of the Worldwide WEB Consortium, which comprises multicenter data related to adult patients with intracranial aneurysms who were managed with the WEB device. These aneurysms were categorized into two groups: those who were treated with TRA or TFA. Patient and aneurysm characteristics and technical and clinical outcomes were compared between groups. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to match groups according to the following baseline characteristics: age, sex, subarachnoid hemorrhage, aneurysm location, bifurcation aneurysm, aneurysm with incorporated branch, neck width, aspect ratio, dome width, and elapsed time since the last follow-up imaging evaluation.

RESULTS

This study included 682 intracranial aneurysms (median [interquartile range] age 61.3 [53.0-68.0] years), of which 561 were treated with TFA and 121 with TRA. PSM resulted in 65 matched pairs. After PSM, both groups had similar characteristics, angiographic and functional outcomes, and rates of retreatment, thromboembolic and hemorrhagic complications, and death. TFA was associated with longer procedure length (median 96.5 minutes vs 72.0 minutes, p = 0.006) and fluoroscopy time (28.2 minutes vs 24.8 minutes, p = 0.037) as compared with TRA. On the other hand, deployment issues were more common in those treated with TRA, but none resulted in permanent complications.

CONCLUSIONS

TRA has comparable outcomes, with shorter procedure and fluoroscopy time, to TFA for aneurysm embolization with the WEB device.

Transradial versus transfemoral access for endovascular therapy of intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies

Endovascular treatment is widely used in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. However, neurosurgeons are sceptical about endovascular access via the radial artery. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and safety of transradial and transfemoral artery access in patients with intracranial aneurysms. We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for studies comparing the two approaches. The primary outcome was total complications, and the secondary outcomes were access site complications, intracranial haemorrhage, stroke, thromboembolism, silent infarct, re-treatment rate, mortality, complete occlusion of intracranial aneurysms, procedure duration, and length of hospital stay. A random-effects model was used to assess the pooled data. Of the 100 identified studies, 6 were eligible (a total of 3764 participants). There were no significant differences in total complications(odds ratio [OR] = 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.33, 1.45], p = 0.32), complete occlusion of intracranial aneurysms (OR = 1.02, 95%CI [0.77,1.37], p = 0.87), procedure duration (mean difference [MD] =  - 6.24, 95%CI [- 14.75, - 1.54], p = 0.95), or length of hospital stay (MD = 2.204, 95%CI [- 0.05, 4.45], p = 0.95), access site complications (OR = 0.49, 95%CI [0.16, 1.52], p = 0.22), intracranial haemorrhage (OR = 1.07, 95%CI [0.49, 2.34], p = 0.86), stroke (OR = 0.59, 95%CI [0.20, 1.77], p = 0.35), thromboembolism (OR = 0.85, 95%CI [0.33, 2.17], p = 0.74), silent infarct (OR = 0.69, 95%CI [0.04, 11.80], p = 0.80), retreatment rate (OR = 1.32, 95%CI [0.70, 2.48], p = 0.39), mortality (OR = 1.41, 95%CI [0.06, 5.20], p = 0.61), immediate occlusion (OR = 0.99, 95%CI [0.64, 1.51], p = 0.95), and occlusion during follow-up (OR = 1.10, 95%CI [0.56, 2.16], p = 0.74) between the transradial and transfemoral groups. This study showed comparable safety and efficacy outcomes between transradial and transfemoral access in patients with intracranial aneurysms treated endovascularly. Future large randomised trials are warranted to confirm these findings.

Radial artery access for neuroendovascular procedures: safety review and complications

Although enthusiasm for transradial access for neurointerventional procedures has grown, a unique set of considerations bear emphasis to preserve safety and minimize complications. In the first part of this review series, we reviewed anatomical considerations for safe and easy neuroendovascular procedures from a transradial approach. In this second part of the review series, we aim to (1) summarize evidence for safety of the transradial approach, and (2) explain complications and their management.

Transition from Proximal to Distal Radial Access for Diagnostic Cerebral Angiography: Learning Curve Analysis

BACKGROUND

Distal transradial access (dTRA) has several advantages compared with proximal transradial access (pTRA) for cerebral angiography. The learning curve for transitioning from pTRA to dTRA has not been described.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of the first 75 diagnostic cerebral angiograms performed with dTRA by a single operator was performed. Outcomes included time for sheath insertion, sheath to first vessel time, procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and contrast volume. Their associations with procedure number were evaluated with multivariate linear regressions, segmented linear regression, and locally weighted regression (LOESS).

RESULTS

The mean age of patients was 56.1 years and 61.3% were female. Seventy-four of 75 angiograms were successfully completed with dTRA. There were 3 minor and no major complications. After adjusting for covariates, sheath to first vessel time (β = -0.50, P < 0.001) and procedure duration (β = -0.26, P = 0.002) were associated with procedure number. Time for sheath insertion, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and contrast volume were not associated with procedure number. Segmented linear regression identified break-points of 33 for sheath to first vessel time and 11 for procedure duration, which corresponded to the procedure number after which these outcomes trended down. LOESS models for time to sheath placement, procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, and radiation dose predicted minimum values between procedures 40-50.

CONCLUSIONS

Transitioning from pTRA to dTRA for diagnostic cerebral angiography is feasible and safe. The learning curve is overcome between procedures 11 and 33, and further refinement in performance occurs through procedures 40-50.

Transradial cerebral angiography becomes more efficient than transfemoral angiography: lessons from 500 consecutive angiograms

BACKGROUND

Transradial arterial access (TRA) for cerebral diagnostic angiography is associated with fewer access site complications than transfemoral access (TFA). However, concerns about increased procedure time and radiation exposure with TRA may slow its adoption. Our objective was to measure TRA rates of success and fluoroscopy time per vessel after 'radial-first' adoption and to compare these rates to those obtained with TFA.

METHODS

We examined 500 consecutive cerebral angiograms on an intent-to-treat basis during the first full year of radial-first adoption, recording patient and procedural characteristics and outcomes.

RESULTS

Over a 9-month period at a single center, 457 of 500 angiograms (91.4%) were performed with intent-to-treat via TRA, and 431 cases (86.2%) were ultimately performed via TRA. One patient (0.2%) experienced a temporary neurologic deficit in the TRA group, and none (0%) did in the TFA group (p=0.80). The mean±SD fluoroscopy time per vessel decreased significantly from the first half of the study to the second half for TRA (5.0±3.8 vs 3.4±3.5 min/vessel; p<0.001), while TFA time remained unchanged (3.7±1.8 vs 3.5±1.4 min/vessel; p=0.69). The median fluoroscopy time per vessel for TRA became faster than that for TFA after 150 angiograms.

CONCLUSION

Of 500 consecutive angiograms performed during the first full year of radial-first implementation, 86.2% were performed successfully using TRA. TRA efficiency exceeded that of TFA after 150 angiograms. Concerns about the length of procedure or radiation exposure should not be barriers to TRA adoption.

Learning curves for transradial access versus transfemoral access in diagnostic cerebral angiography: a case series

BACKGROUND

The perception of a steep learning curve associated with transradial access has resulted in its limited adoption in neurointervention despite the demonstrated benefits, including decreased access-site complications.

OBJECTIVE

To compare learning curves of transradial versus transfemoral diagnostic cerebral angiograms obtained by five neurovascular fellows as primary operator.

METHODS

The first 100-150 consecutive transradial and transfemoral angiographic scans performed by each fellow between July 2017 and March 2020 were identified. Mean fluoroscopy time per artery injected (angiographic efficiency) was calculated as a marker of technical proficiency and compared for every 25 consecutive procedures performed (eg, 1-25, 26-50, 51-75).

RESULTS

We identified 1242 diagnostic angiograms, 607 transradial and 635 transfemoral. The radial cohort was older (64.3 years vs 62.3 years, p=0.01) and demonstrated better angiographic efficiency (3.4 min/vessel vs 3.7 min/vessel, p=0.03). For three fellows without previous endovascular experience, proficiency was obtained between 25 and 50 transfemoral angiograms. One fellow achieved proficiency after performing 25-50 transradial angiograms; and the two other fellows, in <25 transradial angiograms. The two fellows with previous experience had flattened learning curves for both access types. Two patients experienced transient neurologic symptoms postprocedure. Transradial angiograms were associated with significantly fewer access-site complications (3/607, 0.5% vs 22/635, 3.5%, p<0.01). Radial-to-femoral conversion occurred in 1.2% (7/607); femoral-to-radial conversion occurred in 0.3% (2/635). Over time, the proportion of transradial angiographic procedures increased.

CONCLUSION

Technical proficiency improved significantly over time for both access types, typically requiring between 25 and 50 diagnostic angiograms to achieve asymptomatic improvement in efficiency. Reduced access-site complications and decreased fluoroscopy time were benefits associated with transradial angiography.