Contemporary Trends in Physician Utilization Rates of CEA and CAS for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis among Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Carotid revascularization for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (ACAS) has become increasingly controversial in the past few decades as the best medical therapy has improved. The aim of this study was to assess and define contemporary trends in the rate of carotid revascularization procedures for ACAS in the United States and to characterize outlier physicians performing a higher rate of asymptomatic revascularization compared to their peers. METHODS: We used 100% Medicare fee-for-service claims to identify all patients who were newly diagnosed with ACAS between 01/2011-06/2018. Patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis, those with prior carotid revascularization, and surgeons who performed ≤10 CEAs during the study period were excluded. We used a hierarchical multivariable logistic regression model to evaluate patient and physician characteristics associated with undergoing a carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stent procedure within 3 months after the initial diagnosis of ACAS. We also assessed temporal trends in carotid revascularization rates over time using the Cochran-Armitage Trend Test. RESULTS: Overall, 795,512 patients (median age 73.9 years, 50.9% male, 87.6% white) had a first-time diagnosis of ACAS during the study period, of which 23,481 (3.0%) underwent carotid revascularization within 3 months. There was a significant decline in overall carotid artery revascularization rates over time (2011: 3.2% vs. 2018: 2.1%; P < 0.001). The median and mean physician-specific carotid revascularization rates were 2.0% (IQR 0.0%-6.3%) and 4.7% ± 7.1%, respectively. Three-hundred and fifty physicians (5.2%) had carotid revascularization rates ≥19%, which was more than 2 standard deviations above the mean. After adjusting for patient-level characteristics, physician-level variables associated with carotid revascularization for newly diagnosed ACAS included male sex (adjusted OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.35-1.89), more years in practice (≥31 vs. <10 years, aOR 1.64, 95% CI 1.32-2.04), rural practice location (aOR 1.34, 95% CI 1.18-1.52), Southern region practice location (versus Northeast, aOR 1.54, 95% CI 1.39-1.69), and lower volume of ACAS patients (lower versus upper tertile, aOR 2.62, 95% CI 2.39-2.89). Cardiothoracic surgeons had a 1.52-fold higher odds of carotid revascularization compared to vascular surgeons (95% CI 1.36-1.68), whereas cardiologists and radiologists had lower intervention rates (both, P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The current early revascularization rate for newly diagnosed ACAS is <5% among proceduralists in the United States, and has been decreasing steadily since 2014. There are particular physician-level characteristics that are associated with higher rates of carotid revascularization that cannot be fully contextualized without high-level contemporary outcomes data to guide decision making in ACAS.

Validation of the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment in patients with battlefield-related extremity vascular injuries.

OBJECTIVE: Vascular extremity injuries can be a significant burden on a patient's long-term quality of life. Currently, no limb-specific surveys have been used to quantify the relation between injury pattern and the resultant physical or psychological impact. The objective of this study was to validate the use of the Short Musculoskeletal Function Assessment (SMFA) in the setting of extremity vascular injury. METHODS: The Joint Theater Trauma Registry was queried and filtered for U.S. troops with an extremity vascular injury isolated to a single limb. Injury and management data were obtained, and the SMFA was administered after patient contact and consent. Validity was analyzed by characterization of SMFA score distribution, correlation with 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) scores, and assessment of its discriminative capability to external measures of injury severity (ie, Injury Severity Score [ISS], Mangled Extremity Severity Score [MESS], and Medicare Part A disability qualification). RESULTS: At mean follow-up of 5 years, 164 patients (median age, 25 years; interquartile range, 22-31 years) completed both surveys. The overall SMFA Dysfunction Index was 24.8 ± 15.2 (range, 0-78; skewness, 0.60; floor/ceiling effect, 0%-1.2%; and nonresponse, 0%), and the overall Bother Index was 29.4 ± 20.2 (range, 0-96; skewness, 0.58; floor/ceiling effect, 0%-4.3%; and nonresponse, 0.6%). SF-36 physical component summary scores correlated inversely with the Dysfunction Index (r = -0.64; P < .01), whereas mental component summary scores correlated inversely with the Bother Index (r = -0.59; P < .01). No difference was found in reported scores between those considered severely injured (ISS > 15) and those not severely injured (ISS ≤ 15). However, those with mangled extremities (MESS ≥ 7) reported higher Dysfunction and Bother indices than those with lower scores (P < .05). In addition, patients considered disabled (per Medicare Part A qualifications) reported higher Dysfunction and Bother indices compared with those not considered disabled (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Use of the SMFA is validated in those with extremity vascular injuries, and it should be considered an adjunctive tool in evaluating long-term patient outcomes.