Transcarotid Artery Revascularization for Symptomatic Retropharyngeal Internal Carotid Artery Stenosis.

Retropharyngeal internal carotid artery (ICA) is a rare, yet well-described anatomical variant that poses significant challenges to the management of carotid artery stenosis. In this case report, we discuss the treatment of symptomatic ICA stenosis with a retropharyngeal ICA using the transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) technique. A 70-year-old female with comorbidities presented with neurological symptoms and severe ICA stenosis. After diagnostic evaluation, TCAR was chosen for surgical intervention. The patient did well postoperatively. This case emphasizes the importance of considering TCAR when treating ICA stenosis in patients with anatomic variation of ICA location. It also supports adding anatomic variants such as retropharyngeal ICA to the list of indications for TCAR.

Sex as a Predictor of Outcomes for Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis: A Comparative Analysis between CAS and CEA.

PURPOSE: Reporting gender-related outcomes for symptomatic carotid lesion revascularization after both endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) procedures in an unselected group of patients treated by Italian Vascular Specialists. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on patients presenting with recently symptomatic carotid stenosis treated by CAS and by CEA. The primary endpoint was the 30 days any stroke occurrence rate; secondary endpoints were technical success, occurrence of transient ischemic attack (TIA), acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and death. Demographic, clinical and procedural data were all noted in order to identify the outcome's determining factor. RESULTS: A total of 265 patients (193 males and 72 females) were enrolled, and of these 134 (50.5%) underwent CEA and 131 CAS (49.5%). At 30 days, the overall new stroke rate was 3.4% (one fatal), and no TIA, AMI or deaths were observed. Among strokes, seven major and two minor strokes were reported, with six after CEA and three after CAS (p = 0.32; OR: 2; CI95%: 0.48-8.17). The timing of revascularization has been found to be slightly associated with new stroke occurrence: seven out nine strokes were observed in patients treated within 14 days from symptom onset (5.5% vs. 1.4%; p = 0.08, OR: 3.8, CI95%: 0.77-18.56). Lastly, female patients presented a significantly higher risk of post-operative stroke compared to male patients: 6.9% vs. 2.1% (p: 0.05; OR: 3.52; CI95%: 0.91-13.52). CONCLUSIONS: Our experience seems to suggest that both CEA and CAS provide safe and effective results in treating patients presenting with symptomatic carotid stenosis. Regardless of the type of revascularization, female sex is an independent risk factor for stroke recurrence after treatment.

[Reconstruction of internal carotid artery in the resection of paraganglioma of head and neck].

Objective:This study aims to discuss the necessity，surgical method and effect of reconstruction of internal carotid artery （ICA） in the resection of paraganglioma of head and neck. Methods:We retrospectively analyzed the data of the patients who underwent head and neck paraganglioma resection and ICA reconstruction in Peking Union Medical College Hospital from May 2015 to August 2023. The demographic characteristics, preoperative examinations, diagnoses, surgical techniques, and follow-up information were collected. Results:Six patients were enrolled, including four females and two males, with an average age of（39.8±13.0） years. All the patients presented mainly complaining local masses with or without pain. Four cases underwent surgery through Fisch infratemporal fossa approach type A+B, and one through approach type A and one through transcervical approach. Five patients had vascular reconstruction using the great saphenous vein while one patient used an artificial vessel. The average follow-up period was（43.8±31.6） months. One patient had tumor recurrence after 3 years and underwent second surgery to remove the residual tumor, and the other 5 patients had no tumor recurrence. One patient had acute bridging vessel embolism, and the other was found to have occlusion of the bridging vessel at follow-up. Conclusion:Carotid revascularization during resection of paraganglioma of head and neck is an important technique to completely remove the tumor, cure the disease, ensure intracranial blood supply, and reduce cerebrovascular complications. The "pre-reconstruction technique " is an effective method to minimize the duration of brain blood flow interruption, compared to traditional carotid revascularization. Close observation is necessary, along with regular radiological examinations to assess the patency of transplanted vessels, and the residual or recurrent tumors.

Postoperative outcomes in patients with anemia undergoing carotid revascularization.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative anemia is associated with worse postoperative morbidity and mortality after major vascular procedures. Limited research has examined the optimal method of carotid revascularization in patients with anemia. Therefore, we aim to compare the postoperative outcomes after carotid endarterectomy (CEA), transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS), and transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) among patients with anemia. STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective review of patients with anemia undergoing CEA, TFCAS, and TCAR in the Vascular Quality Initiative database between 2016 and 2023. We defined anemia as a preoperative hemoglobin level of <13 g/dL in men and <12 g/dL in women. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality and in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Logistic regression models were used for multivariate analyses. RESULTS: Our study included 40,383 CEA (59.3%), 9159 TFCAS (13.5%), and 18,555 TCAR (27.3%) cases in patients with anemia. TCAR patients were older and had more medical comorbidities than CEA and TFCAS patients. TCAR was associated with a decreased 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-0.59; P < .001), in-hospital MACE (aOR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.46-0.75; P < .001) compared with TFCAS. Additionally, TCAR was associated with a 20% decrease in the risk of 30-day mortality (aOR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.65-0.98; P = .03) and a similar risk of in-hospital MACE (aOR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.77-1.01; P = .07) compared with CEA. Furthermore, TFCAS was associated with an increased risk of 30-day mortality (aOR, 2; 95% CI, 1.5-2.68; P < .001) and in-hospital MACE (aOR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.4-2; P < .001) compared with CEA. CONCLUSIONS: In this multi-institutional national retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected database, TFCAS was associated with a high risk of 30-day mortality and in-hospital MACE compared with CEA and TCAR in patients with anemia. TCAR was associated with a lower risk of 30-day mortality compared with CEA. These findings suggest TCAR as the optimal minimally invasive procedure for carotid revascularization in patients with anemia.

Comparative Analysis of Balloon Angioplasty Alone versus Carotid Artery Stenting for Severe Extracranial Carotid Artery Stenosis: A 4-Year Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: This retrospective study aimed to compare the efficacy of balloon angioplasty alone (BAA) with carotid artery stenting (CAS) for severe extracranial carotid artery stenosis. The primary outcomes assessed were restenosis requiring retreatment and symptomatic stroke occurrence within a 4-year follow-up period. METHODS: A total of 77 patients with 89 carotid artery stenoses undergoing endovascular carotid revascularization between January 2015 and December 2019 were included. Neuroradiologic evaluations, including computed tomography angiography or magnetic resonance angiography, were performed at defined intervals. Statistical analyses were conducted to compare patient characteristics, angiographic outcomes, and clinical outcomes between the BAA and CAS groups. RESULTS: The study demonstrated successful outcomes in both groups with low adverse event rates. The overall restenosis rate was 40.2%, but severe restenosis requiring retreatment occurred in only 10 cases (7 in BAA, and 3 in CAS). No significant difference was found in retreatment rates between the 2 groups (P = 0.53). Stroke occurrence within the 4-year follow-up period was observed in 3 patients, with no statistically significant difference between BAA and CAS groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides valuable insights into the comparative effectiveness of BAA and CAS for severe extracranial carotid artery stenosis. Despite slightly shorter intervals to restenosis in the BAA group, there was no significant difference in retreatment or stroke occurrence rates between the 2 procedures. BAA offers advantages in terms of retreatment options.

Outcomes of carotid revascularization stratified by procedure in patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of <30 and dialysis patients.

OBJECTIVE: Renal failure is a predictor of adverse outcomes in carotid revascularization. There has been debate regarding the benefit of revascularization in patients with severe chronic kidney disease or on dialysis. METHODS: Patients in the Vascular Quality Initiative undergoing transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR), transfemoral carotid artery stenting (tfCAS), or CEA between 2016 and 2023 with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 or on dialysis were included. Patients were divided into cohorts based on procedure. Additional analyses were performed for patients on dialysis only and by symptomatology. Primary outcomes were perioperative stroke/death/myocardial infarction (MI) (SDM). Secondary outcomes included perioperative death, stroke, MI, cranial nerve injury, and stroke/death. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was performed based on treatment assignment to TCAR, tfCAS, and CEA patients and adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, and preoperative symptoms. The χ2 test and multivariable logistic regression analysis were used to evaluate the association of procedure with perioperative outcomes in the weighted cohort. Five-year survival was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and weighted Cox regression. RESULTS: In the weighted cohort, 13,851 patients with an eGFR of <30 (2506 on dialysis) underwent TCAR (3639; 704 on dialysis), tfCAS (1975; 393 on dialysis), or CEA (8237; 1409 on dialysis) during the study period. Compared with TCAR, CEA had higher odds of SDM (2.8% vs 3.6%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.61; P = .049), and MI (0.7% vs 1.5%; aOR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.31-3.05; P = .001). Compared with TCAR, rates of SDM (2.8% vs 5.8%), stroke (1.2% vs 2.6%), and death (0.9% vs 2.4%) were all higher for tfCAS. In asymptomatic patients CEA patients had higher odds of MI (0.7% vs 1.3%; aOR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.15-2.97; P = .011) and cranial nerve injury (0.3% vs 1.9%; aOR, 7.23; 95% CI, 3.28-15.9; P < .001). Like in the primary analysis, asymptomatic tfCAS patients demonstrated higher odds of death and stroke/death. Symptomatic CEA patients demonstrated no difference in stroke, death, or stroke/death. Although tfCAS patients demonstrated higher odds of death, stroke, MI, stroke/death, and SDM. In both groups, the 5-year survival was similar for TCAR and CEA (eGFR <30, 75.1% vs 74.2%; aHR, 1.06; P = .3) and lower for tfCAS (eGFR <30, 75.1% vs 70.4%; aHR, 1.44; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: CEA and TCAR had similar odds of stroke and death and are both a reasonable choice in this population; however, TCAR may be better in patients with an increased risk of MI. Additionally, tfCAS patients were more likely to have worse outcomes after weighting for symptom status. Finally, although patients with a reduced eGFR have worse outcomes than their healthy peers, this analysis shows that the majority of patients survive long enough to benefit from the potential stroke risk reduction provided by all revascularization procedures.

Seven years of the transcarotid artery revascularization surveillance project, comparison to transfemoral stenting and endarterectomy.

OBJECTIVE: This study utilizes the latest data from the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI), which now encompasses over 50,000 transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) procedures, to offer a sizeable dataset for comparing the effectiveness and safety of TCAR, transfemoral carotid artery stenting (tfCAS), and carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Given this substantial dataset, we are now able to compare outcomes overall and stratified by symptom status across revascularization techniques. METHODS: Utilizing VQI data from September 2016 to August 2023, we conducted a risk-adjusted analysis by applying inverse probability of treatment weighting to compare in-hospital outcomes between TCAR vs tfCAS, CEA vs tfCAS, and TCAR vs CEA. Our primary outcome measure was in-hospital stroke/death. Secondary outcomes included myocardial infarction and cranial nerve injury. RESULTS: A total of 50,068 patients underwent TCAR, 25,361 patients underwent tfCAS, and 122,737 patients underwent CEA. TCAR patients were older, more likely to have coronary artery disease, chronic kidney disease, and undergo coronary artery bypass grafting/percutaneous coronary intervention as well as prior contralateral CEA/CAS compared with both CEA and tfCAS. TfCAS had higher odds of stroke/death when compared with TCAR (2.9% vs 1.6%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.65-2.06; P < .001) and CEA (2.9% vs 1.3%; aOR, 2.21; 95% CI, 2.01-2.43; P < .001). CEA had slightly lower odds of stroke/death compared with TCAR (1.3% vs 1.6%; aOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.76-0.91; P < .001). TfCAS had lower odds of cranial nerve injury compared with TCAR (0.0% vs 0.3%; aOR, 0.00; 95% CI, 0.00-0.00; P < .001) and CEA (0.0% vs 2.3%; aOR, 0.00; 95% CI, 0.0-0.0; P < .001) as well as lower odds of myocardial infarction compared with CEA (0.4% vs 0.6%; aOR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.54-0.84; P < .001). CEA compared with TCAR had higher odds of myocardial infarction (0.6% vs 0.5%; aOR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.13-1.54; P < .001) and cranial nerve injury (2.3% vs 0.3%; aOR, 9.42; 95% CI, 7.78-11.4; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Although tfCAS may be beneficial for select patients, the lower stroke/death rates associated with CEA and TCAR are preferred. When deciding between CEA and TCAR, it is important to weigh additional procedural factors and outcomes such as myocardial infarction and cranial nerve injury, particularly when stroke/death rates are similar. Additionally, evaluating subgroups that may benefit from one procedure over another is essential for informed decision-making and enhanced patient care in the treatment of carotid stenosis.

The Effects of Carotid Revascularization on 1-Year Cognitive Performance in Patients With Carotid Artery Stenosis.

PURPOSE: The impact of carotid revascularization on cognitive function for patients with severe carotid artery stenosis remains uncertain. This study is aimed to investigate the 1-year neurocognitive outcomes of patients who accept carotid revascularization and identify the risk factors associated with postoperative cognitive decline. METHODS: From April 2019 to April 2021, patients with ≥70% carotid artery stenosis who were treated with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) were recruited for this study. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) instrument was used to evaluate cognitive function preoperatively and at 3, 6, and 12 months postoperatively. Logistic regression analysis was built to identify potential risk factors for postoperative long-term cognitive decline. RESULTS: A total of 89 patients who met the criteria were enrolled and completed 1-year follow-up. At 3, 6, and 12 months after carotid revascularization, the total MoCA score, attention, language fluency, and delayed recall score were significantly improved compared with the baseline scores (p<0.05). At 12 months, there was also a significant improvement in cube copying compared with baseline (p=0.034). Logistic regression analysis showed that the advancing age, left side, and symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were independent risk factors for cognitive deterioration at 12 months after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, carotid revascularization has a beneficial effect on cognition function in patients with severe carotid artery stenosis, while advancing age, left side, and symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were significantly related to a decreased cognitive score after carotid revascularization. CLINICAL IMPACT: This study focused on the changes in cognitive function within 1 year after carotid revascularization in patients with severe carotid stenosis. Of course, carotid revascularization can improve the cognition function in these patients. On the other hand, we found the advancing age, left side and symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were significantly associated with decreased cognitive scores at 1 year after carotid revascularization, which suggests that clinicians may need to be aware of patients with these characteristics.

Predictors of prolonged length of stay after elective carotid revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: Postoperative day-one discharge is used as a quality-of-care indicator after carotid revascularization. This study identifies predictors of prolonged length of stay (pLOS), defined as a postprocedural LOS of >1 day, after elective carotid revascularization. METHODS: Patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA), transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR), and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) in the Vascular Quality Initiative between 2016 and 2022 were included in this analysis. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of pLOS, defined as a postprocedural LOS of >1 day, after each procedure. RESULTS: A total of 118,625 elective cases were included. pLOS was observed in nearly 23.2% of patients undergoing carotid revascularization. Major adverse events, including neurological, cardiac, infectious, and bleeding complications, occurred in 5.2% of patients and were the most significant contributor to pLOS after the three procedures. Age, female sex, non-White race, insurance status, high comorbidity index, prior ipsilateral CEA, non-ambulatory status, symptomatic presentation, surgeries occurring on Friday, and postoperative hypo- or hypertension were significantly associated with pLOS across all three procedures. For CEA, additional predictors included contralateral carotid artery occlusion, preoperative use of dual antiplatelets and anticoagulation, low physician volume (<11 cases/year), and drain use. For TCAR, preoperative anticoagulation use, low physician case volume (<6 cases/year), no protamine use, and post-stent dilatation intraoperatively were associated with pLOS. One-year analysis showed a significant association between pLOS and increased mortality for all three procedures; CEA (hazard ratio [HR],1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.49-1.82), TCAR (HR,1.56; 95% CI, 1.35-1.80), and TFCAS (HR, 1.33; 95%CI, 1.08-1.64) (all P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: A postoperative LOS of more than 1 day is not uncommon after carotid revascularization. Procedure-related complications are the most common drivers of pLOS. Identifying patients who are risk for pLOS highlights quality improvement strategies that can optimize short and 1-year outcomes of patients undergoing carotid revascularization.

Preoperative Ocular Symptoms Predict Acute Glaucoma After Carotid Revascularization: An Analysis of Combined Single-Center Data and a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Acute glaucoma is a potential complication of carotid revascularization procedures such as endarterectomy or stenting. Although preoperative ocular hypoperfusion may predispose patients to postoperative glaucoma, the details of this complication have not been clarified. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of consecutive patients who underwent carotid revascularization at our institution from January 2019 to December 2022. These patients were divided into glaucoma and nonglaucoma groups. Given the rarity of the event, a systematic literature review was performed to additionally include data from patients who developed acute glaucoma after carotid revascularization. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify the risk factors for acute glaucoma. RESULTS: Thirty-five cases, including 2 from our institution, were included in the glaucoma group, and 130 were included in the nonglaucoma group. Most cases (79%) occurred within five days postoperatively. Multivariate analysis revealed that preoperative ocular symptoms were significantly associated with the development of postoperative glaucoma (odds ratio, 361.06; 95% confidence interval, 34.09-3824.27; P < 0.001). Preoperative neovascularization at the iris or anterior chamber angle, indicating severe ocular hypoperfusion, was found in 84% of patients with glaucoma. Permanent visual loss occurred in 41% of patients. The incidence of postoperative glaucoma at our institution was 1.5% (2/132). The positive predictive value of preoperative ocular symptoms for postoperative glaucoma was 0.25 (95% confidence interval, 0.18-0.32). CONCLUSIONS: This study was the first to clarify the risk factors and characteristics of acute glaucoma after carotid revascularization.

Incidence of myocardial injury in patients submitted to carotid endarterectomy.

Myocardial injury following noncardiac surgery (MINS) is associated with higher mortality and major adverse cardiovascular event rates in the short- and long-term in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA). However, its incidence is still unclear in this subset of patients. Therefore, this systematic review with meta-analysis aims to determine the incidence of MINS in patients undergoing CEA. Three electronic databases MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science were used to search for studies assessing the occurrence of MINS in the postoperative setting of patients undergoing CEA. The incidence of MINS was pooled by random-effects meta-analysis, with sources of heterogeneity being explored by meta-regression and subgroup analysis (general anesthesia vs. regional anesthesia). Assessment of studies' quality was performed using National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Study Quality Assessment Tool, and Risk of Bias 2 tools. Twenty studies were included, with a total of 117,933 participants. Four of them were RCTs, while the remaining were cohort studies. All observational cohorts had an overall high risk of bias, except for Pereira Macedo et al. Three of them had repeated population, thus only data from the most recent one was considered. On the other hand, all RCT had an overall low risk of bias. In patients under regional anesthesia, the incidence of MINS in primary studies ranged between 2% and 15.3%, compared to 0-42.5% for general anesthesia. The meta-analytical incidence of MINS after CEA was of 6.3% [95% CI 2.0-10.6%], but severe heterogeneity was observed (I2=99.1%). MINS appears to be relatively common among patients undergoing CEA. The observed severe heterogeneity points to the need for further larger studies adopting consistent definitions of MINS and equivalent cut-off values.

Automatic 1-year follow-up appointment creation and reminders can improve long-term follow-up after carotid revascularization.

BACKGROUND: Long-term follow-up (LTFU) following carotid revascularization is important for post-surgical care, stroke risk optimization and post-market surveillance of new technologies. METHODS: We instituted a quality improvement project to improve LTFU rates for carotid revascularizations (primary outcome) by scheduling perioperative and one-year follow-up appointments at time of surgery discharge. A temporal trends analysis (Q1 2019 through Q1 2022), multivariable regression, and interrupted time series (ITS) were performed to compare pre-post intervention LTFU rates. RESULTS: 269 consecutive patients were included (151 pre-intervention, 118 post-intervention; mean 71 â€‹± â€‹12 years-old, 39% female, 77% White). The overall LTFU rate improved (64.9%-78.8%; P â€‹= â€‹0.013) after the intervention. After controlling for patient factors, procedures performed after the intervention were associated with increased odds of being seen for 1-year follow-up (OR: 2.2 95%CI: 1.2-4.0). Quarterly ITS analysis corroborated this relationship (P â€‹= â€‹0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Time-of-surgery appointment creation and automated patient reminders can improve LTFU rates following carotid revascularizations.

Evidence and Mechanisms for Embolic Stroke in Contralateral Hemispheres From Carotid Artery Sources.

BACKGROUND: Disambiguation of embolus pathogenesis in embolic strokes is often a clinical challenge. One common source of embolic stroke is the carotid arteries, with emboli originating due to plaque buildup or perioperatively during revascularization procedures. Although it is commonly thought that thromboemboli from carotid sources travel to cerebral arteries ipsilaterally, there are existing reports of contralateral embolic events that complicate embolus source destination relationship for carotid sources. Here, we hypothesize that emboli from carotid sources can travel to contralateral hemispheres and that embolus interactions with collateral hemodynamics in the circle of Willis influence this process. METHODS AND RESULTS: We use a patient-specific computational embolus-hemodynamics interaction model developed in prior works to conduct an in silico experiment spanning 4 patient vascular models, 6 circle of Willis anastomosis variants, and 3 different thromboembolus sizes released from left and right carotid artery sites. This led to a total of 144 different experiments, estimating trajectories and distribution of approximately 1.728 million embolus samples. Across all cases considered, emboli from left and right carotid sources showed nonzero contralateral transport (P value <-0.05). Contralateral movement revealed a size dependence, with smaller emboli traveling more contralaterally. Detailed analysis of embolus dynamics revealed that collateral flow routes in the circle of Willis played a role in routing emboli, and transhemispheric movement occurred through the anterior and posterior communicating arteries in the circle of Willis. CONCLUSIONS: We generated quantitative data demonstrating the complex dynamics of finite size thromboembolus particles as they interact with pulsatile arterial hemodynamics and traverse the vascular network of the circle of Willis. This leads to a nonintuitive source-destination relationship for emboli originating from carotid artery sites, and emboli from carotid sources can potentially travel to cerebral arteries on contralateral hemispheres.

Cognition and Cerebral Blood Flow After Extracranial Carotid Revascularization for Carotid Atherosclerosis: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: Extracranial atherosclerotic carotid stenosis is associated with inadequate cerebral blood flow (CBF) and cognitive dysfunction. The impact of extracranial carotid revascularization on cognition and how any cognitive change relates to changes in CBF are less clear. This review examines the effects of revascularization of extracranial carotid disease by carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid stenting (CAS) on cognition, and how this relates to changes in CBF. METHODS: A systematic review of existing reports in the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis statement recommendations. All original retrospective or prospective studies and clinical trials that compared pre- and postoperative cognitive function and CBF in patients with extracranial carotid stenosis who underwent CEA or CAS versus a control group, published between January 1985 and December 2022, were identified and considered eligible for inclusion in this study. FINDINGS: Seven studies (661 participants; 460 CEA or CAS) were identified. All were observational studies and of moderate to good methodologic quality. Six studies (619 participants; follow-up range 1 month to 2 years) demonstrated improvement in some cognitive domains following CEA or CAS, improvement in CBF following revascularization, and correlated some of these cognitive changes with changes in CBF. One study (42 participants; 3 months follow-up) found cognitive improvement following CEA, but found no improvement in CBF or any correlation between cognitive and CBF change. The literature however represented heterogenous study populations examining asymptomatic and/or symptomatic carotid stenosis, differing in treatment modality and criteria for control groups ranging from healthy volunteers to those with stenosis but not who underwent surgical revascularization, and finally, differing reporting methods. This heterogeneity precluded meta-analysis. IMPLICATIONS: Definitive conclusions are limited by variation in cognitive function assessment, timing of testing, and how these are correlated to CBF. However, research suggests a potential improvement in cognition which may be associated with improvement in CBF, particularly in those patients who have more significant CBF deficit at baseline. Further studies are required to better understand this association and provide a clearer picture of the cognitive effects of carotid revascularization.

Regional variation in patient selection, practice patterns, and outcomes based on techniques for carotid artery revascularization in the Vascular Quality Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: Significant regional variation is known with multiple surgical procedures. This study describes regional variation in carotid revascularization within the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI). METHODS: Data from the VQI carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) databases from 2016 to 2021 were used. Nineteen geographic VQI regions were divided into three tertiles based on the average annual volume of carotid procedures performed per region (low-volume: 956 cases [range, 144-1382]; medium-volume: 1533 cases [range, 1432-1589]; and high-volume: 1845 cases [range, 1642-2059]). Patients' characteristics, indications for carotid revascularization, practice patterns, and outcomes (perioperative and 1-year stroke/death) of different revascularization techniques were compared between these regional groups. Regression models that adjust for known risk factors and allow for random effects at the center level were used. RESULTS: CEA was the most common revascularization procedure (>60%) across all regional groups. Significant regional variation was observed in the practice of CEA such as variability in the use of shunting, drain placement, stump pressure and electroencephalogram monitoring, intraoperative protamine, and patch angioplasty. For transfemoral CAS, high-volume regions had a higher proportion of asymptomatic patients with <80% stenosis (30.5% vs 27.8%) in addition to higher use of local/regional anesthesia (80.4% vs 76.2%), protamine (16.1% vs 11.8%), and completion angiography (81.6% vs 77.6%) during transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TF-CAS) compared with low-volume regions. For transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR), high-volume regions were less likely to intervene on asymptomatic patients with <80% stenosis (32.2% vs 35.8%) than low-volume regions. They also had a higher proportion of urgent/emergent procedures (13.6% vs 10.4%) and were more likely to use general anesthesia (92.0% vs 82.1%), completion angiography (67.3% vs 63.0%), and poststent ballooning (48.4% vs 36.8%). For each carotid revascularization technique, no significant differences were noted in perioperative and 1-year outcomes between low-, medium-, and high-volume regions. Finally, there were no significant differences in outcomes between TCAR and CEA across the different regional groups. In all regional groups, TCAR was associated with a 40% reduction in perioperative and 1-year stroke/death compared with TF-CAS. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant variation in clinical practices for the management of carotid disease, no regional variation exists in the overall outcomes of carotid interventions. TCAR and CEA continue to show superior outcomes to TF-CAS across all VQI regional groups.

Bypass and other modified reconstruction techniques for 'challenging' carotid cases: A comparison with conventional endarterectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Standard carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is usually performed with patch closure or eversion. However, sometimes a 'modified' carotid artery revascularization (MCAR) technique is required if the lesion is complex, extended and anatomically or technically challenging. MCAR is defined as carotid artery bypass; otherwise, it is the combination of common carotid artery (CCA) primary suture or patch angioplasty, associated with internal carotid artery (ICA) patch closure or eversion. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of MCAR during complex carotid procedures, comparing them with standard CEA. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of asymptomatic patients who underwent CEA during a 16-year period (June 2005 to June 2021) was performed. Patients were divided into three different groups: ECEA (eversion CEA), PCEA (CEA with patch angioplasty) and MCAR. Primary endpoints were relevant neurological complication rate (RNCR), death within 30 days, freedom from ipsilateral stroke, reintervention rates and freedom from carotid artery restenosis. RESULTS: A total of 1,752 patients were included (ECEA: 699; PCEA: 948; MCAR: 105) in the study. Patients treated with MCAR were significantly older and had a higher SVS score for arterial hypertension compared with ECEA and PCEA groups. A long plaque in the CCA was the most common indication for MCAR (40.1%); inadequate distal plaque-end or distal dissection (25.7%) was the second most prevalent indication. Overall perioperative RNCR, defined as minor and major stroke, was 0.7% (ECEA: 0.4%; PCEA: 0.7%; MCAR: 1.9%; p = 0.22), without any significant difference among the three groups. However, patients treated with MCAR had a significantly higher rate of global central neurological complications (defined as transient ischaemic attack, minor stroke and major stroke) than the other cohorts (ECEA: 0.7%; PCEA: 1.2%; MCAR: 3.8%; p = 0.02). One patient (0.05%) died perioperatively of a major cerebral infarction. Long-term follow-up (66.7 ± 43.9) showed a significantly lower rate of freedom from ipsilateral stroke for the MCAR group (96.8%) compared with ECEA and PCEA groups (99.8% and 98.9%, respectively, p = 0.03). Similar reintervention rates (ECEA: 2.7%; PCEA: 3.3%; MCAR: 3.8%; p = 0.74) and freedom from carotid restenosis rates (ECEA: 1.3%; PCEA: 2.6%; MCAR: 1.9%; p = 0.16) were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent ICA revascularization with MCAR showed risks of perioperative death, major or minor stroke (<2%), reintervention rates and carotid restenosis rates that are comparable with PCEA or ECEA groups. Nevertheless, the MCAR group showed a significantly higher rate of global central neurological complications (considering together TIA, minor stroke and major stroke) than patients treated with standard CEA. MCAR techniques appear to be effective alternatives to standard CEAs, with an acceptable surgical risk. However, these should be performed mainly in selected cases, for example, in complex anatomy (detected in a non-negligible percentage of patients by preoperative imaging), or in the case of unexpected intraoperative technical issues.

Trends in mortality and postoperative complications among octogenarian patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients represent a large portion of patients undergoing vascular surgery. This study aims to assess the contemporary frequency of octogenarians undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and to evaluate their postoperative complications and survival rates. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) dataset was queried for patients who underwent elective CEA between 2012 and 2021. Patients aged >90 years were excluded, as well as emergent and combined cases. The population was divided into two age groups: <80 years and ≥80 years. Frailty scores were generated using Vascular Quality Initiative variables grouped into 11 domains historically associated with frailty. Patients with scores within the first 25th percentile, between the 25th and 50th percentile, and above the 75th percentile were categorized into low, medium, and high frailty classes, respectively. Procedural indications were defined as hard (stenosis ≥80% or ipsilateral neurologic symptoms) or soft. Primary outcomes of interest were 2-year stroke-free and 2-year overall survival comparing (i) octogenarians with nonoctogenarians and (ii) octogenarians by frailty class. Standard statistical methods were used. RESULTS: Overall, 83,745 cases were included in this analysis. Between 2012 and 2021, a consistent proportion averaging 17% of CEA patients were octogenarians. Among this age group, the proportion of patients undergoing CEA for hard indications increased over time from 43.7% to 63.8% (P < .001). This increase was accompanied by a statistically significant increase in the combined 30-day perioperative stroke and mortality rate from 1.56% in 2012 to 2.96% in 2021 (P = .019). A Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a significantly lower 2-year stroke-free survival among octogenarians compared with the younger group (78.1% vs 87.6%; P < .001). Similarly, there was a significantly lower 2-year overall survival among octogenarians compared with the younger group (90.5% vs 95.1%; P < .001). Multivariate Cox proportional hazard analyses showed that high frailty class was associated with increased 2-year stroke risk (hazard ratio, 2.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.61-3.17; P < .001) and 2-year mortality (hazard ratio, 2.43; 95% confidence interval, 1.71-3.47; P < .001). Repeat Kaplan-Meier analysis stratifying octogenarians by frailty class revealed that octogenarians with low frailty can have stroke-free and overall survival rates comparable with nonoctogenarians (88.2% vs 87.6% [P = .158] and 96.0% vs 95.1% [P = .151], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Chronological age should not be regarded as a contraindication for CEA. Frailty score calculation is a better predictor for postoperative outcomes and is an appropriate tool to risk stratify octogenarians, aiding in the decision between best medical treatment or intervention. The risk benefit assessment for high frailty class octogenarians is paramount because the postoperative risks may outweigh the long-term survival benefits of the prophylactic CEA.

Subclavian to carotid artery bypass for a case of ocular ischemic syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Ocular Ischemic Syndrome (OIS) is a rare, vision threatening condition associated with severe carotid artery disease. There are few cases of OIS reported in the literature. METHODS: We present the case of a 54-year-old male with history of multiple previous carotid interventions including a right carotid stent, who presented with right-sided OIS. RESULTS: CTA and angiogram showed a severe calcific plaque causing restenosis of the right carotid stent, with a patent right internal carotid artery (ICA) in the very distal neck. The right common carotid artery (CCA) was patent but diseased with ulcerated plaque extending proximally to below the level of the clavicle. The left CCA was chronically occluded from its origin all the way to the bifurcation. Given our patient's surgical history, the imperative to revascularize the ipsilateral carotid, and a diffusely diseased ipsilateral CCA, he was successfully treated with an ipsilateral subclavian to internal carotid bypass. CONCLUSION: There is paucity of data regarding the best approach for carotid revascularization in OIS. This case report discusses our unique perioperative decision making as well as relevant literature.

Simple CaroTID-VasC score to predict one-year risk of stroke in symptomatic carotid stenosis patients.

BACKGROUND: A subset of extracranial symptomatic carotid stenosis (ESCS) patients may fare well on current optimal medical therapy (OMT), and surgery may be avoided in these patients. Therefore, we aimed to develop and validate a stroke risk prediction model to stratify the risk among ESCS patients. METHODS: Adult ESCS patients who denied revascularization procedures were enrolled prospectively and prescribed OMT. Patients were followed-up for twelve months after assessing the clinical, imaging, and hemodynamics-based risk predictors at baseline. Cox regression analysis was performed on predictors which were significant in univariate analysis. Beta coefficients of significant predictors in Cox regression were used to generate a numeric score. The model was internally validated using bootstrapping. RESULTS: A total of 20 (20.2%) out of 99 patients had event recurrence during the follow-up. Transient ischemic attack index event (P = 0.014), diabetes mellitus (P = 0.018), contralateral significant stenosis (P = 0.007), echolucent plaque (P = 0.011), and impaired vasomotor reactivity (P = 0.006) were significant predictors in Cox regression analysis. A points score (0-6) was derived from regression coefficients of the significant predictors. The area under ROC was 0.884 for the developed model and 0.832 for the bootstrapped model. Youden's index divided the score into low-risk (2.2%) and high-risk (35.8%) groups, and the difference in risk was significant (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Most ESCS patients benefited from OMT, and the CaroTID-VasC score was effective in stratifying patients for risk of endpoint occurrence. The developed model may help identify high-risk subgroups of ESCS patients and assist the decision-making of carotid interventions.