Outcomes of Transcarotid Artery Revascularization Stratified by Institutional Designation: Academic Versus Community Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: The extent of practice setting's influence on transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) outcomes is not yet established. This study seeks to assess and compare TCAR outcomes in academic and community-based healthcare settings. METHODS: Retrospective review of prospectively maintained, systemwide TCAR databases from 2 institutions was performed between 2015 and 2022. Patients were stratified based on the setting of surgical intervention (i.e., academic or community-based hospitals). Relevant demographics, medical conditions, anatomic characteristics, intraoperative and postoperative courses, and adverse events were captured for multivariate analysis. RESULTS: We identified 973 patients who underwent TCAR, 570 (58.6%) were performed at academic and 403 (41.4%) at community-based hospitals. An academic facility was defined as a designated teaching hospital with 24/7 service-line coverage by a trainee-led surgical team. Baseline comorbidity between cohorts were similar but cases performed at academic institutions were associated with increased complexity, defined by high cervical stenosis (P < 0.001), prior dissection (P < 0.01), and prior neck radiation (P < 0.001). Intraoperatively, academic hospitals were associated with longer operative time (67 min vs. 58 min, P < 0.001), higher blood loss (55 mLs vs. 37 mLs, P < 0.001), and longer flow reversal time (9.5 min vs. 8.4 min, P < 0.05). Technical success rate was not statistically different. In the 30-day perioperative period, we observed no significant difference with respect to reintervention (1.5% vs. 1.5%, P ≥ 0.9) or ipsilateral stroke (2.7% vs. 2.0%, P = 0.51). Additionally, no difference in postoperative myocardial infarction (academic 0.7% vs. community 0.2%, P < 0.32), death (academic 1.9% vs. community 1.4%, P < 0.57), or length of stay (1 day vs. 1 day, P < 0.62) was seen between the cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Cases performed at academic centers were characterized by more challenging anatomy, more frequent cardiovascular risk factors, and less efficient intraoperative variables, potentially attributable to case complexity and trainee involvement. However, there were no differences in perioperative outcomes and adverse events between the cohorts, suggesting TCAR can be safely performed regardless of practice setting.

An Analysis of Sex-Based Outcomes Following Transcarotid Artery Revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: Several studies suggest that females have higher perioperative adverse events and decreased benefit from carotid artery revascularization with transfemoral carotid artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) compared to males. However, there are limited data of sex-based outcomes for transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR). METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively maintained system-wide TCAR databases was performed between December 2015-January 2022. Patients who underwent TCAR were stratified based on sex. Relevant demographics, medical conditions, anatomical characteristics, intra- and postoperative courses, and adverse events were captured. RESULTS: 729 patients underwent TCAR, 486 (66.6%) male and 243 (33.3%) female. Males were more likely to be diagnosed with coronary artery disease (56.9% vs 47.7%, P<.01) and were active smokers (30.4% vs 21.4%, P < .01). Age, symptomatic status, BMI, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes mellitus, arrhythmia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, history of myocardial infarction, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction <30%, end-stage renal disease and Charlson Comorbidity Index were similar. In the perioperative period, there was no significant difference in reintervention rates (1.6% vs 1.2%, P = .75), cranial nerve palsy (.6% vs .4%, P > .99), ipsilateral stroke (1.9% vs 3.3%, P = .29), stent thrombosis (.4% vs .8%, P > .99), myocardial infarction (0% vs 0%, P > .99) and death (1.2% vs 1.2%, P > .99). In follow-up, no significant difference was found in reintervention, ipsilateral stroke, contralateral stroke, myocardial infarction, in-stent restenosis >50%, stent thrombosis, and death. CONCLUSIONS: Males and females did not have a statistically significant difference in outcomes when comparing ipsilateral stroke, in-stent thrombosis, conversion to CEA, and death after TCAR. However, our cohort comprised predominantly male patients and may conceal statistical significance as the females in our cohort did have a higher tendency toward developing complications. Future studies with a larger female cohort should be conducted to determine whether there is a true disparity of outcomes between the males and females undergoing TCAR.

Extensive cell salvage and postoperative outcomes following thoracoabdominal and descending aortic repair.

OBJECTIVE: Cell salvage (CS) reduces intraoperative blood transfusion. However, it may cause deformity of the red blood cells and loss of coagulation factors, which may lead to unwanted sequelae. Thus, we hypothesized that extensive CS would lead to adverse outcomes after descending/thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm (D/TAAA) repair. METHODS: Between 1991 and 2017, 2012 patients undergoing D/TAAA repair were retrospectively reviewed. After we excluded patients without reported intraoperative CS amount, patients were enrolled in the study (N = 1474) and divided into 2 groups: low CS (salvaged units <40, N = 983) and high CS (salvaged units ≥40, N = 491). Analyses were performed to verify the extensive CS as the risk factor for adverse outcomes. RESULTS: Preoperative demographics showed that the high-CS group had a significantly greater incidence of male patients (72% vs 58%), heritable aortic disease (24% vs 17%), redo (27% vs 20%), greater glomerular filtration rate (mL/min/1.73 m2, 75 vs 66) and more extensive aneurysms (TAAA extent II-IV). The high-CS group had significantly more postoperative complications compared with the low-CS group, including respiratory failure, renal failure, cardiac complications, neurologic deficits, bleeding, and 30-day mortality. Multivariable analysis confirmed high CS was an independent risk factor for renal failure along with long bypass time, older age, and extent of repairs. There was an incremental risk of renal failure and 30-day mortality proportional to salvaged cell unit (P < .001 in both). CONCLUSIONS: Increased salvaged cell units were associated with adverse postoperative outcomes after D/TAAA repairs. Risk of renal failure and mortality increased proportionally to the salvaged cell units.

Intraoperative Intercostal Nerve Cryoanalgesia Improves Pain Control After Descending and Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repairs.

BACKGROUND: We reviewed the efficacy of intraoperative intercostal nerve cryoanalgesia for pain control in patients undergoing descending and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repairs. METHODS: During 2013 and 2017, 241 patients underwent descending and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Of those, 38 patients were treated with intraoperative cryoanalgesia to the intercostal nerves at the level of 4th to 10th under electromyography guidance and were compared with patients who did not receive cryoanalgesia. Both groups received multilevel paravertebral block and local infiltration with liposomal bupivacaine. Numerical pain scale scores and amount of opioid usage in morphine milligram equivalences on the first to fourth and eighth postoperative days were collected. We excluded patients from the study who were extubated after the third postoperative day or who were reintubated. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-six patients met the inclusion criteria: 28 in the cryoanalgesia group and 98 in the control group. Preoperative patient demographics were similar in both groups, except for more frequent chronic dissection in patients with cryoanalgesia (93% vs 65%, P = .004). Postoperative major complications, length of stay, and discharge to home were not significantly different in either group. However, median ventilation hours were significantly shorter in the cryoanalgesia group (5 vs 12 hours, P < .001). Opioid use was significantly less in the cryoanalgesia group after postoperative day 4. Indexed morphine milligram equivalences, adjusted with body surface area, and numerical pain scale scores were significantly lower in the cryoanalgesia group throughout the postoperative course. CONCLUSIONS: Intercostal nerve cryoanalgesia under electromyography guidance provided improved pain control and reduced narcotic use after descending and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repairs compared with those who only received paravertebral block.

Open Descending and Thoracoabdominal Aortic Repairs in Patients Younger Than 50 Years Old.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to redefine indications of open descending and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair in the younger population. METHODS: Between 1991 and 2017, 2012 patients undergoing descending and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repair at our institution were divided into 2 groups for comparison: younger (<50 years; 276 [14%]) and older (≥50 years; 1736 [86%]). Patient demographics and perioperative outcomes were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Younger patients had significantly more heritable thoracic aortic disease (HTAD; 53% vs 9%, P < .001) and chronic dissections (64% vs 26%, P < .001) and fewer comorbidities. The younger cohort underwent more extent II repairs (28% vs 15%, P < .001). Operative mortality was significantly lower in younger patients (6% vs 17%, P < .001). Significant disabling complications (composite of operative mortality, paraplegia/paraparesis, stroke, and dialysis) were seen in 17% of the younger patients and in 40% of older patients 40% (P < .001). In multivariate analysis, extent of repair and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were independent predictors for significant disabling complications in the younger cohort. Additional aortic interventions were required in 12% in the younger group and in 4% in the older group (P < .001), and nearly one-third were in the treated segment (ie, treatment failure) in both groups. Younger patients requiring additional reintervention had significantly higher incidence of HTAD (66% vs 9%, P < .001). Survival rate was significantly higher in the younger patient group, with a 10-year survival rate of 74.6% ± 2.9% vs 40.7% ± 1.3% (log-rank P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients younger than 50 years with descending and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm have low surgical risks, and open repairs can be performed with excellent short-term and durable long-term results. Open surgical repairs should be considered initially in younger patients requiring descending and thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm repairs. HTAD warrants closer postoperative surveillance.

Can trauma surgeons keep up? A prospective cohort study comparing outcomes between patients with traumatic brain injury cared for in a trauma versus neuroscience intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: Although many patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI) are admitted to trauma intensive care units (ICUs), some question whether outcomes would improve if their care was provided in neurocritical care units. We sought to compare characteristics and outcomes of patients with TBI admitted to and cared for in a trauma versus neuroscience ICU. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of adult (≥18 years of age) blunt trauma patients with TBI admitted to a trauma versus neuroscience ICU between May 2015 and December 2016. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate an adjusted odds ratio (OR) comparing 30-day mortality between cohorts. RESULTS: In total, 548 patients were included in the study, including 207 (38%) who were admitted to the trauma ICU and 341 (62%) to the neuroscience ICU. When compared with neuroscience ICU admissions, patients admitted to the trauma ICU were more likely to have sustained their injuries from a high-speed mechanism (71% vs. 34%) and had a higher Injury Severity Score (ISS) (median 25 vs. 16) despite a similar head Abbreviated Injury Scale score (3 vs. 3, p=0.47) (all p<0.05). Trauma ICU patients also had a lower initial Glasgow Coma Scale score (5 vs. 15) and systolic blood pressure (128 mm Hg vs. 136 mm Hg) and were more likely to have fixed or unequal pupils at admission (13% vs. 8%) (all p<0.05). After adjusting for age, ISS, a high-speed mechanism of injury, fixed or unequal pupils at admission, and field intubation, the odds of 30-day mortality was 70% lower among patients admitted to the trauma versus neuroscience ICU (adjusted OR=0.30, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: Despite a higher injury burden and worse neurological examination and hemodynamics at presentation, patients admitted to the trauma ICU had a lower adjusted 30-day mortality. This finding may relate to improved care of associated injuries in trauma versus neuroscience ICUs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prospective comparative study, level II.

Determinants and outcomes of nonoperative management for blunt traumatic aortic injuries.

OBJECTIVE: The natural history and parameters for successful nonoperative management of blunt traumatic aortic injuries (BTAIs) involving the descending aorta are poorly understood. We examined our experience with nonoperative BTAI treatment (anti-impulse, blood pressure) and evaluated for determinants of successful outcomes. METHODS: We performed a review of our institutional prospective trauma registry database for all BTAI patients from 1999 to 2015. Computed tomography angiography was used to classify aortic injuries on the basis of severity: grade I, intimal tear; grade II, intramural hematoma; grade III, aortic pseudoaneurysm; and grade IV, free rupture. Grade IV injuries were excluded from nonoperative management. Baseline characteristics, clinical outcomes, and follow-up lesion resolution were compared within the medically managed cohort and between surgical and nonoperative groups using univariate and multivariable analysis. RESULTS: Among 338 BTAI patients admitted between 1999 and 2015, 67 BTAI patients were managed nonoperatively; 26 (54%) had grade I BTAI, 22 (46%) had grade II, and 2 (4%) had grade III. Both grade III injuries required a late thoracic endovascular aortic repair after initial medical management and were excluded from analysis. In all, 48 were managed with initial medical therapy, and the remaining 19 died on admission or before definitive treatment. Among the 48 medically managed, the median age was 34 years, and 14 (29%) were female. Six of the 48 (12%) were transferred from other facilities. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics or early outcomes between BTAI grades. Median injury resolution time was 39 days for grade I and 62 days for grade II (P = .03). Compared with a surgical cohort, BTAI grade and Abbreviated Injury Scale score for the chest were the only significant determinants of propensity to operate. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these limited data, it appears that patients with minimal aortic injuries (grades I and II) may be managed medically, with the majority resolving within 8 weeks. Minimal aortic injury is associated with low mortality and excellent intermediate-term outcomes. Further prospective studies are required to validate these findings.

Beta blockers in critically ill patients with traumatic brain injury: Results from a multicenter, prospective, observational American Association for the Surgery of Trauma study.

BACKGROUND: Beta blockers, a class of medications that inhibit endogenous catecholamines interaction with beta adrenergic receptors, are often administered to patients hospitalized after traumatic brain injury (TBI). We tested the hypothesis that beta blocker use after TBI is associated with lower mortality, and secondarily compared propranolol to other beta blockers. METHODS: The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Clinical Trial Group conducted a multi-institutional, prospective, observational trial in which adult TBI patients who required intensive care unit admission were compared based on beta blocker administration. RESULTS: From January 2015 to January 2017, 2,252 patients were analyzed from 15 trauma centers in the United States and Canada with 49.7% receiving beta blockers. Most patients (56.3%) received the first beta blocker dose by hospital day 1. Those patients who received beta blockers were older (56.7 years vs. 48.6 years, p < 0.001) and had higher head Abbreviated Injury Scale scores (3.6 vs. 3.4, p < 0.001). Similarities were noted when comparing sex, admission hypotension, mean Injury Severity Score, and mean Glasgow Coma Scale. Unadjusted mortality was lower for patients receiving beta blockers (13.8% vs. 17.7%, p = 0.013). Multivariable regression determined that beta blockers were associated with lower mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.35; p < 0.001), and propranolol was superior to other beta blockers (adjusted odds ratio, 0.51, p = 0.010). A Cox-regression model using a time-dependent variable demonstrated a survival benefit for patients receiving beta blockers (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.42, p < 0.001) and propranolol was superior to other beta blockers (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.50, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Administration of beta blockers after TBI was associated with improved survival, before and after adjusting for the more severe injuries observed in the treatment cohort. This study provides a robust evaluation of the effects of beta blockers on TBI outcomes that supports the initiation of a multi-institutional randomized control trial. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/care management, level III.