Transcarotid artery revascularization in reverse for innominate artery stenosis.

Stenotic lesions of the supra-aortic vessels have been reported in 2-6% of patients presenting with corresponding symptoms. In the past, these lesions have been treated with open surgical techniques. More recently, endovascular treatment approaches have been proposed for occlusive lesions in the innominate (IA) or common carotid (CCA) arteries. Retrograde stenting of IA and CCA lesions using flow reversal has been described in a retrospective case series; however, a modification of their technique is proposed. Case Presentation: The patient is a 68-year-old male with symptoms of right upper extremity claudication. CT angiogram revealed critical stenosis of the innominate artery and high-grade stenosis of the right subclavian artery. The patient consented to retrograde stenting of the innominate stenosis with neuroprotection using flow reversal or transcarotid revascularization (TCAR) in reverse. Surgical cut-down was performed of the carotid bifurcation, and a U-stitch was placed on the anterior wall of the distal common carotid artery. Flow reversal was achieved by connecting the arterial sheath to the venous sheath. The innominate lesion was crossed, primarily stented with a VBX stent, and post-dilated with a non-compliant balloon. Just prior to crossing the lesion and primary stent placement, the vessel loop around the common carotid and internal carotid arteries were pulled up to ensure neuroprotection while the stent was expanded. This was continued for two minutes before restoring antegrade flow first in the external carotid and then in the internal carotid artery. There were no adverse events. At one month follow-up, the patient reported no right arm claudication symptoms. TCAR for the proximal lesion as described in other case series may not adequately attain flow based neuroprotection. Under that circumstance, the arterial sheath is acting as a conduit to deliver the stent. Risk of embolization to the brain may not be mitigated when the proximal lesion is stented and antegrade flow restored.

Surgical Considerations in the Treatment of Axillary-Subclavian Venous Thrombosis in the Era of COVID-19.

PURPOSE: Traditional treatment of axillary-subclavian venous thrombosis is resource intensive due to the need for advanced nursing care and increased utilization of intensive care units for thrombolysis procedures. We recently encountered this in the management of 2 patients with effort-induced upper extremity venous thrombosis following COVID-19 infection and offer a treatment paradigm for consideration. CASE REPORTS: A 30-year-old presented with 2 weeks of left upper extremity symptoms following COVID-19 infection. Duplex ultrasound demonstrated axillary-subclavian venous thrombosis and venogram confirmed total occlusion of the axillary and subclavian veins with profuse collaterals around the occlusion. Suction thrombectomy was performed successfully and veins remained patent at 6 month follow up. The patient declined first rib resection and stopped lifting weights. A 16-year-old presented with 4 days of right arm symptoms 1 month after testing positive for COVID-19. Duplex ultrasound revealed acute axillary and subclavian vein thrombosis and she underwent successful thrombectomy followed by balloon angioplasty with improvement in symptoms. CONCLUSION: The pandemic has strained health care resources such that the treatment of non-life-threatening conditions must be triaged to conserve resources. While axillary-subclavian venous occlusion is usually not life-threatening, timely treatment leads to decreased morbidity and better outcomes. Percutaneous aspiration and thrombectomy without adjunctive thrombolysis may be of benefit in reducing healthcare resource utilization while still achieving good outcomes during the COVID pandemic and beyond.