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.

The effect of controlled vs uncontrolled hypertension on outcomes of carotid revascularization procedures.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension (HTN) has been implicated as a strong predictive factor for poorer outcomes in patients undergoing various vascular procedures. However, limited research is available that examines the effect of uncontrolled HTN (uHTN) on outcomes after carotid revascularization. We aimed to determine which carotid revascularization procedure yields the best outcome in this patient population. METHODS: We studied patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA), transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS), or transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) from April 2020 to June 2022 using data from the Vascular Quality Initiative. Patients were stratified into two groups: those with cHTN and those with uHTN. Patients with cHTN were those with HTN treated with medication and a blood pressure of <130/80 mm Hg. Patients with uHTN had a blood pressure of ≥130/80 mm Hg. Our primary outcomes were in-hospital stroke, death, myocardial infarction (MI), and 30-day mortality. Our secondary outcomes were postoperative hypotension or HTN, reperfusion syndrome, prolonged length of stay (LOS) (>1 day), stroke/death, and stroke/death/MI. We used logistic regression models for the multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A total of 34,653 CEA (uHTN, 11,347 [32.7%]), 8199 TFCAS (uHTN, 2307 [28.1%]), and 17,309 TCAR (uHTN, 4990 [28.8%]) patients were included in this study. There was no significant difference in age between patients with cHTN and patients with uHTN for each carotid revascularization procedure. However, compared with patients with cHTN, patients with uHTN had significantly more comorbidities. uHTN was associated with an increased risk of combined in-hospital stroke/death/MI after CEA (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.56; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30-1.87; P < .001), TFCAS (aOR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.21-2.08; P < .001), and TCAR (aOR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.12-1.73; P = .003) compared with cHTN. Additionally, uHTN was associated with a prolonged LOS after all carotid revascularization methods. For the subanalysis of patients with uHTN, TFCAS was associated with an increased risk of stroke (aOR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.39-2.37; P < .001), in-hospital death (aOR, 3.73; 95% CI, 2.25-6.19; P < .001), reperfusion syndrome (aOR, 6.24; 95% CI, 3.57-10.93; P < .001), and extended LOS (aOR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.51-2.32; P < .001) compared with CEA. There was no statistically significant difference between the outcomes of TCAR compared with CEA. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this study show that patients with uHTN are at a higher risk of stroke and death postoperatively compared with patients with cHTN, highlighting the importance of treating HTN before undergoing elective carotid revascularization. Additionally, in patients with uHTN, TFCAS yields the worst outcomes, whereas CEA and TCAR proved to be safer interventions. Patients with uTHN with symptomatic carotid disease treated with CEA or TCAR have better outcomes compared with those treated with TFCAS.

Transcarotid arterial revascularization is feasible and safe with concomitant inferior vena cava occlusion.

Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) has risen as a promising minimally invasive intervention for high-risk patients with favorable anatomy. TCAR's noninferiority to carotid endarterectomy regarding stroke is reliant on its flow reversal technology and lack of aortic arch manipulation. We present the case of a 79-year-old man with a chronically occluded inferior vena cava who safely underwent staged bilateral TCAR for bilateral high-grade carotid artery stenosis. Although chronic inferior vena cava occlusion alters flow mechanics, we suspect that any pressure gradient facilitating retrograde flow from the carotid artery to the femoral vein provides neuroprotective benefits.

Persistent pulmonary abnormalities after 18 months of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia.

OBJECTIVE: To describe persistent pulmonary abnormalities detected on HRCT after 18 months of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia, and to determine their extension and correlation with pulmonary function. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective cross-sectional study with an initial cohort of 90 patients in follow-up due to persisting lung abnormalities on imaging, functional respiratory impairment and/or respiratory symptoms. Of these, 31 (34%) were selected for analysis due to the persistence of their lung abnormalities on HRCT at 18 months after infection. A double reading was performed for each HRCT (62 observations). RESULTS: Of the 31 patients included: 20 (65%) were men; mean age was 67 years; 17 (55%) were smokers/ex-smokers. The mean hospitalisation time was 38 days. Eighteen (58%) patients were admitted to intensive care units. Five patients (16%) suffered an acute pulmonary thromboembolism and three (9.7%) had a pneumothorax. The mean time between the onset of pneumonia and the follow-up HRCT was 20.34 months. Nineteen percent of patients suffered from total lung function abnormalities; and ground-glass opacities and reticulation were present in 12% and 4.5% respectively. The findings of the 62 readings were: ground-glass opacities (100%), reticulation (83%), subpleural curvilinear lines (62%), parenchymal bands (34%), traction bronchiectasis (69%), displacement of vessels/fissures (46%) and honeycombing (4.9%). Pulmonary function 18 months after the acute episode revealed a mean FVC of 92% of predicted value, with an FVC < 80% of predicted value in 11 patients (35.4%). Mean DLCO was 71% of predicted value, with a DLCO < 80% in 22 patients (70%). We observed a statistically significant relationship between total lung function abnormalities on HRCT and FVC (P < 0.05), and a trend towards statistical significance with DLCO (P = 0.051); there was a statistically significant relationship between the presence of ground-glass opacities and FEV1/FVC (P < 0.01). The relationships between reticulation and FVC, FVC%, FEV1, FEV1% and DLCO% were also considered statistically significant (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Persistent interstitial lung abnormalities are seen on HRCT for a subset of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Seventy percent of these patients suffered a slight decrease in DLCO.

Transcarotid Artery Revascularization (TCAR): The Best Surgical Intervention Option in an Unusual Presentation of Carotid Dissection in a 37-Year-Old Pregnant Female.

Carotid artery dissection (CAD) is a condition that compromises blood flow and leads to serious complications such as a stroke or cerebrovascular accident (CVA). This case report demonstrates an unusual case of right internal carotid artery dissection, stenosis of >70%, and an intraluminal thrombus. The patient presented to the emergency department with complaints of right-sided neck pain and severe headache status-post a complicated pregnancy. A computed tomography (CT) angiogram of the right carotid was conducted and showed a right internal carotid artery dissection with 70% luminal stenosis and thrombosis. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA), transfemoral carotid angioplasty with stenting (CAS), or transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) were all surgical intervention options that were explored. Risks and benefits were compared between the three surgical intervention options, and transcarotid artery revascularization was deemed the best surgical option in this patient's case.

Clinical outcomes of transcarotid artery revascularization vs carotid endarterectomy from a large single-center experience.

BACKGROUND: Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) has been practiced as an alternative for both carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and transfemoral carotid artery stenting, specifically in high-risk patients. More recently, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services expanded coverage for TCAR in standard surgical risk patients if done within the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative TCAR surveillance project. A few registry studies (primarily from the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative) compared the early and up to 1-year outcomes of TCAR vs CEA or transfemoral carotid artery stenting. There is no large single-center study that reported late clinical outcomes. The present study compares intermediate clinical outcomes of TCAR vs CEA. METHODS: This study retrospectively analyzed collected data from TCAR surveillance project patients enrolled in our institution and compare it with CEA patients done by the same providers at the same time period. The primary outcome was combined perioperative stroke/death and late stroke/death. Secondary outcomes included combined stroke, death, and myocardial infarction, cranial nerve injury (CNI), and bleeding. Propensity matching was done to analyze outcome. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate freedom from stroke, stroke/death, and ≥50% and ≥80% restenosis. RESULTS: We analyzed 646 procedures (637 patients) (404 CEA, 242 TCAR). There was no significant difference in the indications for carotid intervention. However, TCAR patients had more high-risk criteria, including hypertension, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, and renal failure. There was no significant differences between CEA vs TCAR in 30-day perioperative stroke (1% vs 2%), stroke/death rate (1% vs 3%; P = .0849), or major hematomas (2% vs 2%). The rate of CNI was significantly different (5% for CEA vs 1% for TCAR; P = .0138). At late follow-up (2 years), the rate of stroke was 1% vs 4% (P = .0273), stroke/death 8% vs 15% (P = .008), ≥80 % restenosis 0.5% vs 3% (P = .0139) for CEA patients vs TCAR patients, respectively. After matching 242 CEAs and 242 TCARs, the perioperative stroke rate was 1% for CEA vs 2% for TCAR (P = .5037), the stroke/death rate was 2% vs 3% (P = .2423), and the CNI rate was 3% vs 1% (P = .127). At late follow-up, rates of stroke were 1% for CEA vs 4% for TCAR (P = .0615) and stroke/death were 8% vs 15% (P = .0345). The rate of ≥80% restenosis was 0.9% for CEA vs 3% for TCAR (P = .099). The rates of freedom from stroke at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months for CEA vs TCAR were 99%, 99%, 99%, and 99% vs 97%, 95%, 93% and 93%, respectively (P = .0806); stroke/death were 94%, 90%, 87%, and 86% vs 93%, 87%, 76%, and 75%, respectively (P = .0529); and ≥80% restenosis were 100%, 99%, 98%, and 98% vs 97%, 95%, 93%, and 93%, respectively (P = .1132). CONCLUSIONS: In a propensity-matched analysis, both CEA and TCAR have similar perioperative clinical outcomes. However, CEA was superior to TCAR for the rates of late stroke/death and had a somewhat lower rate of ≥80% restenosis at 2 years, but this difference was not statistically significant.

"TCAR or nothing": the only options for some complex carotid stenosis.

Transcervical carotid artery revascularization has emerged as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy and transfemoral carotid artery stenting. We present four cases for which we believe transcervical carotid artery revascularization was the only option to treat the lesions. Each case presented with specific technical challenges that were overcome by intraoperative planning that allowed for safe deployment of the Enroute stent (Silk Road Medical) with resolution of each patient's stenosis.

Neck radiation is not associated with increased risk of perioperative adverse events after transcarotid artery revascularization or transfemoral carotid artery stenting.

OBJECTIVE: It is unclear whether patients with prior neck radiation therapy (RT) are at high risk for carotid artery stenting (CAS). We aimed to delineate 30-day perioperative and 3-year long-term outcomes in patients treated for radiation-induced stenotic lesions by the transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) or transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) approach to determine comparative risk and to ascertain the optimal intervention in this cohort. METHODS: Data were extracted from the Vascular Quality Initiative CAS registry for patients with prior neck radiation who had undergone either TCAR or TFCAS. The Student t-test and the χ2 test were used to compare baseline patient characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression and Cox Hazard Proportional analysis were used to compare perioperative and long-term differences between patients with and without prior neck radiation following TCAR and TFCAS. Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to determine the incidence of 3-year adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 72,656 patients (TCAR, 40,879; TFCAS, 31,777) were included in the analysis. Of these, 4151 patients had a history of neck radiation. Patients with a history of neck radiation were more likely to be younger, white, and have fewer comorbidities than patients with no neck radiation history. After adjustment for confounding factors, there was no difference in relative risk of 30-day perioperative stroke (P = .11), death (P = .36), or myocardial infarction (MI) (P = .61) between TCAR patients with or without a history of neck radiation. The odds of stroke/death (P = .10) and stroke/death/MI (P = .07) were also not statistically significant. In patients with prior neck radiation, TCAR had lower odds for in-hospital stroke/death/MI (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35-0.99; P = .05) and access site complications than TFCAS. At year 3, patients with prior neck radiation had an increased hazard for mortality after TCAR (hazard ratio [HR], 1.24; 95% CI, 1.02-1.51; P = .04) and TFCAS (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.12-1.58; P = .001). Patients with prior neck radiation also experienced an increased hazard for reintervention after TCAR (HR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.45-3.20; P < .001) and TFCAS (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.02-2.73; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with prior neck radiation had a similar relative risk of 30-day perioperative adverse events as patients with no neck radiation after adjustment for baseline demographics and disease characteristics. In these patients, TCAR was associated with reduced odds of perioperative stroke/death/MI as compared with TFCAS. However, patients with prior neck radiation were at increased risk for 3-year mortality and reintervention.

Female and male patients have similar outcomes after transcarotid artery revascularization in prospective trials.

OBJECTIVE: Sex disparities in outcomes after carotid revascularization have long been a concern, with several studies demonstrating increased postoperative death and stroke for female patients after either carotid endarterectomy or transfemoral stenting. Adverse events after transfemoral stenting are higher in female patients, particularly in symptomatic cases. Our objective was to investigate outcomes after transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) stratified by patient sex hypothesizing that the results would be similar between males and females. METHODS: We analyzed prospectively collected data from the Safety and Efficacy Study for Reverse Flow Used During Carotid Artery Stenting Procedure (ROADSTER)1 (pivotal), ROADSTER2 (US Food and Drug Administration indicated postmarket), and ROADSTER Extended Access TCAR trials. All patients had verified carotid stenosis meeting criteria for intervention (≥80% for asymptomatic patients and ≥50% in patient with symptomatic disease), and were included based on anatomical or clinical high-risk criteria for carotid stenting. Neurological assessments (National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale, Modified Rankin Scale) were obtained before and within 24 hours from procedure end by an independent neurologist or National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale-certified nurse. Patients were stratified by sex (male vs female). Baseline demographics were compared using χ2 and Fisher's exact tests where appropriate; primary outcomes were combination stroke/death (S/D) and S/D/myocardial infarction (S/D/M) at 30 days, and secondary outcomes were the individual components of S/D/M. Univariate logistic regression was conducted. RESULTS: We included 910 patients for analysis (306 female [33.6%], 604 male [66.4%]). Female patients were more often <65 years old (20.6% vs 15%) or ≥80 years old (22.6% vs 20.2%) compared with males, and were more often of Black/African American ethnicity (7.5% vs 4.3%). There were no differences by sex in term of comorbidities, current or prior smoking status, prior stroke, symptomatic status, or prevalence of anatomical and/or clinical high-risk criteria. General anesthetic use, stent brands used, and procedure times did not differ by sex, although flow reversal times were longer in female patients (10.9 minutes male vs 12.4 minutes female; P = .01), as was more contrast used in procedures for female patients (43 mL male vs 48.9 mL female; P = .049). The 30-day S/D and S/D/M rates were similar between male and female patients (S/D, 2.7% male vs 1.6% female [P = .34]; S/D/M, 3.6% male vs 2.6% female [P = .41]), which did not differ when stratified by symptom status. Secondary outcomes did not differ by sex, including stroke rates at 30 days (2.2% male vs 1.6% female; P = .80), nor were differences seen with stratification by symptom status. Univariate analysis demonstrated that history of a prior ipsilateral stroke was associated with increased odds of S/D (odds ratio [OR], 4.19; P = .001) and S/D/M (OR, 2.78; P = .01), as was symptomatic presentation with increased odds for S/D (OR, 2.78; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Prospective TCAR trial data demonstrate exceptionally low rates of S/D/MI, which do not differ by patient sex.

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.

Transcarotid stenting of extracranial carotid artery aneurysm with covered stents and flow reversal.

Introduction: An extracranial carotid artery aneurysm (ECAA) is a rare pathology comprising <1% of all arterial aneurysms. The etiology includes trauma, previous surgery, radiation, and infection. Treatment of ECAAs has evolved from open repair to endovascular repair with stenting. Reports of endovascular repair describe the transfemoral approach; however, little more than case reports are available describing the transcarotid approach for ECAAs. In this study, we describe a cohort of patients who safely underwent transcarotid repair of ECAAs. Methods: We performed a retrospective medical record review of all cases of transcarotid stenting using covered stents for a carotid aneurysm within 11 different hospitals within the Memorial Hermann Health System from December 2019 through December 2022. Technical success is defined as coverage of the aneurysm with no endoleak. We report the patient demographics, clinical presentation, intraoperative metrics, and outcomes. Results: Seven patients underwent transcarotid covered stent placement using flow reversal for neurologic protection. Their average age was 65 years, and four of the seven patients were men. Three patients presented with pain, two with transient ischemic attack, one with stroke, and one with a pulsatile mass. Technical success was 100%. All the patients were treated with transcarotid stenting, and the average aneurysm size was 13 mm. The average operative time was 69 minutes, and the flow reversal time was 9 minutes. No postoperative stroke, myocardial infarction, or death occurred. The average length of hospital stay was 2.7 days. Conclusions: A transcarotid approach for endovascular treatment of ECAAs was safe for this cohort of patients, with no postoperative death, stroke, or myocardial infarction. Also, the technical success was 100%.

Use of a prosthetic conduit for stent delivery in transcarotid artery revascularization for patients with unfavorable anatomy.

Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) provides a safe alternative to carotid endarterectomy. The anatomic requirements include a 5-cm minimum clavicle to carotid bifurcation distance for sheath access proximal to the lesion. In the present report, we describe our experience with conduit use for patients not meeting that requirement. Patients undergoing elective TCAR with a conduit from 2021 to 2022 were retrospectively identified. After carotid artery exposure, a 6-mm prosthetic graft was anastomosed to the common carotid artery in an end-to-side fashion. After stent delivery, the conduit was ligated and oversewn. The patient demographics, procedural details, and outcomes were recorded and compared with our nonconduit TCAR experience. A total of 11 patients (64% male; age, 75 ± 5 years) underwent TCAR with a conduit, 5 (46%) for symptomatic disease, and 77 patients underwent TCAR with no conduit, 52 (60%) with symptomatic disease (P = .50). Other than a higher rate of prior coronary interventions in the conduit group (55% vs 47%; P = .007), no significant differences were found in age, gender, race, comorbidities, or high risk for carotid endarterectomy criteria. In the conduit group, the average skin to carotid artery depth was 4.2 cm (range, 1.9-6.1 cm). The average clavicle to bifurcation distance was 4.4 cm (range, 3.3-4.9 cm) vs 6.5 cm (range, 3.3-9.7 cm; P = .002) in the nonconduit group. Dacron was the most common conduit material used (73%). No differences were found in the mean procedure times (121 ± 32 vs 129 ± 53 minutes; P = .785) or flow reversal times (14 ± 5 vs 19 ± 13 minutes; P =.989) for the conduit and nonconduit cohorts, respectively. Technical success was achieved in 100% of the conduit and nonconduit cases. Excluding one outlier of a prolonged stay (7 days) for management of unrelated medical issues (gastrostomy tube placement for chronic dysphagia after mass resection and neck radiation), the mean hospital stay was 2 days (1.2 ± 0.4 intensive care unit days) compared with 3.8 ± 5.7 days for our nonconduit cohort (P = .2). Hypotension was the most common reason for delayed discharge for the conduit group (n = 3; 27%). The average follow-up was 2.7 months (range, 1-10 months). For all 11 conduit patients, the stent remained patent without stenosis, thrombus, or pseudoaneurysm at the conduit stump site on surveillance duplex ultrasound. No strokes or complications had occurred at 30 days in the conduit group compared with four strokes or transient ischemic attacks (P = .469) and 18 minor complications in the nonconduit group (P = .091). For patients lacking a sufficient distance between the clavicle and carotid artery bifurcation, a prosthetic conduit facilitates safe use of flow reversal for stent delivery and can be ligated at procedural completion without consequences.

Intraoperative fusion imaging during transcarotid artery revascularization.

Background: Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) with reverse-flow neuroprotection has emerged as an alternative to transfemoral carotid artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy. However, it requires fluoroscopic guidance, exposing the patient and surgeon to radiation. Although fusion-guided endovascular aneurysm repair has been demonstrated to significantly decrease this radiation risk, not much is known about similar outcomes for TCAR. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the outcomes at a single institution using fusion-guided imaging during TCAR compared with regional TCAR cases in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) registry without fusion imaging. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted of data collected from all patients undergoing TCAR with fusion-guided imaging (TCAR-F) at our hospital and patients undergoing TCAR alone within the VQI database. The primary outcomes included the total operative time, dose area product, fluoroscopy time, contrast usage, and flow-reversal time. The demographics and preoperative risk factors were also assessed in both groups. Continuous outcomes were compared using the Welch t test. Categorical outcomes were compared using the Fisher exact test. Results: A total of 30 TCAR-F cases (January 2019 to May 2022) at our institution were compared against the regional VQI dataset (n = 2535). The TCAR-F cases had a lower dose area product (5.67 vs 93.1 Gy cm2; P < .0001), shorter fluoroscopy time (8.07 vs 16.4 minutes; P < .0001), and less contrast usage (13.49 vs 76.7 mL; P < .0001) compared with the regional averages of the same. The TCAR-F cases had a longer total operative time (117.3 vs 80.9 minutes; P < .0001) and flow-reversal time (14.4 vs 11.7 minutes; P = .025) compared with the regional cases. Conclusions: The results from this pilot study comparing TCAR-F patients at a single institution with VQI regional TCAR patients suggest that TCAR-F cases use less radiation and contrast compared with TCAR without fusion imaging. Fusion-guided imaging might provide radiation protection to both patients and surgeons and decrease contrast usage for the patient.

Update on Management of Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis.

Carotid artery stenosis (CAS) is one of the leading causes of cerebral ischemia and stroke.7 When plaque builds up in the internal carotid artery, it blocks blood flow to the brain. Oftentimes, this condition only comes to light after a patient experiences a stroke or stroke-like symptoms. When this occurs, cholesterol-lowering medications and blood thinners can help to increase blood flow to the brain. However, if the plaque is so large that it severely narrows the lumen of the artery, surgery may be required to restore blood flow to the brain. Patients with severe stenosis can undergo procedures such as carotid endarterectomies (CEA), stenting, and transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) for this purpose. In this review, we discuss these procedures and which patients warrant which type of intervention. We look at the pathophysiology of internal carotid artery stenosis and current treatment options, while highlighting emerging treatment options. This review aims to increase understanding of the management of symptomatic carotid artery stenosis as well as provide a groundwork for more innovative treatments.

Assessment of Conflicts of Interest in the Transcarotid Artery Revascularization Literature.

INTRODUCTION: To systematically review the accuracy of self-reported conflicts of interest (COIs) among transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) studies and evaluate factors associated with increased discrepancies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search identified all TCAR-related studies with at least one American author published between January 2017 and December 2020. Industry payments from Silk Road Medical, Inc. were collected using the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Open Payments database. COI discrepancies were identified by comparing author declaration statements with payments found for the year of publication and year prior (24-mo period). Risk factors for COI discrepancy were evaluated at both the study and author level. RESULTS: A total of 79 studies (472 authors) were identified. Sixty four studies (81%) had at least one author who received payments from Silk Road Medical, Inc. Fifty eight (73%) studies had at least one author who received an undeclared payment. Consulting fees represented the majority of general payment subtype (60%). Authors who accurately disclosed payments received significantly higher median payments compared to authors who did not accurately disclose payments ($37,222 [interquartile range: $28,203-$132,589] versus $1748 [interquartile range $257-$35,041], P < 0.0001). Senior authors were significantly more likely to have a COI discrepancy compared to first authors (P = 0.0219). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of TCAR-related studies did not accurately declare COI. A multivariate analysis demonstrated no effect of sponsorship on study recommendations or impact factor. This study highlights the need for increased efforts in accountability to improve the transparency of industry sponsorship, especially when consulting authors are reporting their results on patient outcomes.

Rescue of immediate post-transcarotid artery revascularization carotid stent thrombosis due to clopidogrel resistance using flow-reversal and aspiration thrombectomy.

An 84-year-old patient developed immediate thrombosis of his carotid stent in recovery after transcarotid artery revascularization. In the present report, the technical details about intraoperative management for neurovascular rescue using the transcarotid artery revascularization flow-reversal system are described. The patient was determined to have clopidogrel resistance. Intraoperative medical management is also discussed. The current alternative intravenous and oral antiplatelet therapies such as glycoprotein IIb/IIIa and P2Y12 inhibitors are explored. The debate regarding preoperative antiplatelet resistance testing remains ambiguous, and increasing studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of alternatives to clopidogrel. Despite an unpredictable and devastating complication, the patient's outcome was successful using contemporary strategies.

Society for Vascular Surgery duplex ultrasound surveillance guidelines are safe and cost effective for transcarotid artery revascularization.

BACKGROUND: Carotid duplex ultrasound (CDUS) examination is used in the long-term surveillance after transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR). The objective of this study was to evaluate the usefulness and cost effectiveness of post-TCAR CDUS surveillance regimens in monitoring for in-stent restenosis (ISR) and associated stroke risk at a single-center community institution. METHODS: CDUS data were collected retrospectively from patients who had undergone TCAR between January 2017 and January 2023. ISR >50% was defined as a peak systolic velocity (PSV) of >220 cm/s and an internal carotid artery (ICA) to common carotid velocity ratio of >2.7. ISR >80% was defined as a PSV of >340 cm/s and an ICA/common carotid artery ratio of >4.15. Study outcomes included incidences of ISR, reintervention, transient ischemic attacks (TIAs), strokes, and mortality. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was done to calculate the rates of freedom from ISR. RESULTS: During the study period, 108 TCAR stents were deployed in 104 patients. Eight patients were excluded in analysis or lost to follow-up. Preoperatively, 62% of patients had >80% stenosis, and 39% were symptomatic. No intraprocedural complications were noted. One patient suffered an immediate postoperative dissection. Eight stents (8%) experienced ISR progression from <50% to >50%. Three of the eight had further ISR progression to >80%. One patient had high-grade ISR and a contralateral ICA occlusion that warranted reintervention. There were no occurrences of postoperative TIAs, strokes, or TCAR-related deaths. Rates of freedom from ISR progression from <50% to >50% were 97.4%, 95.9%, 90.9%, 88.2%, and 88.2% at 6, 12, 24, 36, and 42 months, respectively. Rates of freedom from ISR >80% were 100%, 100%, 98.5%, 95.5%, and 95.5% at the same time points. Patients with >50% ISR tended to be females with hyperlipidemia. In addition, they had higher average lesion lengths and lower rates of postdilation balloon angioplasty. The 5-year estimated surveillance cost in this cohort using the Society for Vascular Surgery 2022, and 2018 guidelines, as well as our current protocol would be $113,853, $221,382, and $193,207, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed a low incidence of ISR progression, as well as no TIA, stroke, or TCAR-related deaths, highlighting the safety and efficacy of TCAR. Post-TCAR CDUS examination using the updated Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines are safe and cost effective. Patients with contralateral occlusion or stenosis, or who have significant risk factors, should have more frequent surveillance regimens.

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.

Initial experience with transcarotid arterial revascularization with flow reversal in the management of symptomatic carotid stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of transcarotid arterial revascularization (TCAR) as a viable intervention in the treatment of symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective review of prospectively collected data of the first 62 consecutive patients treated at Rhode Island Hospital in Providence, Rhode Island, who underwent a TCAR for symptomatic carotid artery stenosis between November 11, 2020, and March 31, 2022. Relevant demographic, comorbidity, and perioperative data were extracted through retrospective chart review. Patients with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis were excluded. The authors also evaluated patients using pertinent physiological and anatomical high-risk criteria as described in the ROADSTER trial. Risk factors were aggregated to form a composite risk total for every patient. The primary outcome of this study was the 30-day adverse outcome rate of stroke, myocardial infarction, and/or death. Periprocedural stroke was identified by clinical symptoms and radiographic findings. Secondary endpoints included device and procedural success, 30-day mortality, 30-day stroke rate, and postoperative complications. RESULTS: The authors analyzed the first 62 patients with > 50% symptomatic carotid artery stenosis who underwent TCAR at their institution. The mean age of the cohort was 71.5 years, and the cohort was predominantly male (67.7%). The most common high-risk medical criteria were age older than 75 years (45.3%) and severe coronary artery disease (13.6%). The most common anatomical high-risk criteria were high bifurcation (35.1%) and contralateral stenosis requiring treatment within 30 days (15.8%). Fifty percent of patients had at least 1 medical high-risk criterion, 50% had at least 1 anatomical risk criterion, and 82% of patients had 2 or more high-risk criteria of any kind. Among this group, all patients (100%) underwent successful revascularization, with 1 (1.6%) requiring intraprocedural conversion to carotid endarterectomy. Postprocedurally, there was 1 nondisabling stroke (1.6%) and 3 deaths (4.8%) within 30 days of the procedure, with only 1 death directly attributable to the procedure. One patient (1.6%) experienced a neck hematoma. In total, 4 patients (6.5%) experienced a major complication. The overall complication rate was 8.0%. CONCLUSIONS: The authors' initial experience with TCAR suggests that it might provide an effective alternative to carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting in the management of symptomatic carotid stenosis in patients with high-risk anatomical and medical characteristics.

Vascular Quality Initiative assessment of compliance with Society for Vascular Surgery clinical practice guidelines on the management of extracranial cerebrovascular disease.

OBJECTIVES: Compliance with Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) is associated with improved outcomes for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm, but this has not been assessed for carotid artery disease. The Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) registry was used to examine compliance with the SVS CPGs for the management of extracranial cerebrovascular disease and its impact on outcomes. METHODS: The 2021 SVS extracranial cerebrovascular disease CPGs were reviewed for evaluation by VQI data. Compliance rates by the center and provider were calculated, and the impact of compliance on outcomes was assessed using logistic regression with inverse probability-weighted risk adjustment for each CPG recommendation, allowing for clustering by the center. Our primary outcome was a composite end point of in-hospital stroke/death. As a secondary analysis, compliance with the 2021 SVS carotid implementation document recommendations and associated outcomes were also assessed. RESULTS: Of the 11 carotid CPG recommendations, 4 (36%) could be evaluated using VQI registry data. Median center-specific CPG compliance ranged from 38% to 95%, and median provider-specific compliance ranged from 36% to 100%. After adjustment, compliance with 2 of the recommendations was associated with lower rates of in-hospital stroke/death: first, the use of best medical therapy (antiplatelet and statin therapy) in low/standard surgical risk patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy for >70% asymptomatic stenosis (event rate in compliant vs noncompliant cases 0.59% vs 1.3%; adjusted odds ratio: 0.44, 95% confidence interval: 0.29-0.66); and second, carotid endarterectomy over transfemoral carotid artery stenting in low/standard surgical risk patients with >50% symptomatic stenosis (1.9% vs 3.4%; adjusted odds ratio: 0.55, 95% confidence interval: 0.43-0.71). Of the 132 implementation document recommendations, only 10 (7.6%) could be assessed using VQI data, with median center- and provider-specific compliance rates ranging from 67% to 100%. The impact of compliance on outcomes could only be assessed for 6 (4.5%) of these recommendations, and compliance with all 6 recommendations was associated with lower stroke/death. CONCLUSIONS: Few SVS recommendations could be assessed in the VQI because of incongruity between the recommendations and the VQI data variables collected. Although guideline compliance was extremely variable among VQI centers and providers, compliance with most of these recommendations was associated with improved outcomes after carotid revascularization. This finding confirms the value of guideline compliance, which should be encouraged for centers and providers. Optimization of VQI data to promote evaluation of guideline compliance and distribution of these findings to VQI centers and providers will help facilitate quality improvement efforts in the care of vascular patients.