Shared quality data are associated with increased protamine use and reduced bleeding complications after carotid endarterectomy in the Vascular Study Group of New England

Cumulative Risks for Reoperation Due to Bleeding After Carotid Endarterectomy and The Associated Clinical Impact of Bleeding Events

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify all preoperative and intraoperative variables in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) carotid endarterectomy (CEA) module that have a statistically significant association with reoperation for bleeding. A weighted risk score was developed and validated to predict this event, with assessment of its impact on 30-day mortality and other adverse perioperative events.

METHODS

The VQI CEA module was queried between January 2003 and October 2023. Overall, 192,547 CEA procedures met study inclusion. An internal VQI validation cohort was created with the same exclusion criteria utilizing CEA performed between November 2023 and October 2024 over which time period 17,449 procedures met inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

The following variables had a statistically significant multivariable association (P<.05) with reoperation for bleeding after CEA : Black race (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.53); BMI <20 kg/m2 (aOR 1.40); hypertension (aOR 1.19); history of CAD revascularization (aOR 1.16); CHF (aOR 1.37); COPD (aOR 1.19); dual antiplatelet at time of surgery (aOR 1.51); on anticoagulation baseline (aOR 1.23); preoperative Rankin score 2 or higher (aOR 1.41); urgent/emergent CEA (aOR 1.36); eversion CEA technique (aOR 1.33); surgeon selection for drain placement (aOR 1.17); and, lack of protamine utilization intraoperatively (aOR 2.08). The following variables had a significant (P<.05) protective effect versus reoperation for bleeding after CEA : female sex (aOR .84); BMI>35 kg/m2; and active smoking status (aOR 0.85). Patients with risk scores of zero or less had an only .006% risk of return to the operating room for bleeding. There was significant elevation in risk for return to the operating room for bleeding with escalating risk sores. Patients with risk scores 11 and higher had an absolute reoperation for bleeding event rate of 3.6% which was a total event rate 600 times higher than individuals with scores of 0 or less and 3.6 times as high as individuals with scores as high as 5. The internal VQI validation cohort experienced the event of return to the operating room for bleeding at very similar rates to the primary study source cohort with no statistically significant difference at any of the risk score points indicating consistency for the risk score. Patients who experienced return to the operating room for bleeding after CEA experienced a statistically significant increased rate of : 30 day mortality (OR 1.59); cranial nerve injury (OR 2.03); perioperative neurological event (OR 5.80); myocardial infarction (MI) (OR 6.56); cardiac dysrhythmia (OR 4.20); perioperative congestive heart failure (CHF) (OR 5.26); and skin-soft tissue infection (SSI) postoperatively (OR 12.61) with P<.001 for all.

CONCLUSIONS

A validated quantitative risk score has been developed to predict reoperation for bleeding after carotid endarterectomy (CEA). The most impactful variables, which are also largely modifiable, include intraoperative protamine utilization and avoidance of dual antiplatelet therapy. Patients who experience reoperation for bleeding after CEA experience significantly higher rates of 30-day mortality, MI, CHF, cranial nerve injury, SSI, and adverse perioperative neurological events.

Brazilian Angiology and Vascular Surgery Society Guidelines for the treatment of extracranial cerebrovascular disease

Extracranial cerebrovascular disease has been the subject of intense research throughout the world, and is of paramount importance for vascular surgeons. This guideline, written by the Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery (SBACV), supersedes the 2015 guideline. Non-atherosclerotic carotid artery diseases were not included in this document. The purpose of this guideline is to bring together the most robust evidence in this area in order to help specialists in the treatment decision-making process. The AGREE II methodology and the European Society of Cardiology system were used for recommendations and levels of evidence. The recommendations were graded from I to III, and levels of evidence were classified as A, B, or C. This guideline is divided into 11 chapters dealing with the various aspects of extracranial cerebrovascular disease: diagnosis, treatments and complications, based on up-to-date knowledge and the recommendations proposed by SBACV.

An international, multispecialty, expert-based Delphi Consensus document on controversial issues in the management of patients with asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid stenosis

OBJECTIVE

Despite the publication of various national/international guidelines, several questions concerning the management of patients with asymptomatic (AsxCS) and symptomatic (SxCS) carotid stenosis remain unanswered. The aim of this international, multi-specialty, expert-based Delphi Consensus document was to address these issues to help clinicians make decisions when guidelines are unclear.

METHODS

Fourteen controversial topics were identified. A three-round Delphi Consensus process was performed including 61 experts. The aim of Round 1 was to investigate the differing views and opinions regarding these unresolved topics. In Round 2, clarifications were asked from each participant. In Round 3, the questionnaire was resent to all participants for their final vote. Consensus was reached when ≥75% of experts agreed on a specific response.

RESULTS

Most experts agreed that: (1) the current periprocedural/in-hospital stroke/death thresholds for performing a carotid intervention should be lowered from 6% to 4% in patients with SxCS and from 3% to 2% in patients with AsxCS; (2) the time threshold for a patient being considered "recently symptomatic" should be reduced from the current definition of "6 months" to 3 months or less; (3) 80% to 99% AsxCS carries a higher risk of stroke compared with 60% to 79% AsxCS; (4) factors beyond the grade of stenosis and symptoms should be added to the indications for revascularization in AsxCS patients (eg, plaque features of vulnerability and silent infarctions on brain computed tomography scans); and (5) shunting should be used selectively, rather than always or never. Consensus could not be reached on the remaining topics due to conflicting, inadequate, or controversial evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The present international, multi-specialty expert-based Delphi Consensus document attempted to provide responses to several unanswered/unresolved issues. However, consensus could not be achieved on some topics, highlighting areas requiring future research.

Temporal Trends and Contemporary Regional Variation in Management of Patients Undergoing Carotid Endarterectomy

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study is to investigate regional variation and temporal trends in seven quality metrics amongst CEA patients: discharge on antiplatelet after CEA; discharge on statin after CEA; protamine administration during CEA; patch placement at conventional CEA site; continued statin usage at the time of most recent follow-up; continued antiplatelet usage at the time of most recent follow-up; and smoking cessation at the time of long term follow up.

METHODS

There are 19 de-identified regions within the VQI database in the United States. Patients were placed into one of three temporal eras based on the time of their CEA: 2003-2008; 2009-2015; and 2016-2022. We first investigated temporal trends across the seven quality metrics for all regions combined on a national basis. The percentage of patients in each time era with the presence/absence of each metric was identified. Chi-squared testing was performed to confirm statistical significance of the differences across eras. Next, analysis was performed within each region and within each time metric. We separated out the 2016-2022 patients within each region to serve as the status of each metric application in the most modern era. We then compared the frequency of metric non-adherence in each region utilizing Chi-squared testing.

RESULTS

There was statistically significant improvement in achievement of all seven metrics between the initial 2003-2008 era and the modern 2016-2022 era. The most marked change in practice pattern was noted for lack of protamine usage at surgery (decreased from 48.7% to 25.9%), discharge home postoperatively without statin (decreased from 50.6% to 15.3%), and lack of statin usage confirmed at time of most recent long term follow up (decreased from 24% to 8.9%). Significant regional variation exists across all metrics (P < .01 for all). Lack of patch placement at the time of conventional endarterectomy ranges from 1.9% to 17.8% across regions in the modern era. Lack of protamine utilization ranges from 10.8% to 49.7%. Lack of antiplatelet and statin at the time of discharge varies from 5.5% to 8.2% and 4.8% to 14.4% respectively. Adherence to the various measures at the time of most recent follow up are more tightly aligned across regions with ranges of: 5.3% to 7.5% for lack of antiplatelet usage; 6.6% to 11.7% lack of statin utilization; and 13.3 to 15.4% for persistent smoking.

CONCLUSIONS

Prior studies and societal initiatives on CEA documenting the beneficial effects of patch angioplasty, protamine use at surgery, smoking cessation, antiplatelet utilization and statin compliance have positively impacted adherence to these measures over time. In the modern 2016-2022 era the widest regional variation is noted in patch placement, protamine utilization and discharge medications allowing individual geographic areas to identify areas for potential improvement via internal VQI administrative feedback.

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.

Urgent Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Occlusion is Associated with a High Mortality

OBJECTIVE

Interventions for carotid occlusions are infrequently undertaken and the outcomes are poorly defined. We sought to study patients undergoing urgent carotid revascularization for symptomatic occlusions.

METHODS

The Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative database was queried from 2003 to 2020 to identify patients with carotid occlusions undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Only symptomatic patients undergoing urgent interventions within 24 hours of presentation were included. Patients were identified based on CT and MRI imaging. This cohort was compared to symptomatic patients undergoing urgent intervention for severe stenosis (≥80%). Primary endpoints were perioperative stroke, death, myocardial infarction (MI) and composite outcomes as defined by the SVS reporting guidelines. Patient characteristics were analyzed to determine predictors of perioperative mortality and neurological events.

RESULTS

390 patients who underwent urgent CEA for symptomatic occlusions were identified. The mean age was 67.4±10.2 years (range 39 to 90 years). The cohort was predominantly male (60%) with associated risk factors for cerebrovascular disease, including hypertension (87.4%), diabetes (34.4%), coronary artery disease (21.6%) and current smoking (38.7%). This population had high utilization of medications including statin (78.6%), P2Y₁₂ inhibitor (32.0%), aspirin (77.9%) and renin-angiotensin inhibitor (43.7%) preoperatively. When compared to patients undergoing urgent endarterectomy for severe stenosis (≥80%), those with symptomatic occlusion were well matched with regards to risk factors, but the severe stenosis cohort appeared better medically managed and less likely to present with cortical stroke symptoms. Perioperative outcomes were significantly worse for the carotid occlusion cohort, primarily driven by higher perioperative mortality (2.8% vs 0.9%, P<.001). The composite endpoint of stroke/death/MI was also significantly worse in the occlusion cohort (7.7% vs 4.9%, P=.014). On multivariate analysis, carotid occlusion was associated with increased mortality (OR, 3.028; 95% CI, 1.362-6.730; P=.007) and composite outcome of stroke, death, or MI (OR, 1.790; 95% CI, 1.135-2.822, P=.012).

CONCLUSIONS

Revascularization for symptomatic carotid occlusion constitutes approximately 2% of carotid interventions captured in the VQI, affirming the rarity of this undertaking. These patients have acceptable rates of perioperative neurologic events but are at an elevated risk of overall perioperative adverse events, primarily driven by higher mortality, compared to those with severe stenosis. Carotid occlusion appears to be the most significant risk factor for the composite endpoint of perioperative stroke, death, or MI. While intervention for a symptomatic carotid occlusion may be performed with acceptable rate of perioperative complications, judicious patient selection is warranted in this high-risk cohort.

A Meta-Analysis of Using Protamine for Reducing the Risk of Hemorrhage During Carotid Recanalization: Direct Comparisons of Post-operative Complications

Background: Protamine can decrease the risk of hemorrhage during carotid recanalization. However, it may cause severe side effects. There is no consensus on the safety and efficacy of protamine during surgery. Thus, we conduct a comprehensive review and meta-analysis to compare the differences between the protamine and the no-protamine group.

Method: We systematically obtained literature from Medline, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and PubMed electronic databases. All four databases were scanned from 1937 when protamine was first adopted as a heparin antagonist until February 2021. The reference lists of identified studies were manually checked to determine other eligible studies that qualify. The articles were included in this meta-analysis as long as they met the criteria of PICOS; conference or commentary articles, letters, case report or series, and animal observation were excluded from this study. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale and Cochrane Collaboration’s tool are used to assess the risk of bias of each included observational study and RCT, respectively. Stata version 12.0 statistical software (StataCorp LP, College Station, Texas) was adopted as statistical software. When I2 &lt; 50%, we consider that the data have no obvious heterogeneity, and we conduct a meta-analysis using the fixed-effect model. Otherwise, the random-effect model was performed.

Result: A total of 11 studies, consisting of 94,618 participants, are included in this study. Our analysis found that the rate of wound hematoma had a significant difference among protamine and no-protamine patients (OR = 0.268, 95% CI = 0.093 to 0.774, p = 0.015). Furthermore, the incidence of hematoma requiring re-operation (0.7%) was significantly lower than that of patients without protamine (1.8%). However, there was no significant difference in the incidence of stroke, wound hematoma with hypertension, transient ischemic attacks (TIA), myocardial infarction (MI), and death.

Conclusion: Among included participants undergoing recanalization, the use of protamine is effective in reducing hematoma without increasing the risk of having other complications. Besides, more evidence-based performance is needed to supplement this opinion due to inherent limitations.

Risk factors associated with 30-day hospital readmission after carotid endarterectomy

OBJECTIVE

The current study evaluated all-cause 30-day readmissions after carotid endarterectomy.

METHODS

Patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy were selected from the Cerner Health Facts® database using ICD-9-CM procedure codes from their index admission. Readmission within 30 days of discharge was determined. Chi-square analysis determined characteristics of the index admission (demographics, diagnoses, postoperative medications, and laboratory results) associated with readmission. Multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify characteristics independently associated with readmission.

RESULTS

In total, 5257 patients undergoing elective carotid endarterectomy were identified. Readmission within 30 days was 3.1%. After multivariable adjustment, readmission was associated with end-stage renal disease (OR: 3.21, 95% CI: 1.01-10.2), hemorrhage or hematoma (OR: 2.34, 95% CI: 1.15-4.77), procedural complications (OR: 3.07, 95% CI: 1.24-7.57), use of bronchodilators (OR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.03-2.11), increased Charlson index scores (OR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.08-1.38), and electrolyte abnormalities (hyponatremia < 135 mEq/L (OR: 1.69, 95% CI: 1.07-2.67) and hypokalemia less than 3.7 mEq/L (OR: 2.26, 95% CI: 1.03-4.98)).

CONCLUSIONS

Factors associated with readmission following carotid endarterectomy included younger age, increased comorbidity burden, end-stage renal disease, electrolyte disorders, the use of bronchodilators, and complications including bleeding (hemorrhage or hematoma). Of note, in this real-world study, only 40% of the patients received protamine, despite evidence-based literature demonstrating the reduced risk of bleeding complications. As healthcare moves towards quality of care-driven reimbursement, physician modifiable targets such as protamine utilization to reduce bleeding are greatly needed to reduce readmission, and failure to reduce preventable physician-driven complications after carotid interventions may be associated with decreased reimbursement.

Protamine Induced Anaphylactic Shock after Peripheral Vascular Surgery

Anaphylactic reactions to protamine are quite rare and almost exclusively reported during cardiac surgery. In this report, we illustrate a rare case of protamine reaction after peripheral vascular surgery a couple of months after cardiac surgery and how the patient survived this critical complication.

Protamine sulfate use during tibial bypass does not appear to increase thrombotic events or affect short-term graft patency

OBJECTIVES

While the use of protamine sulfate as a heparin reversal agent has been extensively reviewed in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy and coronary artery bypass grafting, there is a lack of literature on protamine's effects on lower extremity bypasses. The purpose of this study was to determine the risk of protamine sulfate dosing after tibial bypass on thrombotic or bleeding events, including early bypass failure.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of our institutional database for patients undergoing primary distal peripheral bypass from January 2009 through December 2015 (contralateral bypass was considered to be a new primary bypass). Primary endpoints include composite thrombotic events (myocardial infarction, stroke, amputation at 30 days and patency less than 30 days) and composite bleeding events (bleeding or transfusion).

RESULTS

A total of 152 tibial or peroneal bypasses in 136 patients with critical limb ischemia were identified. Of these, 78 (57.4%) patients received protamine sulfate intraoperatively and 58 (42.6%) did not. There were no differences in composite thrombotic or hemorrhagic outcomes. Protamine use had no effect on the rates of perioperative MI (9.0% versus 3.5%, p = 0.20), stroke (1.3% versus 1.7%, p = 0.83), or perioperative mortality (5.1% versus 3.5%, p = 0.64). There was no significant difference in composite post-operative bleeding events (20.7% versus 14.1%, p = 0.31) or composite thrombotic events (17.2% versus 18.0%, p = 0.91). Patients who received protamine undergoing bypass with non-autogenous conduit had significantly higher-recorded median operative blood loss (250 mL versus 150 mL, p = 0.0097) and median procedure lengths (265 min versus 201 min, p = 0.0229). No difference in 30-day amputation-free survival was noted (91.0% versus 91.4%, p = 0.94). Follow-up Kaplan-Meier estimation did not demonstrate a difference in 30-day patency (91.7% versus 88.5%, p = 0.52).

CONCLUSIONS

Heparin reversal with protamine sulfate after tibial or peroneal bypass grafting is not associated with higher cardiovascular morbidity, bypass thrombosis, amputation, or mortality. Additionally, there was no statistically significant difference in post-operative bleeding or thrombosis complications for patients who did not receive protamine, although the findings are suggestive of a potential difference in a more adequately powered study. Our results suggest that protamine sulfate is safe for intraoperative use without increased risk of thrombotic complications or early tibial bypass graft failure.

Analysis of Thirty-Day Readmission after Infrainguinal Bypass

BACKGROUND

The Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE) conducted a pilot study evaluating the feasibility of 30-day data collection in patients undergoing infrainguinal bypass (INFRA) which was subsequently expanded to include a limited number of additional sites within the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI). The purpose of our study was to use these data to evaluate the incidence of 30-day readmission after infrainguinal bypass. A secondary goal of the study was to perform a critical appraisal of the data elements and definitions in the 30-day dataset.

METHODS

All infrainguinal bypass procedures performed during the pilot study period (7/2008 and 4/2016) were identified and merged with a dataset containing the 30-day data. Incidence and types of readmission were assessed. The primary endpoint was 30-day readmission, defined as any hospital readmission within 30 days of index operation; unplanned 30-day readmission was the secondary endpoint. Covariates tested for association with the primary and secondary endpoints included patient demographics, comorbidities, procedural, and postoperative characteristics. Variables significant on univariate screen (P < 0.2) were evaluated with logistic regression to identify independent determinants.

RESULTS

Of 9,847 infrainguinal bypass patients, 5,842 (59%) patients were identified with 30-day data, and 907 (16%) were readmitted within 30 days. Of readmissions, 675 (85%) were unplanned. Potentially modifiable independent determinants of any 30-day readmission included 30-day surgical site infection (SSI) (odds ratio [OR]: 10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 8.2-12, P < 0.0001), postoperative acute kidney injury (OR: 1.7, 95% CI: 1.2-2.5, P = 0.002), and discharge anticoagulation (OR: 1.2, 95% CI: 1.04-1.5; P = 0.02). Predictors of unplanned 30-day readmission were very similar but identified in-hospital major amputation as an additional independent predictor (OR: 2.8, 95% CI: 1.6-4.9, P = 0.0002).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates the interest in, and value of, 30-day data collection in VSGNE/VQI and documents the frequency of readmission after infrainguinal bypass. Readmission within 30 days is strongly associated with SSI, stressing the importance of efforts to decrease this complication. Given that many other predictors are unmodifiable, 30-day readmission is only appropriate as a quality metric if it is risk adjusted using large, real-world datasets such as VQI. Lessons learned from this analysis can be used to select optimal 30-day data elements.

Does surgical technique influence the postoperative hemodynamic disturbances and neurological outcomes in carotid endarterectomy?

INTRODUCTION

The carotid endarterectomy is already well established in patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis. The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a difference in postoperative blood pressure changes, stroke rate and postoperative complications following eversion carotid endarterectomy (E-CEA) and conventional carotid endarterectomy (C-CEA).

METHODS

From 1 January 2010 to 31 March 2017 consecutive patients admitted to our department with symptomatic or asymptomatic ICA stenosis were included in this retrospective study. During the 7-year period, 175 CEAs were performed in 166 consecutive patients (25 females, 141 males; mean age 70.6 ± 14.4 years; range 47 to 92 years).

RESULTS

The mean operative and cross-clamping time were shorter for E-CEA (72 ± 14.3 minutes vs. 115 ± 17.4 minutes, p < .001), (22 ± 7.7 vs 34 ± 6.3, p < .001) respectively. No significant difference was noted between the groups for the occurrence of perioperative stroke (p = .501). No significant difference was noted for postoperative blood pressure difference on the 6th hour and the 24th hour after surgery between E-CEA and C-CEA (p = .130).

CONCLUSIONS

E-CEA was associated with significant reduction in operative time and cross-clamping time however, increases postoperative bleeding. No difference was noted for postoperative stroke and blood pressure distortion between E-CEA and C-CEA.

Surgical Pitfalls in Carotid Endarterectomy: A New Step-By-Step Approach

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is a surgical intervention that may prevent stroke in asymptomatic and symptomatic patients. Our aim was to examine the microsurgical anatomy of carotid artery and other related neurovascular structures to summarize the CEA that is currently applied in ideal conditions. The upper necks of 2 adult cadavers (4 sides) were dissected using ×3 to ×40 magnification. The common carotid artery, external carotid artery (ECA), and internal carotid artery were exposed and examined. The surgical steps of CEA were described using 3-D cadaveric photos and computed tomography angiographic pictures obtained with help of OsiriX imaging software program. Segregating certain neurovascular and muscular structures in the course of CEA significantly increased the exposure. The division of facial vein allowed for internal jugular vein to be mobilized more laterally and dividing the posterior belly of digastric muscle resulted in an additional dorsal exposure of almost 2 cm. Isolating the ansa cervicalis that pulls hypoglossal nerve inferiorly allowed hypoglossal nerve to be released safely medially. The locations of the ECA branches alter depending on their anatomical variations. The hypoglossal nerve, glossopharyngeal nerve, and accessory nerve pierce the fascia of the upper part of the carotid sheath and they are vulnerable to injury because of their distinct courses along the surgical route. Surgical exposure in CEA requires meticulous dissection and detailed knowledge of microsurgical anatomy of the neck region to avoid neurovascular injuries and to determine the necessary surgical maneuvers in cases with neurovascular variations.

The impact of race on outcomes after carotid endarterectomy in the United States

OBJECTIVE

Black patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in the United States are more often symptomatic at presentation and have more comorbidities compared with white patients. However, the impact of race on outcomes after CEA is largely unknown.

METHODS

We identified CEA patients in the Vascular Quality Initiative registry (2012-2017) and compared them by race (black vs white). All other nonwhite races (891 [1.4%]) and Hispanics (2222 [3.4%]) were excluded. We used multilevel logistic regression to account for differences in demographics and comorbidities. We assessed long-term survival using multivariable Cox regression. The primary outcome was perioperative stroke/death, with long-term survival as a secondary outcome.

RESULTS

We included 57,622 CEA patients; 2909 (5.0%) were black, of whom 983 (34%) were symptomatic. Of the 54,713 white patients, 16,132 (30%) were symptomatic. Black patients, compared with white patients, had a higher vascular disease burden and were less likely to be operated on in a high-volume hospital or by a high-volume surgeon. In addition, black symptomatic patients, compared with white symptomatic patients, were more often operated on <2 weeks after the index neurologic symptom (47% vs 40%; P < .001). Perioperative stroke/death was comparable between black and white patients (symptomatic, 2.8% vs 2.2% [P = .2]; asymptomatic, 1.6% vs 1.3% [P = .2]), as was unadjusted survival at 3 years (93% vs 93%; P = .7). However, after adjustment, black patients did experience better long-term survival compared with white patients (hazard ratio, 0.8; 95% confidence interval, 0.7-0.9; P = .01). On multilevel logistic regression, race was not associated with perioperative stroke/death (odds ratio, 1.0; 95% confidence interval, 0.8-1.3; P = .98).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the greater prevalence of vascular risk factors in black patients and racial inequalities in surgical treatment, rates of perioperative stroke/death and unadjusted survival were similar between white and black patients. Moreover, black patients experienced better adjusted long-term survival after CEA.

Carotid Endarterectomy in the Southern California Vascular Outcomes Improvement Collaborative

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to examine the variation in practice patterns and associated outcomes for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) within the Southern California Vascular Outcomes Improvement Collaborative (So Cal VOICe), a regional quality group of the Vascular Quality Initiative.

METHODS

All cases entered in the CEA registry by the So Cal VOICe were included in the study.

RESULTS

From September 2010 through September 2015, 1,110 CEA cases were entered by 9 centers in the So Cal VOICe. Six hundred seventy-seven patients (61%) were male with mean age of 73 years. Nine hundred eighty-eight (89%) were hypertensive, 655 (59%) were prior or current smokers, 389 (35%) were diabetics, and 233 (21%) had coronary artery disease. Eight hundred twenty-one (74%) patients were asymptomatic (no history of ipsilateral neurologic event). The percentage of asymptomatic patients varied across the 9 centers from 57% to 91%. Preoperatively, 344 (31%) underwent cardiac stress test, center variation 13-75%, 500 (45%) underwent only duplex, center variation 11-72%. Intraoperatively, 600 (54%) underwent routine shunting, whereas 67 (6%) were shunted for an indication, and 444 (40%) were not shunted. Wound drainage was used in 422 (38%) cases, center variation 2-98%. Completion imaging by duplex and/or angiogram was performed in 766 (69%) cases, center variation 0-100%. Postoperatively, 11 (1%) patients had a new ipsilateral postoperative neurologic event, center variation 0-1.3%, 6 (0.5%) had a postoperative myocardial infarction, center variation 0-1.3%, and 8 (0.7%) required return to operating room for bleeding, center variation 0-1.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite wide variation in practice patterns surrounding CEA in the So Cal VOICe, postoperative complications were uniformly low. Further work will focus on identifying practices that can be modified to improve cost-effectiveness while maintaining excellent outcomes.

The impact of contralateral carotid artery stenosis on outcomes after carotid endarterectomy

OBJECTIVE

Patients with contralateral carotid occlusion (CCO) have been excluded from randomized clinical trials because of a deemed high risk for adverse neurologic outcomes with carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Evidence for this rationale is limited and conflicting. Therefore, we aimed to compare outcomes after CEA between patients with and without CCO and varying degrees of contralateral carotid stenosis (CCS).

METHODS

We identified patients undergoing CEA from 2003 to 2015 in the Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE) registry. Patients were stratified by preoperative symptom status and presence of CCO. Multivariable analysis was used to account for differences in demographics and comorbidities. Our primary outcome was 30-day stroke/death risk.

RESULTS

Of 15,487 patients we identified who underwent CEA, 10,377 (67%) were asymptomatic. CCO was present in 914 patients, of whom 681 (75%) were asymptomatic. Overall, the 30-day stroke/death was 2.0% for symptomatic patients (CCO: 2.6%) and 1.1% for asymptomatic patients (CCO: 2.3%). After adjustment, including symptom status, CCO was associated with higher 30-day stroke/death (odds ratio [OR], 2.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.4-3.3; P = .001), any in-hospital stroke (OR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.7-4.6; P < .001), in-hospital ipsilateral stroke (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.2-4.0; P = .02), in-hospital contralateral stroke (OR, 5.1; 95% CI, 2.2-11.4; P < .001), and prolonged length of stay (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.3-1.9; P < .001). CCS of 80% to 99% was only associated with a prolonged length of stay (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6; P = .01), not with in-hospital stroke. Neither CCO nor CCS was associated with 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Although CCO increases the risk of 30-day stroke/death, in-hospital strokes, and prolonged length of stay after CEA, the 30-day stroke/death rates in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with CCO remain within the recommended thresholds set by the 14 societies' guideline document. Thus, CCO should not qualify as a high-risk criterion for CEA. Moreover, there is no evidence that patients with CCO have lower stroke/death rates after carotid artery stenting than after CEA. We believe that CEA remains a valid and safe option for patients with CCO and that CCO should not be applied as a criterion to promote carotid artery stenting per se.

Quality and Safety in Health Care, Part XXIV: More on Vascular Surgery

The use of registries such as the Vascular Quality Initiative and its regional groups, such as the Vascular Study Group of New England, have been very helpful in investigating problems related to quality and safety in vascular surgery. This article discusses some of their contributions regarding carotid artery procedures, the use of certain medications in the perioperative period, and the risk factors for sustaining a major cardiac complication while in the hospital after vascular surgery.

Regional variation in patient selection and treatment for lower extremity vascular disease in the Vascular Quality Initiative

OBJECTIVE

Prior studies on the cause and effect of surgical variation have been limited by utilization of administrative data. The Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI), a robust national clinical registry, provides anatomic and perioperative details allowing a more robust analysis of variation in surgical practice.

METHODS

The VQI was used to identify all patients undergoing infrainguinal open bypass or endovascular intervention from 2009 to 2014. Asymptomatic patients were excluded. The 16 regional groups of the VQI were used to compare variation in patient selection, operative indication, technical approach, and process measures. χ² analysis was used to assess for differences across regions where appropriate.

RESULTS

A total of 52,373 interventions were included (31%). Of the 16,145 bypasses, 5% were performed for asymptomatic disease, 26% for claudication, 56% for chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLI) (61% of these for tissue loss), and 13% for acute limb-threatening ischemia. Of the 35,338 endovascular procedures, 4% were for asymptomatic disease, 40% for claudication, 46% for CLI (73% tissue loss), and 12% for acute limb-threatening ischemia. Potentially unwarranted variation included proportion of prosthetic conduit for infrapopliteal bypass in claudication (13%-41%, median, 29%; P < .001), isolated tibial endovascular intervention for claudication (0.0%-5.0%, median, 3.0%; P < .001), discharge on antiplatelet and statin (bypass: 62%-84%; P < .001; endovascular: 63%-89%; P < .001), and ultrasound guidance for percutaneous access (claudication: range, 7%-60%; P < .001; CLI: 5%-65%; P < .001). Notable areas needing further research with significant variation include proportion of CLI vs claudication treated by bypass (38%-71%; P < .001) and endovascular intervention (28%-63%; P < .001), and use of closure devices in percutaneous access (claudication; 26%-76%; P < .001; CLI: 30%-78%; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Significant variation exists both in areas where evidence exists for best practice and, therefore, potentially unwarranted variation, and in areas of clinical ambiguity. Quality improvement efforts should be focused on reducing unwarranted variation. Further research should be directed at identifying best practice where no established guidelines and high variation exists.

Dual antiplatelet therapy reduces stroke but increases bleeding at the time of carotid endarterectomy

OBJECTIVE

Controversy persists regarding the perioperative management of clopidogrel among patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA). This study examined the effect of preoperative dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin and clopidogrel) on in-hospital CEA outcomes.

METHODS

Patients undergoing CEA in the Vascular Quality Initiative were analyzed (2003-2014). Patients on clopidogrel and aspirin (dual therapy) were compared with patients taking aspirin alone preoperatively. Study outcomes included reoperation for bleeding and thrombotic complications defined as transient ischemic attack (TIA), stroke, or myocardial infarction. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital death and composite stroke/death. Univariate and multivariable analyses assessed differences in demographics and operative factors. Propensity score-matched cohorts were derived to control for subgroup heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Of 28,683 CEAs, 21,624 patients (75%) were on aspirin and 7059 (25%) were on dual therapy. Patients on dual therapy were more likely to have multiple comorbidities, including coronary artery disease (P < .001), congestive heart failure (P < .001), and diabetes (P < .001). Patients on dual therapy were also more likely to have a drain placed (P < .001) and receive protamine during CEA (P < .001). Multivariable analysis showed that dual therapy was independently associated with increased reoperation for bleeding (odds ratio [OR], 1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-2.42; P = .003) but was protective against TIA or stroke (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43-0.87; P = .007), stroke (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.41-0.97; P = .03), and stroke/death (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.44-0.98; P = .04). Propensity score matching yielded two groups of 4548 patients and showed that patients on dual therapy were more likely to require reoperation for bleeding (1.3% vs 0.7%; P = .004) but less likely to suffer TIA or stroke (0.9% vs 1.6%; P = .002), stroke (0.6% vs 1.0%; P = .04), or stroke/death (0.7% vs 1.2%; P = .03). Within the propensity score-matched groups, patients on dual therapy had increased rates of reoperation for bleeding regardless of carotid symptom status. However, asymptomatic patients on dual therapy demonstrated reduced rates of TIA or stroke (0.6% vs 1.5%; P < .001), stroke (0.4% vs 0.9%; P = .01), and composite stroke/death (0.5% vs 1.0%; P = .02). Among propensity score-matched patients with symptomatic carotid disease, these differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative dual antiplatelet therapy was associated with a 40% risk reduction for neurologic events but also incurred a significant increased risk of reoperation for bleeding after CEA. Given its observed overall neurologic protective effect, continued dual antiplatelet therapy throughout the perioperative period is justified. Initiating dual therapy in all patients undergoing CEA may lead to decreased neurologic complication rates.

A comparison of results with eversion versus conventional carotid endarterectomy from the Vascular Quality Initiative and the Mid-America Vascular Study Group

OBJECTIVE

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is usually performed with eversion (ECEA) or conventional (CCEA) technique. Previous studies report conflicting results with respect to outcomes for ECEA and CCEA. We compared patient characteristics and outcomes for ECEA and CCEA.

METHODS

Deidentified data for CEA patients were obtained from the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative (SVS VQI) database for years 2003 to 2013. Second (contralateral) CEA, reoperative CEA, CEA after previous carotid stenting, or CEA concurrent with cardiac surgery were excluded, leaving 2365 ECEA and 17,155 CCEA for comparison. Univariate analysis compared patients, procedures, and outcomes. Survival analysis was also performed for mortality. Multivariate analysis was used selectively to examine the possible independent predictive value of variables on outcomes.

RESULTS

Groups were similar with respect to sex, demographics, comorbidities, and preoperative neurologic symptoms, except that ECEA patients tended to be older (71.3 vs 69.8 years; P < .001). CCEA was more often performed with general anesthesia (92% vs 80%; P < .001) and with a shunt (59% vs 24%; P < .001). Immediate perioperative ipsilateral neurologic events (ECEA, 1.3% vs CCEA, 1.2%; P = .86) and any ipsilateral stroke (ECEA, 0.8% vs CCEA, 0.9%; P = .84) were uncommon in both groups. ECEA tended to take less time (median 99 vs 114 minutes; P < .001). However, ECEA more often required a return to the operating room for bleeding (1.4% vs 0.8%; P = .002), a difference that logistic regression analysis showed was only partly explained by differential use of protamine. Life-table estimated 1-year freedom from any cortical neurologic event was similar (96.7% vs 96.7%). Estimated survival was similar comparing ECEA with CCEA at 1 year (96.7% vs 95.9%); however, estimated survival tended to decline more rapidly in ECEA patients after ∼2 years. Cox proportional hazards modeling confirmed that independent predictors of mortality included age, coronary artery disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and smoking, but also demonstrated that CEA type was not an independent predictor of mortality. The 1-year freedom from recurrent stenosis >50% was lower for ECEA (88.8% vs 94.3%, P < .001). However, ECEA and CCEA both had a very high rate of freedom from reoperation at 1 year (99.5% vs 99.6%; P = .67).

CONCLUSIONS

ECEA and CCEA appear to provide similar freedom from neurologic morbidity, death, and reintervention. ECEA was associated with significantly shorter procedure times. Furthermore, ECEA obviates the expenses, including increased operative time, associated with use of a patch in CCEA, and a shunt, more often used in CCEA in this database. These potential benefits may be reduced by a slightly greater requirement for early return to the operating room for bleeding.