Association between the choice of anesthesia and in-hospital outcomes after carotid artery stenting

Impact of the type of anesthesia on adverse events during transcarotid artery revascularization

OBJECTIVE

The use of local or regional anesthesia (LRA) is encouraged during transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) because the procedure is performed through a small incision. LRA permits neurologic evaluation during the procedure and may reduce periprocedural cardiac morbidity compared with general anesthesia (GA). There is limited and conflicting information regarding the preferred anesthesia to use during TCAR. We compared periprocedural clinical and technical complications, and intraprocedural performance metrics of TCAR performed under GA vs LRA.

METHODS

Patient, lesion, physician, and procedural information was collected in a worldwide quality assurance program of consecutive TCAR procedures. A composite clinical adverse event rate (death, stroke, transient ischemic attack, myocardial infarction) and a composite technical adverse event rate (aborted procedure, conversion to carotid endarterectomy, bleeding, dissection, cranial-nerve injury, device failure) in the periprocedural period were computed. Four intraprocedural performance measures (flow-reversal time, fluoroscopy time, contrast volume, and skin-to-skin time) were recorded. Deidentified data were analyzed independently at the Center for Vascular Research, University of Maryland. Poisson regressions were used to assess the impact of anesthesia type on adverse event rates. Linear regressions were used to compare performance measures.

RESULTS

A total of 27,043 TCARs were performed by 1456 physicians between 2012 and 2021. A majority of patients (83%) received GA, and this proportion increased over time (R2 = 0.74; P < .0001). Some physicians (33.4%) used LRA in some of their procedures; only 2.7% used LRA in all of their procedures. Clinical risk factors were more common in the LRA group (P < .0001) and anatomic risk factors in the GA group (P < .0001); these differences were adjusted for in subsequent analyses. LRA was more likely to be used by vascular surgeons and by physicians with higher prior transfemoral carotid stenting experience (P < .0001). When comparing GA vs LRA, clinical adverse events (1.49%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.8 vs 1.55%; 95% CI, 1.2-2.0; P = .78), technical adverse events (5.6%; 95% CI, 5.2-6.2 vs 5.3%; 95% CI, 4.5-6.3; P = .47), and intraprocedural performance measures did not differ by type of anesthesia.

CONCLUSIONS

Almost two-thirds of physicians performed TCAR exclusively under GA, and the overall proportion of procedures performed under GA increased over time. A larger fraction of patients with severe medical risk factors received LRA vs GA, whereas a larger fraction of patients with anatomic risk-factors received GA. Periprocedural clinical and technical adverse events did not differ by type of anesthesia. Intraprocedural performance metrics that drive procedural cost were similar between groups; potential differences in procedural cost driven by anesthetic choice require further study.

Locoregional Versus General Anesthesia for Carotid Artery Stenting in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project

OBJECTIVES

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) may be performed by transfemoral or transcervical (TCAR) approaches and with a variety of anesthetic techniques. No current literature clearly supports one anesthetic method over another. We therefore sought to evaluate the outcomes of CAS procedures based on anesthetic approach.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2011 to 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

All individuals undergoing CAS during the study period.

INTERVENTIONS

Anesthetic type (locoregional versus general [GA]).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Locoregional anesthesia for CAS was used for 754 (65.5%) patients, with the remainder under GA. Demographic variables were comparable, as were the incidence of symptomatic presentation, high-risk anatomy or physiology, severity of the stenosis, and presence/severity of contralateral carotid disease. There was no difference in composite outcome (stroke, myocardial infarction [MI], and death) (7.0% v 6.1%, p = 0.53). The GA group had lower odds ratio of MI (0.12, p = 0.0362) but higher odds ratio of death (3.33, p = 0.008) and postoperative pneumonia (3.87, p = 0.0083), although on multivariable analysis the risk of death appeared confounded by respiratory variables. Multivariable and propensity score-weighted analyses did not identify a significant association of GA with the composite outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients undergoing CAS in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, GA was not associated with the composite outcome but was associated with increased rates of postoperative pneumonia and decreased rates of MI. Further investigation should attempt to better clarify these relationships.

Clinical experience in intracranial stenting of Wingspan stent system under local anesthesia

Objective

The use of endovascular treatments for symptomatic intracranial atherosclerosis disease (ICAD) remains contentious due to high periprocedural complications. Many centers resort to general anesthesia for airway protection and optimal periprocedural conditions; however, this approach lacks real-time monitoring of patients' neurological status during procedures. In this study, we employed intracranial stenting with the Wingspan system under local anesthesia to address this challenge.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study of 45 consecutive ICAD patients who underwent intracranial stenting with the Wingspan system at our hospital from August 2013 to May 2021. These stenting procedures were performed under local anesthesia in a hybrid operation room. Neurological assessments were conducted during the procedure. The patients with periprocedural complications were analyzed for the risk factors.

Results

The study included 45 ICAD patients (median age 62 years; 35 male and 10 female individuals). Among them, 30 patients had anterior circulation ICAD, and 15 had posterior circulation ICAD. The periprocedural complication rate was 8.9% (4/45), with an overall mortality rate of 2.2% (1/45). Notably, no procedure-related perforation complications were found, and all ischemic complications occurred in the perforating bearing artery, specifically in patients with stents placed in the middle cerebral artery or basilar artery, while no complications were observed in the non-perforating bearing artery of the internal carotid artery and vertebral artery (p = 0.04).

Conclusion

Our study demonstrates the safety and efficacy of the Wingspan stent system when performed on selected patients under local anesthesia. This approach seems to reduce procedural-related morbidity and be a safe intervention. In addition, it is crucial for surgeons to be aware that patients with perforator-bearing artery stenosis may be at a higher risk of complications.

Drug-Coated Balloons for Treatment of Internal Carotid Artery Restenosis After Stenting: A Single-Center Mid-Term Outcome Study

PURPOSE

Endovascular and surgical treatments of stenosis of the extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) are common procedures, yet both introduce a risk of restenosis due to endothelial hyperplasia. Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) are designed to decrease neointimal hyperplasia, however rarely used in the neurovascular setting. This study retrospectively analyzes mid-term results of DCB-treated in-stent restenosis (ISR) of the ICA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The medical history, comorbidities, and periprocedural data of patients receiving DCB treatment for > 50% ISR of the ICA after carotid artery stenting were analyzed. Follow-up after DCB treatment was performed with Doppler ultrasound. Suspicious cases were checked with CT- or MR-angiography and-if there was agreement between the modalities-validated with digital subtraction angiography. Potential risk factors for restenosis and differences in outcomes after PTA with three types of DCB balloons were evaluated.

RESULTS

DCB treatment was performed in 109 cases, 0.9% of which involved in-hospital major stroke; no minor strokes occurred. A total of 17 patients (15.6%) had recurrent ISR after DCB treatment, after a mean time of 30.2 months (7-85 months). Tobacco use was significantly associated with a higher incidence of recurrent ISR.

CONCLUSION

DCB angioplasty for ISR is an effective treatment that may delay and decrease restenosis. Treating comorbidities and adopting lifestyle changes may additionally help prevent ISR.

Prevention of in-stent restenosis with drug-eluting balloons in patients with postirradiated carotid stenosis accepting percutaneous angioplasty and stenting

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the technical safety and outcome of in-stent restenosis (ISR) prevention with drug-eluting balloon (DEB) in patients with postirradiated carotid stenosis (PIRCS) undergoing percutaneous angioplasty and stenting (PTAS).

METHODS

Between 2017 and 2021, we prospectively recruited patients with severe PIRCS for PTAS. They were randomly separated into two groups based on endovascular techniques performed with and without DEB. Preprocedural and early postprocedural (within 24 hours) MRI, short-term ultrasonography (6 months after PTAS), and long-term CT angiography (CTA)/MR angiography (MRA), 12 months after PTAS, were performed. Technical safety was evaluated based on periprocedural neurological complications and the number of recent embolic ischemic lesions (REIL) in the treated brain territory on diffusion-weighted imaging of early postprocedural MRI.

RESULTS

Sixty-six (30 with and 36 without DEB) subjects were enrolled, with one failure in techniques. For 65 patients in the DEB versus conventional groups, technical neurological symptoms within 1 month (1/29 (3.4%) vs 0/36; P=0.197) and REIL numbers within 24 hours (1.0±2.1 vs 1.3±1.5; P=0.592) after PTAS showed no differences. Peak systolic velocity (PSVs) on short-term ultrasonography was significantly higher in the conventional group (104.13±42.76 vs .81.95±31.35; P=0.023). The degree of in-stent stenosis (45.93±20.86 vs 26.58±8.75; P<0.001) was higher, and there were more subjects (n=8, 38.9% vs 1, 3.4%; P=0.029) with significant ISR (≥ 50%) in the conventional group than in the DEB group on long-term CTA/MRA.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed similar technical safety of carotid PTAS with and without DEBs. The number of cases of significant ISR were fewer and the degree of stenosis of ISR was less in primary DEB-PTAS of PIRCS than for conventional PTAS in the 12-month follow-up.

Filter-type Protection Device Retrieval Interfered by Deployed Stent during Subclavian Artery Stenosis Treatment: Case Report and Complication Avoidance Recommendation

Endovascular treatment is a standard procedure for subclavian artery stenosis or obstruction. However, great care should be taken to avoid embolic complications to the vertebral artery, and several methods have previously been reported. Hence, as surgical procedures become increasingly complicated, unintended issues may arise during treatment. Here, the authors report a case where the filter-type protection device was caught in the stent because the patient moved during treatment, leading to open surgery to recover the filter-type protection device． A 78-year-old female suffering from a left subclavian steal syndrome underwent stenting due to subclavian artery stenosis. The stenotic lesion was approached via the transfemoral route, and a filter-type protection device was advanced to the vertebral artery via the transbrachial route to prevent embolic complications. As the procedure was performed under local anesthesia, the patient moved during stent deployment proximally to the left vertebral artery origin, and the stent unintentionally advanced distally, covering the vertebral artery and obstructing the retrieval catheter for the filter-type protection device to advance. Failed attempts in recovering the filter-type protection device required open surgery for retrieval. Fortunately, there was no postoperative neurological and radiographic complication, ameliorating her chief complaint． The retriever catheter for the protection device should be advanced beyond the vertebral artery orifice just proximal to the protection device before stenting to avoid such complications while also thoroughly considering the type of anesthesia during treatment．.

Predictors of hemodynamic instability during and persistent after carotid artery stenting

OBJECTIVES

The risk factors for post-carotid artery stenting severe hemodynamic instability remain elusive. This study aimed to identify the predictors of severe hemodynamic instability during and persisted after carotid artery stenting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent carotid artery stenting for extracranial carotid artery stenosis at a single-center between September 2018 and July 2021 were retrospectively assessed. The predictive factors of severe hemodynamic instability intraoperation and post-operation were analyzed.

RESULTS

Among the 139 patients included, 63 experienced severe hemodynamic instability, with 45 and 18 cases occurring intra and postoperatively, respectively. Persistent was observed in 21 patients. Smoke exposure (odds ratio [OR], 2.38; p=0.039), carotid bifurcation stenosis (OR, 0.91; p=0.018), and large-diameter balloon (>4 mm) dilatation (OR, 11.95; p<0.001) were identified as independent risk factors for hemodynamic instability at any stage of carotid artery stenting. Intraoperatively, large-diameter balloon (>4 mm) dilatation was associated with an increased risk of hemodynamic instability occurrence (OR, 4.67; p=0.01), whereas general anesthesia (OR, 0.19; p=0.001) and a longer distance from the stenosis to the carotid bifurcation (OR, 0.89; p=0.01) were negatively associated with hemodynamic instability. Furthermore, smoking exposure (OR, 3.73; p=0.03), large diameter balloon dilatation (OR, 6.12; p=0.032), distance from stenosis to bifurcation (OR, 0.85; p=0.047) and long-stent (40 mm) implantation (OR, 0.84 [95% confidence interval, 0.74-0.95]; p=0.007) could independently predict persistent hemodynamic instability.

CONCLUSION

Patients with a smoking history, lesions near the carotid bulb, or dilatation using a large-diameter balloon were most likely to suffer severe hemodynamic instability. General anesthesia can protect against severe hemodynamic instability only intraoperatively. Long-term stent implantation may reduce persistent hemodynamic instability.

Hemodynamic Instability Predicts In-Hospital and One-Year Mortality After TransCarotid Artery Revascularization and TransFemoral Carotid Stenting

OBJECTIVES

Blood pressure fluctuations are a common hemodynamic alteration following carotid artery stenting either with transfemoral (TFCAS) or transcarotid (TCAR) approach and are thought to be related to alteration in baroreceptor function due to angioplasty and stent expansion. These fluctuations are particularly worrisome in the high-risk patient population referred for CAS. This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of patients who required the administration of intravenous blood pressure medication (IVBPmed) for hypotension or hypertension after CAS.

METHODS

All patients undergoing carotid revascularization in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database between 2016-2021 were included. we compared outcomes of patients who required postoperative IVBPmed to treat hyper- or hypotension with normotensive patients. In-hospital outcomes were compared using multivariable logistic regression. One-year outcomes were assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival and multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression analyses.

RESULTS

We identified 38,510 patients undergoing CAS (57.7% TCAR and 42.3% TFCAS), of which, 30% received IVBPmed for treatment of either postoperative hypertension (12.6%) or hypotension (16.4%). In multivariable analysis, postoperative hypotension was associated with a higher risk of stroke, death, or MI (OR: 3.1, 95%CI (2.6-3.6), P<.001), stroke or death (OR: 2.9, 95%CI (2.4-3.5), P<.001), stroke (OR: 2.6, 95%CI (2.1-3.2), P<.001), death (OR: 3.5, 95%CI (2.6-4.8), P<.001), MI (OR: 4.7, 95%CI (3.3-6.7), P<.001), and bleeding (OR: 1.96, 95%CI (1.4-2.7), P<.001) compared to normotensive patients. Postoperative hypertension was associated with a higher risk of stroke, death, or MI (3.6, 95%CI (3-4.4), P<.001), stroke or death (OR: 3.3, 95%CI (2.7-4.1), P<.001), stroke (OR: 3.7, 95%CI (3-4.7), P<.001), death (OR: 2.7, 95%CI (1.9-3.9), P<.001), MI (OR: 5.7, 95%CI (3.9-8.3), P<.001), and bleeding (OR: 1.9, 95%CI (1.4-2.7), P<.001) compared to normotensive patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative hypertension or hypotension requiring IVBPmed after CAS is associated with an increased risk of in-hospital stroke, death, MI, and bleeding. Postoperative hypertension is associated with worse survival at one year. This study indicates that the need for IVBPmed after CAS is not benign, therefore, these patients necessitate aggressive perioperative medical management and safe techniques to avoid hypo and hypertension. Close follow-up and continue medical management is needed to maximize these patients' survival.

Outcomes of Carotid Revascularization in the Treatment of Restenosis After Prior Carotid Endarterectomy

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Restenosis after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is associated with an increased risk of ipsilateral stroke. The optimal procedural modality for this indication has yet to be determined. Here, we evaluate the in-hospital outcomes of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR), redo-CEA, and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) in a large contemporary cohort of patients who underwent treatment for restenosis after CEA.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients in the vascular quality initiative database who underwent TCAR, redo-CEA, or TFCAS after ipsilateral CEA between September 2016 and April 2020. Patients with prior ipsilateral CAS were excluded from this analysis. In-hospital outcomes following TCAR versus CEA and TCAR versus TFCAS were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 4425 patients were available for this analysis. There were 963 (21.8%) redo-CEA, 1786 (40.4%) TFCAS, and 1676 (37.9%) TCAR. TCAR was associated with lower odds of in-hospital stroke/death (odds ratio [OR], 0.41 [95% CI, 0.24-0.70], P=0.021), stroke (OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.23-0.93], P=0.03), myocardial infarction (MI; OR, 0.32 [95% CI, 0.14-0.73], P=0.007), stroke/transient ischemic attack (OR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.24-0.74], P=0.002), and stroke/death/MI (OR, 0.41 [95% CI, 0.24-0.70], P=0.001) when compared with redo-CEA. There was no significant difference in the odds of death between the 2 groups (OR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.28-3.5], P=0.995). TCAR was also associated with lower odds of stroke/transient ischemic attack (OR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.18-0.74], P=0.005) when compared with TFCAS. There was no significant difference in the odds of stroke, death, MI, stroke/death, or stroke/death/MI between TCAR and TFCAS.

CONCLUSIONS

TCAR was associated with significantly lower odds of in-hospital stroke, MI, stroke/transient ischemic attack, stroke/death, and stroke/death/MI when compared with redo-CEA and lower odds of in-hospital stroke/transient ischemic attack when compared with TFCAS. Additional long-term studies are warranted to establish the role of TCAR for the treatment of restenosis after CEA.

Anesthetic choice during transcarotid artery revascularization and carotid endarterectomy affects the risk of myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies have shown no differences in the outcomes of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) performed with general anesthesia (GA) vs local or regional anesthesia (LRA). To date, no study has specifically compared the outcomes of TCAR to those of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) stratified by anesthetic type. The aim of the present study was to identify the effect of the anesthetic type on the outcomes of TCAR vs CEA.

METHODS

Patients undergoing CEA and TCAR for carotid artery stenosis from 2016 to 2019 in the Vascular Quality Initiative were included. We excluded patients who had undergone concomitant procedures, patients with more than two stented lesions, and patients who had undergone the procedure for a nonatherosclerotic indication. Propensity score matching was performed between the two procedures stratified by the anesthetic type for age, sex, race, presenting symptoms, major comorbidities (ie, hypertension, diabetes, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, chronic kidney disease), previous coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous transluminal coronary intervention, previous CEA or carotid artery stenting, degree of ipsilateral stenosis, the presence of contralateral occlusion, and preoperative medications. Intergroup differences between the treatment groups and differences in the perioperative outcomes were tested using the McNemar test for categorical variables and the paired t test or Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test for continuous variables, as appropriate. The relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated as the ratio of the probability of the outcome event for the patients treated within each treatment group.

RESULTS

A total of 65,337 patients were included. Of the 65,337 patients, 59,664 had undergone carotid revascularization under GA (91%). When performed with LRA, TCAR and CEA had similar rates of stroke, death, and MI. However, when performed with GA, patients undergoing TCAR had a 50% decreased risk of MI compared with those undergoing CEA under GA (0.5% vs 1.0%; RR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.32-0.80; P < .01). When stratified by symptomatic status, patients undergoing TCAR with GA for symptomatic carotid disease had a 67% decreased risk of MI compared with those undergoing CEA with GA for symptomatic disease (0.4% vs 1.2%; RR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.15-0.75; P < .01). In contrast, no difference was found in the risk of MI between patients undergoing CEA vs TCAR for asymptomatic carotid disease (0.6% vs 0.9%; RR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.37-1.14; P = .13).

CONCLUSIONS

The results from the present study have confirmed previous studies suggesting that TCAR confers a lower risk of MI compared with CEA. However, our findings demonstrated no differences in the MI rates between TCAR and CEA when performed with LRA. Patients undergoing TCAR under GA had lower rates of MI compared with patients undergoing CEA under GA. When stratified by symptomatic status, the benefit of TCAR persisted only for the symptomatic patients.

Anesthetic considerations in transcarotid artery revascularization

Transcarotid artery revascularization is a relatively new technology made available to vascular interventionalists within the last several years for patients with carotid artery stenosis. However, the intraoperative techniques and perioperative management of these patients continues to evolve as more experience is gained. Herein, we consider some important principles of anesthesia for patients undergoing this procedure.

Hospital-Level Medicaid Prevalence Is Associated with Increased Length of Stay after Asymptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy and Stenting Despite no Increase in Major Complications

BACKGROUND

Length of stay (LOS) after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) for asymptomatic disease is used as a quality measure and affects hospital operating margins. Patient-level Medicaid status has traditionally been associated with longer hospital LOS. Our goal was to assess the association between hospital-level Medicaid prevalence and postoperative LOS after CEA and CAS.

METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample was queried from 2006-2014 for CEA and CAS performed for asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Overall hospital-level Medicaid prevalence was divided into quartiles. The quartiles were further categorized into low Medicaid prevalence (LM) (lowest quartile), medium Medicaid prevalence (MM) (second and third quartiles), and high Medicaid prevalence (HM) (fourth quartile) cohorts. The primary outcome evaluated was postoperative LOS >1 day. The secondary outcomes included perioperative/in-hospital complications and mortality.

RESULTS

There were 984,283 patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis who underwent CEA (88%) or CAS (12%). Mean postoperative LOS after CEA at hospitals with LM, MM, and HM prevalence was 1.4 ± 1.5, 2.1 ± 2.5, and 2.2 ± 2.8 days (P = 0.0001), respectively, and after CAS were 1.7 ± 2.6, 1.8 ± 2.1, and 2 ± 2.6 days (P < 0.0001), respectively. After CEA, relative to LM prevalence, MM (OR 1.62, 95% CI 1.17-2.24) and HM (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.2-2.28) prevalence were associated with a higher likelihood of LOS > 1 day (P = 0.009). After CAS, relative to LM prevalence, HM prevalence was associated with a higher likelihood of LOS >1 day (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.06-1.91) (P = 0.003). After CEA, neurologic (0.8% vs. 0.9% vs. 0.9%, P = 0.83) and cardiac complications (0.9% vs. 1.2% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.24) were similar among hospitals with LM, MM, and HM prevalence, respectively. After CAS, the prevalence of neurological (1.1% vs. 1% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.42) and cardiac complications (2% vs. 1.3% vs. 1.5%, P = 0.46) were also similar. After both CEA and CAS, mortality was similar among Medicaid prevalence cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher hospital-level Medicaid prevalence was associated with longer LOS after CEA and CAS for asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Value-based payment models should adjust for hospital-level Medicaid prevalence to appropriately reimburse providers and hospital with higher Medicaid prevalence as well as investigate care pathways and systems improvement to help reduce LOS.

The study of transcarotid artery revascularization under local versus general anesthesia with results from the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative

Objective

The primary purpose of this study was to examine any potential difference in clinical outcomes between transcarotid artery revascularization performed under local anesthesia compared with general anesthesia by utilizing a large national database.

Methods

The primary outcome of the study was a composite endpoint of postoperative in-hospital stroke, myocardial infarction and mortality following transcarotid artery revascularization for the index procedure. Secondary outcomes included a composite outcome of postoperative in-hospital stroke, transient ischemic attack, myocardial infarction and mortality along with several subsets of its components and each individual component, flow reversal time (min), radiation dose (GY/cm2), contrast volume utilized (mL), total procedure time (min), extended total length of stay (>1 day) and extended postoperative length of stay (>1 day). Statistical analyses employed both descriptive measures to characterize the study population and analytic measures such as multivariable mixed-effect linear and logistic regressions using both unmatched and propensity-score matched cohorts.

Results

A total of 2609 patients undergoing transcarotid artery revascularization between the years 2016 and 2018 in the US were identified, with 82.3% performed under general anesthesia and 17.7% under local anesthesia. The primary composite outcome was observed in 2.3% of general anesthesia patients versus 2.6% of local anesthesia patients ( p = 0.808). The rate of postoperative transient ischemic attack and/or myocardial infarction was 1.6% with general anesthesia versus 1.1% with local anesthesia ( p = 0.511). For adjusted regression analysis, general anesthesia and local anesthesia were comparable in terms of primary outcome (OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.27–1.93, p = 0.515). As for the secondary outcomes, no significant differences were found except for contrast, where the results demonstrated significantly less need for contrast with procedures performed under general anesthesia (coefficient: 4.94; 95% CI: 1.34–8.54, p = 0.007). A trend towards significance was observed for lower rate of postoperative transient ischemic attack and/or myocardial infarction (OR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.09–1.18, p = 0.088) and lower flow reversal time under local anesthesia (coefficient: –0.94: 95% CI: –2.1–0.22, p = 0.111).

Conclusions

Excellent outcomes from transcarotid artery revascularization for carotid stenosis were observed in the VQI database between the years 2016 and 2018, under both local anesthesia and general anesthesia. The data demonstrate the choice of anesthesia for transcarotid artery revascularization does not appear to have any effect on clinical outcomes. Surgical teams should perform transcarotid artery revascularization under the anesthesia type they are most comfortable with.

Carotid Revascularization: Current Practice and Future Directions

Carotid stenosis is responsible for approximately 15% of ischemic strokes. Carotid revascularization significantly decreases patients' stroke risk. Carotid endarterectomy has first-line therapy for moderate-to-severe carotid stenosis after a series of pivotal randomized controlled trials were published almost 30 years ago. Revascularization with carotid stenting has become a popular and effective alternative in a select subpopulation of patients. We review the current state of the literature regarding revascularization indications, patient selection, advantages of each revascularization approach, timing of intervention, and emerging interventional techniques, such as transcarotid artery revascularization.