Defining the threshold surgeon volume associated with improved patient outcomes for carotid endarterectomy

Association of surgeon volume and operative factors with early thrombosis of arteriovenous fistulas for hemodialysis

OBJECTIVE

Although arteriovenous fistula (AVF) is the ideal initial option for hemodialysis access, failure can occur due to early thrombosis or lack of maturation. Surgeon volume has previously been associated with higher rates of maturation, but the relationship between volume and early thrombosis remains unknown.

METHODS

All adults undergoing cephalic-based AVF between 2014 and 2019 were identified from five safety net hospitals within the Los Angeles County Department of Health Services system. Surgeons were divided into two groups based on whether their 30-day thrombosis rate was below (Group A) or above (Group B) the mean. The relationship between selected operative characteristics and surgeon volume on surgeon early thrombosis rates was analyzed.

RESULTS

Sixteen surgeons performed 828 cephalic-based AVFs. Group A surgeons had lower rates of early thrombosis overall, 3.8% vs 15.4% (P < .001). There were no differences in age, sex, or comorbidities among the patients operated on by Group A and Group B surgeons. Following adjustment, Group A surgeons were more likely to use intraoperative systemic anticoagulation (odds ratio [OR], 8.745; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.875-13.019; P < .001), have an AVF volume >40 (OR, 2.847; 95% CI, 1.853-4.374; P < .001), and have an operating time >1.5 hours (OR, 2.031; 95% CI, 1.387-2.974; P < .001). However, Group A surgeons had lower odds of utilizing intraoperative antibiotics (OR, 0.261; 95% CI, 0.130-0.544) and general anesthesia (OR, 0.340; 95% CI, 0.175-0.658; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The present analysis identified variability in 30-day AVF thrombosis. Surgeons with low rates of early thrombosis were likely to have a higher case volume, use intraoperative anticoagulation, and have longer operative times.

Factors Associated with Increased Fluoroscopy Time During Elective Endovascular Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair and Its Utilization as an Indicator of Intraoperative and Postoperative Outcomes

OBJECTIVES

This study explores the impact of prolonged fluoroscopy time (FT) on outcomes in endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). While total operative time includes multiple variables, FT precisely captures the technical precision of the EVAR procedure. By examining the factors that extend FT, we aim to establish FT as a critical quality metric for evaluating surgical performance and predicting postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective review of the Society for Vascular Surgery (SVS) Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) was conducted (2003-2021). The FT was studied based on a median dichotomy of ≤18 mins (Group I) and >18 mins (Group II). Primary outcomes of in-hospital mortality and discharge status were studied, along with numerous secondary outcomes pertaining to systemic complications. Factors associated with more extended FT were also measured. All the variables examined in multivariate analyses were estimated in odds ratios, and a P-value of <0.05 was deemed significant for all the analyses performed.

RESULTS

41,841 patients were studied, of which 20,339 were categorized in Group I and 21,502 in Group II. The average fluoroscopy time in the selected patients was reported to be 23.2 minutes. Patients in Group II generally had overall poorer health status with multiple comorbidities and on various medications. Aortic aneurysm parameters can influence the FT, including the greater aorta-neck angle, neck angle, neck diameter, and neck length. Patients treated by high-volume surgeons were observed to have less likelihood of prolonged FT. On trends analysis, it was observed that the FT has been consistent over the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

Various factors can influence the FT in patients undergoing EVAR, including the patient characteristics and the complexity of the aneurysm. Identifying the risk factors associated with prolonged FT can help prepare the surgeons and devise ways to ensure a high quality of care, better risk stratification, and enhanced safety, especially for more prolonged exposure to radiation and contrast volumes.

Higher stroke risk after carotid endarterectomy and transcarotid artery revascularization is associated with relative surgeon volume ratio

OBJECTIVE

Adoption of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) by surgeons has been variable, with some still performing traditional carotid endarterectomy (CEA), whereas others have shifted to mostly TCAR. Our goal was to evaluate the association of relative surgeon volume of CEA to TCAR with perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative CEA and carotid artery stent registries were analyzed from 2021 to 2023 for symptomatic and asymptomatic interventions. Surgeons participating in both registries were categorized in the following CEA to CEA+TCAR volume percentage ratios: 0.25 (majority TCAR), 0.26 to 0.50 (more TCAR), 0.51 to 0.75 (more CEA), and 0.76 to 1.00 (majority CEA). Primary outcomes were rates of perioperative ipsilateral stroke, death, cranial nerve injury, and return to the operating room for bleeding.

RESULTS

There were 50,189 patients who underwent primary carotid revascularization (64.3% CEA and 35.7% TCAR). CEA patients were younger (71.1 vs 73.5 years, P < .001), with more symptomatic cases, less coronary artery disease, diabetes, and lower antiplatelet and statin use (all P < .001). TCAR patients had lower rates of smoking, obesity, and dialysis or renal transplant (all P < .001). Postoperative stroke after CEA was significantly impacted by the operator CEA to TCAR volume ratio (P = .04), with surgeons who perform majority TCAR and more TCAR having higher postoperative ipsilateral stroke (majority TCAR odds ratio [OR]: 2.15, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16-3.96, P = .01; more TCAR OR: 1.42, 95% CI: 1.02-1.96, P = .04), as compared with those who perform majority CEA. Similarly, postoperative stroke after TCAR was significantly impacted by the CEA to TCAR volume ratio (P = .02), with surgeons who perform majority CEA and more CEA having higher stroke (majority CEA OR: 1.51, 95% CI: 1.00-2.27, P = .05; more CEA OR: 1.50, 95% CI: 1.14-2.00, P = .004), as compared with those who perform majority TCAR. There was no association between surgeon ratio and perioperative death, cranial nerve injury, and return to the operating room for bleeding for either procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

The relative surgeon CEA to TCAR ratio is significantly associated with perioperative stroke rate. Surgeons who perform a majority of one procedure have a higher stroke rate in the other. Surgeons offering both operations should maintain a balanced practice and have a low threshold to collaborate as needed.

The effect of institutional case volume on post-operative outcomes after endarterectomy and stenting for symptomatic carotid stenosis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effects of yearly institutional case volume for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and stenting (CAS) among symptomatic carotid stenosis patients on the rates of postoperative stroke and inpatient mortality.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with prior stroke ("symptomatic") undergoing CEA or CAS during an inpatient stay were identified from the National Inpatient Sample for years 2012-2015. The primary variable was volume of CEA or CAS performed annually by each institution. The primary outcome was a composite variable for in-hospital death or postoperative stroke.

RESULTS

A total of 5,628 patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis underwent CEA, while 245 underwent CAS. In the symptomatic CEA population, 519 (9.2 %) patients experienced postoperative stroke or mortality, and were more likely to be treated at centers with a lower yearly institutional volume (median 10 [IQR 5-15] versus 10 [7-20] cases, p < 0.001). In the symptomatic CAS population, 32 (13.1 %) patients experienced stroke or mortality, and these patients were also more likely to undergo treatment at hospitals with a lower yearly institutional volume (median 5 [IQR 5-7] versus 5 [5-10] cases, p = 0.044). Thresholds for yearly institutional volume found differences in adverse outcome between 0-9, 10-29, and ≥30 cases/year (11.7 % vs 8.4 % vs 6.0 %, p < 0.001) for CEA, and differences in postoperative stroke between 0-9 and ≥10 cases/year for CAS (11.0 % vs 1.4 %, p = 0.028).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitals performing higher volumes of CEA or CAS have fewer postoperative strokes. The threshold reported herein is ≥30 CEA procedures or ≥10 CAS procedures annually for appreciably improved outcomes.

Prospective Comparison of Wound Complication Rates after Elective Open Peripheral Vascular Surgery - Endovascular Versus Open Vascular Surgeons

BACKGROUND

Skill and experience of surgeons are likely to influence the incidence of surgical wound complications (SWC) after open lower limb revascularization. Differences in SWC between surgeons with predominantly endovascular or open vascular surgical profiles could be expected. The aim of this study was to compare SWC rates after elective open vascular surgery between primarily endovascular and primarily open vascular surgeons.

METHODS

Prospective data from patients undergoing elective surgery for peripheral artery disease (PAD) was collected between 2013 and 2019. Senior surgeons were assigned to the open-surgeon or the endo-surgeon group based on the percentage of their open surgical case load during the 6 year study period. SWC was measured by their clinical impact scale (grade 1-outpatient treatment to grade 6-death). Surgical site infection was defined by Additional treatment, Serous discharge, Erythema, Purulent exudate, Separation of deep tissues, Isolation of bacteria, and Stay (ASEPSIS) criteria. Propensity score adjusted analysis (PSAA) was used to account for differences in baseline and perioperative characteristics and expressed as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

The proportion of chronic limb-threatening ischemia (P = 0.001), ipsilateral foot wound (P = 0.012) and femoro-popliteal bypass procedures (P < 0.001) were higher in the open-surgeon group. A lower incidence of SWC according to ASEPSIS criteria (25.6% vs. 38.6%, respectively, P = 0.042) and SWC grade ≥1 (33.7% vs. 51.0%, respectively, P = 0.010) was found in the endo-surgeon group (n = 86) compared to the open-surgeon group (n = 153). These differences disappeared after PSAA (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.27-1.44, and OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.27-1.33, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients operated by endo-surgeons had less advanced PAD and lower incidence of SWC compared to those treated by open-surgeons. No difference in SWC remained after PSAA.

Extending Quality Improvement for Pancreatoduodenectomy Within the High-Volume Setting: The Experience Factor

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the association of a surgeon's experience with postoperative outcomes of pancreatoduodenectomies (PDs) when stratified by Fistula Risk Score (FRS).

BACKGROUND

Centralization is now well-established for pancreatic surgery. Nevertheless, the benefits of individual surgeon's experience in high-volume settings remain undefined.

METHODS

Pancreatoduodenectomies performed by 82 surgeons across 18 international specialty institutions (median: 140 PD/year) were analyzed. Surgeon cumulative PD volume was linked with postoperative outcomes through multivariable models, adjusted for patient/operative characteristics and the FRS. Then, surgeon experience was also stratified by the 10, previously defined, most clinically impactful scenarios for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF) development.

RESULTS

Of 8189 PDs, 18.7% suffered severe complications (Accordion≥3), 4.8% were reoperated upon and 2.2% expired. Although the most experienced surgeons (top-quartile; >525 career PDs) more often operated on riskier cases, their experience was significantly associated with declines in CR-POPF ( P <0.001), severe complications ( P =0.008), reoperations ( P <0.001), and length of stay (LOS) ( P <0.001)-accentuated even more in the most impactful FRS scenarios (2830 patients). Risk-adjusted models indicate male sex, increasing age, ASA class, and FRS, but not surgeon experience, as being associated with severe complications, failure-to-rescue, and mortality. Instead, upper-echelon experience demonstrates significant reductions in CR-POPF (OR 0.66), reoperations (OR 0.64), and LOS (OR 0.65) in moderate-to-high fistula risk circumstances (FRS≥3, 68% of cases).

CONCLUSIONS

At specialty institutions, major morbidity, mortality, and failure-to-rescue are primarily associated with baseline patient characteristics, while cumulative surgical experience impacts pancreatic fistula occurrence and its attendant effects for most higher-risk pancreatoduodenectomies. These data also suggest an extended proficiency curve exists for this operation.

Surgical Specialty Impacts Quality of Operative Training in Carotid Endarterectomy

BACKGROUND

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is currently performed by multiple surgical specialties. The impact of surgical specialty and operative volume on post-CEA outcomes has been well described. However, it is unclear whether trainees of different surgical specialties have similar quality of operative training.

METHODS

Data from Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education annual reports were collected and compared between graduating vascular surgery (VS) residents, VS fellows, and neurological surgery (NS) residents. Only cases reported as chief/senior/lead resident, surgeon junior, or surgeon fellow were included in analysis. Linear regression analysis was utilized to evaluate trends in case-mix and volume.

RESULTS

From 2013 to 2022, total CEA case volume was higher among VS residents and fellows, compared to NS residents (52.8 ± 0.8 vs. 44.3 ± 1.4 vs. 12.9 ± 0.6, P < 0.0001). Additionally, VS residents and fellows performed other carotid operations including transfemoral or transcarotid artery stenting (11.1 ± 0.9 vs. 11.2 ± 0.8 vs. 0), carotid body tumor resection (0.7 ± 0.1 vs. 0.7 ± 0.0 vs. 0), and extracranial cervical bypass (6.7 ± 0.3 vs. 6.3 ± 0.3 vs. 0) that were not reported by the NS resident cohort (P < 0.0001 each). On linear regression analysis, total CEA procedures did not change for VS residents (R2 = 0.03, P = 0.62), decreased for VS fellows (-1.29 cases/yr, R2 = 0.75, P < 0.0001), and decreased among NS residents (-0.41 cases/yr, R2 = 0.44, P = 0.01) over the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

Although residents of multiple surgical specialties are trained in CEA, vascular training offers significantly greater numbers and diversity of extracranial carotid cases. It also appears that CEA volume is decreasing among neurosurgical trainees. In light of recent reports on the volume-outcome effect in carotid surgery, these data may have implications for future practice patterns in the domain of extracranial carotid artery disease.

Mid-Term Results of an Italian Multicentric Experience with the RoadsaverTM Dual-Layer Carotid Stent System

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) using first-generation single-layer stents is widely accepted as a good alternative to standard carotid endarterectomy (CEA) but it is associated with worse outcomes in terms of both plaque prolapse and cerebral embolization.

AIM

To evaluate the perioperative and midterm outcomes of CAS using the new-generation RoadsaverTM dual-layer micromesh-covered carotid stent.

METHODS

Herein, we present the results of an observational, retrospective, multicentric study on non-consecutive patients who underwent the CAS procedure between January 2017 and December 2022 at three Italian, high-volume vascular surgery centers. The inclusion criteria were the patients' eligibility for the CAS procedure in accordance with the current Italian guidelines, and the implantation of a Roadsaver stent. Both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients were included in the study. The patients requiring reintervention for carotid restenosis following CEA were also included. Perioperative data regarding procedural success was defined as the successful implantation of the device in the desired position, less than 30% residual stenosis, and the absence of intraoperative neurological complications. The primary outcome was any adverse cerebrovascular event such as stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) during the procedure and/or after discharge. The secondary outcomes were the need for further intervention, and all-cause death following procedure.

RESULTS

Three-hundred-fifty-three (353) patients were included in our study; the mean age was 74.3 years. A total of 5.9% of the patients were symptomatic on their operated side, while 7.3% had contralateral carotid occlusion. A cerebral embolic protection device (CPD) was employed in all patients. A total of 13.3% of the patients were operated on for restenosis after CEA Technical success was achieved in 96.9% of the cases with an intraoperative report of six TIAs (1.7%) and six ipsilateral strokes (1.7%). The mean hospital stay was 1.8 days. The thirty-day follow up showed one TIA and one more stroke. At the mean 35-month follow-up time, the primary outcome was present in six patients (1.7%), where four TIAs (1.1%) and two strokes (0.5%) were reported. Restenosis occurred in five patients (1.4%). Death for any cause was reported in 11 patients (3.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

As most recent, high-quality studies show, the CAS procedure with second-generation devices such as the Roadsaver stent is safe and effective in preventing carotid-related cerebrovascular events in both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. The intraoperative and postoperative cerebrovascular complication rate in high volume centers is very low, ensuring confidence in its employment for the CAS procedure along with a CPD as a valid alternative to CEA.

Guideline Compliant Minimum Asymptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Surgeon and Hospital Volume Cutoffs

BACKGROUND

There is a known association between volume and outcomes after carotid endarterectomy (CEA). A recent analysis suggested rates of stroke and death do not significantly reduce after a surgeon volume cutoff of 20 CEAs per year. However, these results would severely limit access. The objective here is to identify a lower optimal cutpoint for surgeon and hospital volume for asymptomatic CEA.

METHODS

We evaluated asymptomatic CEA patients using The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database from 2000-2014. The relationship of 3-year averaged volumes for surgeons and hospitals to 30-day stroke was assessed using multiple logistic regression and included both hospital and surgeon volume in all analyses. Optimized cut points were the lowest significant volume cutoff that minimized the adjusted odds ratio of stroke.

RESULTS

We studied 32,549 CEAs performed by 271 surgeons in 136 centers by vascular surgeons. The median surgeon volume was 26.3 (interquartile range: 12.3-51.7) and the median hospital volume was 67 (interquartile range: 36.3-119.3). The surgeon volume cut point was 3 and the hospital volume cut point was 6 cases per year. There were 756 (2.3%) procedures performed by surgeons with a volume < 3 and 560 (1.7%) procedures performed by hospitals with a volume < 6. Perioperative stroke and death rates were 2.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.8-2.1) and 3.8% (95% CI: 2.6-5.5) for an average yearly surgeon volume ≥ 3 and < 3 (P = 0.070), respectively. The combined stroke and death rate was 2.0% (95% CI: 1.8-2.1) and 4.8% (95% CI: 3.2-7.0) for an average yearly center volume ≥ 6 and < 6 (P = 0.007), respectively. A combined surgeon and hospital volume variable also predicted outcomes and low-volume procedures did not meet previously proposed American Heart Association and Society for Vascular Surgery quality measures.

CONCLUSIONS

These data demonstrate an improvement in outcomes at a lower volume threshold than previously reported. These modest cutoff values should be used for asymptomatic CEA volume guideline formation and for future studies, after accounting for the impact of other important factors that may be driving volume-outcome relationships in asymptomatic CEA.

A Scoping Review of Simulation-Based Training Paradigms for Carotid Artery Endarterectomy and Carotid Artery Stenting

BACKGROUND

Surgical simulation has come to the forefront to enhance the training of residents. The aim of our scoping review is to analyze the available simulation-based carotid revascularization techniques, including carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) and suggest critical steps for evaluating competency in a standardized fashion.

METHODS

A scoping review of all reports on simulation-based carotid revascularization techniques including CEA and CAS was performed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane, Science Citation Index Expanded, Emerging Sources Citation Index, and Epistemonikos databases. Data were collected according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines. The English language literature was searched from January 1, 2000 to January 9, 2022. The outcomes evaluated included measures of assessment of operator performance.

RESULTS

Five CEA and 11 CAS manuscripts were included in this review. The methods of assessments employed by these studies to judge performance were comparable. The 5 CEA studies sought to validate and demonstrate improved performance with training or distinguish surgeons by their experience level, either through assessing operative performance or end-product results. The 11 CAS studies used 1 of 2 types of commercial simulators and focused on determining the efficacy of simulators as teaching tools. By examining the steps of the procedure associated with preventable perioperative complications, it provides a reasonable framework for determining which elements of the procedure should be emphasized most. Furthermore, using potential errors as a basis for assessment of competency could reliably distinguish operators based on level of experience.

CONCLUSIONS

Competency-based simulation training is becoming more relevant as our surgical training paradigm shifts with the increased scrutiny within training programs of work-hour regulations and the need to develop a curriculum to assess our trainees' ability to perform specific operations competently during their stipulated training period. Our review has given us an insight into the current efforts in this space regarding 2 specific procedures that are key for all vascular surgeons to master. Although many competency-based modules are available, there is a lack of standardization in the grading/rating system of what surgeons consider vital steps of each procedure to assess these simulation-based modules. Therefore, the next steps of curriculum development should be based on standardization efforts for the different protocols available.

Predictors of 30-day mortality using machine learning approach following carotid endarterectomy

BACKGROUND

Preoperative prognostication of 30-day mortality in patients with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can optimize surgical risk stratification and guide the decision-making process to improve survival. This study aims to develop and validate a set of predictive variables of 30-day mortality following CEA.

METHODS

The patient cohort was identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2005-2016). We performed logistic regression (enter, stepwise, and forward) and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) method for the selection of variables, which resulted in 28-candidate models. The final model was selected based upon clinical knowledge and numerical results.

RESULTS

Statistical analysis included 65,807 patients with 30-day mortality in 0.7% (n = 466) patients. The median age of our cohort was 71.0 years (range, 16-89 years). The model with 9 predictive factors which included age, body mass index, functional health status, American Society of Anesthesiologist grade, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder, preoperative serum albumin, preoperative hematocrit, preoperative serum creatinine, and preoperative platelet count-performed best on discrimination, calibration, Brier score, and decision analysis to develop a machine learning algorithm. Logistic regression showed higher AUCs than LASSO across these different models. The predictive probability derived from the best model was converted into an open-accessible scoring system.

CONCLUSION

Machine learning algorithms show promising results for predicting 30-day mortality following CEA. These algorithms can be useful aids for counseling patients, assessing preoperative medical risks, and predicting survival after surgery.

Higher Surgeon Volume is Associated with Lower Odds of Complication Following TEVAR for Aortic Dissections

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to understand the impact of surgeon volume on outcomes of thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) in patients being treated for aortic dissection.

METHODS

Patients undergoing TEVAR from January 2014 - March 2021 in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database were analyzed. Patients with aortic dissection who underwent TEVAR were divided into quartiles based on the annual TEVAR volume of their vascular surgeon. The highest quartile, middle two quartiles, and lowest quartile were deemed high volume (HV), moderate volume (MV), and low volume (LV), respectively. Multivariable logistic regressions were performed to compare cohort outcomes in terms any postoperative complication, stroke, spinal cord ischemia, reintervention, and 30-day mortality. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to assess the hazard of overall postoperative mortality.

RESULTS

Amongst 1,217 patients undergoing TEVAR, 321, 621, and 275 were performed by HV, MV, and LV surgeons, respectively. HV performed >19 annual TEVARs, MV surgeons between 5 and 18, and LV surgeons ≤4. Adjusted odds of any postoperative complication revealed that HV and MV surgeons had lower odds of overall postoperative complications [(OR 0.58, (95% CI 0.30 - 0.85), p = 0.011) and (OR 0.60, (95% CI 0.38 - 0.87), p = 0.008)], respectively when compared to LV patients. HV had lower odds of respiratory complications than LV surgeons complications [(OR 0.42, (95% CI 0.17 - 0.93), p = 0.039)]. Adjusted analysis of outcomes including spinal cord ischemia, stroke, myocardial infarction, 30-day mortality, and overall mortality did not reveal statistically significant differences between cohorts.

CONCLUSION

Surgeon volume does not to impact 30-day mortality or long-term mortality after TEVAR for aortic dissection, but the odds of overall postoperative complications were lower for HV and MV surgeons when compared to LV surgeons.

Learning curve and proficiency metrics for transcarotid artery revascularization

BACKGROUND

When introduced to a new procedure, physicians improve their performance and reduce their procedural adverse event rates rapidly during the initial cases and then improvement slows, signaling that proficiency has been achieved. Determining when they have acquired proficiency has important implications for procedural innovation, education, credentialing, and patient safety. We analyzed the worldwide experience with transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR), a hybrid approach to carotid revascularization, to identify the (1) procedural performance measures associated with clinical and technical adverse events; (2) target levels of performance measures that minimize adverse event rates; and (3) number of TCAR cases needed to achieve the target levels for the performance measures.

METHODS

The patient, lesion, and physician characteristics were collected for each TCAR procedure performed by each physician worldwide in an international quality assurance database. Four procedural performance measures were recorded for each procedure: flow-reversal time, fluoroscopy time, contrast volume, and total skin-to-skin time. Composite clinical adverse events (ie, transient ischemic attack, stroke, myocardial infarction, death) and composite technical adverse events (ie, aborted procedure, conversion to surgery, bleeding, dissection, cranial nerve injury, device failure), occurring within 24 hours were also recorded. Correlations between each performance measure and the clinical and technical adverse event rates were computed. The inflection points in the performance measures were identified at which no further improvements occurred in the adverse event rates. Finally, the minimum number of TCAR cases required to achieve the target performance measure levels was computed.

RESULTS

A total of 18,240 procedures performed by 1273 physicians were analyzed. Of the 18,240 patients, 34.9% were women and 62.5% were asymptomatic. The flow-reversal time correlated with clinical adverse events adjusted for age, sex, and symptomatic status (R2 = 0.91; P < .0001) and adjusted technical adverse events (R2 = 0.86; P < .0001). The skin-to-skin time correlated with adjusted technical adverse events (R2 = 0.92; P < .0001). A reduction in flow-reversal times to <13.1 minutes and the skin-to-skin time to <81 minutes did not translate into further improvements in the adverse event rates. A minimum of 26 TCAR cases was required to achieve the target flow-reversal time, and a minimum of 15 cases was required to achieve the target skin-to-skin time.

CONCLUSIONS

The flow-reversal time and skin-to-skin time are appropriate performance measures for establishing the level of expertise of physicians as they acquire skills to perform TCAR. A target time of ≤13.1 minutes for flow-reversal and 81 minutes for skin-to-skin time minimized the adverse event rates. Familiarity with the steps involved in performing TCAR was achieved after ≥15 cases, and minimizing clinical adverse events occurred after ≥26 cases.

The Impact of Plastic Surgery Volume on Inpatient Burn Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Acute burn care involves multiple types of physicians. Plastic surgery offers the full spectrum of acute burn care and reconstructive surgery. The authors hypothesize that access to plastic surgery will be associated with improved inpatient outcomes in the treatment of acute burns.

METHODS

Acute burn encounters with known percentage total body surface area were extracted from the National Inpatient Sample from 2012 to 2014 based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition, codes. Plastic surgery volume per facility was determined based on procedure codes for flaps, breast reconstruction, and complex hand reconstruction. Outcomes included odds of receiving a flap, patient safety indicators, and mortality. Regression models included the following variables: age, percentage total body surface area, gender, inhalation injury, comorbidities, hospital size, and urban/teaching status of hospital.

RESULTS

The weighted sample included 99,510 burn admissions with a mean percentage total body surface area of 15.5 percent. The weighted median plastic surgery volume by facility was 245 cases per year. Compared with the lowest quartile, the upper three quartiles of plastic surgery volume were associated with increased likelihood of undergoing flap procedures (p < 0.03). The top quartile of plastic surgery volume was also associated with decreased odds of patient safety indicator events (p < 0.001). Plastic surgery facility volume was not significantly associated with a difference in the likelihood of inpatient death.

CONCLUSIONS

Burn encounters treated at high-volume plastic surgery facilities were more likely to undergo flap operations. High-volume plastic surgery centers were also associated with a lower likelihood of inpatient complications. Therefore, where feasible, acute burn patients should be triaged to high-volume centers.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Surgeon experience contributes to improved outcomes in pancreatoduodenectomies at high risk for fistula development

BACKGROUND

Pancreatoduodenectomies at high risk for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula are uncommon, yet intimidating, situations. In such scenarios, the impact of individual surgeon experience on outcomes is poorly understood.

METHODS

The fistula risk score was applied to identify high-risk patients (fistula risk score 7-10) from 7,706 pancreatoduodenectomies performed at 18 international institutions (2003-2020). For each case, surgeon pancreatoduodenectomy career volume and years of practice were linked to intraoperative fistula mitigation strategy adoption and outcomes. Consequently, best operative approaches for clinically relevant pancreatic fistula prevention and best performer profiles were identified through multivariable analysis models.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and thirty high-risk pancreatoduodenectomies, performed by 64 surgeons, displayed an overall clinically relevant pancreatic fistula rate of 33.7%. Clinically relevant pancreatic fistula rates decreased with escalating surgeon career pancreatoduodenectomy (-49.7%) and career length (-41.2%; both P < .001), as did transfusion and reoperation rates, postoperative morbidity index, and duration of stay. Great experience (≥400 pancreatoduodenectomies performed or ≥21-year-long career) was a significant predictor of clinically relevant pancreatic fistula prevention (odds ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.35-0.76) and was more often associated with pancreatojejunostomy reconstruction and prophylactic octreotide omission, which were both independently associated with clinically relevant pancreatic fistula reduction. A risk-adjusted performance analysis also correlated with experience. Moreover, minimizing blood loss (≤400 mL) significantly contributed to clinically relevant pancreatic fistula prevention (odds ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.22-0.74).

CONCLUSION

Surgeon experience is a key contributor to achieve better outcomes after high-risk pancreatoduodenectomy. Surgeons can improve their performance in these challenging situations by employing pancreatojejunostomy reconstruction, omitting prophylactic octreotide, and minimizing blood loss.

Carotid endarterectomy with concomitant distal endovascular intervention is associated with increased rates of stroke and death

OBJECTIVE

Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) with concomitant distal endovascular intervention (CEA+D) is infrequently necessary but has often been used as a salvage maneuver when complications occur during CEA. The present study aimed to determine whether preoperative risk factors associated with CEA requiring CEA+D exist and to evaluate the outcomes compared with isolated CEA.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative CEA registry was used to identify patients who had undergone CEA or CEA+D for asymptomatic or symptomatic carotid stenosis from 2013 to 2019. Data regarding distal intervention included whether angioplasty or stenting of the distal internal carotid artery (ICA) and/or bifurcation had been required. However, information regarding the indication or whether the intervention had been planned was not included. The χ² test and analysis of variance were used to evaluate the categorical and continuous perioperative variables. Variables with P < .20 on univariate analysis were included in the multivariable analysis to assess for preoperative predictors of the need for CEA+D and the association with perioperative stroke.

RESULTS

From 2013 to 2019, 327 CEA+D cases were identified and compared with 105,192 isolated CEA cases. The CEA+D patients were more likely to have undergone previous ipsilateral CEA (CEA, 1.8%; CEA+D, 4.9%; P < .01) and contralateral ICA occlusion (CEA, 4.6%; CEA+D, 11.0%; P < .01) but were less likely to have had ipsilateral stenosis ≥70% (CEA, 88.3%; CEA+D, 80.6%; P < .01). The preoperative factors associated with the need for CEA+D on multivariable analysis included previous peripheral vascular intervention, American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥4, contralateral ICA occlusion, low-volume surgeon, and previous ipsilateral CEA. CEA+D was associated with significantly increased rates of stroke in both asymptomatic (CEA+D, 3.9%; CEA, 0.9%; P < .01) and symptomatic (CEA+D, 9.4%; CEA, 1.9%; P < .01) patients. CEA+D was associated with decreased rates of 30-day survival in both asymptomatic (CEA+D, 98.3%; CEA, 99.4%; P = .02) and symptomatic (CEA+D, 94.8%; CEA, 99.1%; P < .01) cohorts. On multivariable analysis, CEA+D remained significantly associated with stroke (odds ratio, 3.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.80-5.60; P < .01). Other factors significantly associated with perioperative stroke included procedure length >135 minutes, diabetes, hypertension, shunt for indication, symptomatic status, previous ipsilateral CEA, contralateral ICA occlusion, urgent or emergent procedure, intravenous medications for hemodynamic instability, and re-exploration at the initial operation.

CONCLUSIONS

Although markers of more significant cardiovascular disease burden were associated with the use of CEA+D, their power to predict CEA+D use was limited. In cases in which CEA+D was used, CEA+D was associated with significantly greater rates of perioperative stroke and mortality compared with isolated CEA for both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients, which could be useful for framing the expected outcomes after these procedures.