Temporal trends in safety of carotid endarterectomy in asymptomatic patients: systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objective
To systematically review temporal changes in perioperative safety of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in asymptomatic individuals in trial and registry studies.Methods
The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched using the terms "carotid" and "endarterectomy" and "asymptomatic" from 1947 to August 23, 2014. Articles dealing with 50%-99% stenosis in asymptomatic individuals were included and low-volume studies were excluded. The primary endpoint was 30-day stroke or death and the secondary endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality. Statistical analysis was performed using random-effects meta-regression for registry data and for trial data graphical interpretation alone was used.Results
Six trials (n = 4,431 procedures) and 47 community registries (n = 204,622 procedures) reported data between 1983 and 2013. Registry data showed a significant decrease in postoperative stroke or death incidence over the period 1991-2010, equivalent to a 6% average proportional annual reduction (95% credible interval [CrI] 4%-7%; p < 0.001). Considering postoperative all-cause mortality, registry data showed a significant 5% average proportional annual reduction (95% CrI 3%-9%; p < 0.001). Trial data showed a similar visual trend.Conclusions
CEA is safer than ever before and high-volume registry results closely mirror the results of trials. New benchmarks for CEA are a stroke or death risk of 1.2% and a mortality risk of 0.4%. This information will prove useful for quality improvement programs, for health care funders, and for those re-examining the long-term benefits of asymptomatic revascularization in future trials.
SUBMITTER: Munster AB
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4520814 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Statins are neuroprotective in a variety of experimental models of cerebral injury. We sought to determine whether patients taking statins before asymptomatic carotid endarterectomy exhibit a lower incidence of neurological injury (clinical stroke and cognitive dysfunction).A total of 328 patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis scheduled for elective carotid endarterectomy consented to participate in this observational study of perioperative neurological injury.Patients taking statins had a lower incidence of clinical stroke (0.0% vs 3.1%; P=0.02) and cognitive dysfunction (11.0% vs 20.2%; P=0.03). In a multivariate regression model, statin use was significantly associated with decreased odds of cognitive dysfunction (odds ratio, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.27-0.96]; P=0.04).Preoperative statin use was associated with less neurological injury after asymptomatic carotid endarterectomy. These observations suggest that it may be possible to further reduce the perioperative morbidity of carotid endarterectomy. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00597883.
| S-EPMC3609915 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) among asymptomatic patients involves a trade-off between a higher short-term perioperative risk in exchange for a lower long-term risk of stroke. The clinical benefit observed in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) may not extend to real-world practice. Objective:To examine whether early intervention (CEA) was superior to initial medical therapy in real-world practice in preventing fatal and nonfatal strokes among patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Design, Setting, and Participants:This comparative effectiveness study was conducted from August 28, 2018, to March 2, 2020, using the Corporate Data Warehouse, Suicide Data Repository, and other databases of the US Department of Veterans Affairs. Data analyzed were those of veterans of the US Armed Forces aged 65 years or older who received carotid imaging between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2009. Patients without a carotid imaging report, those with carotid stenosis of less than 50% or hemodynamically insignificant stenosis, and those with a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack in the 6 months before index imaging were excluded. A cohort of patients who received initial medical therapy and a cohort of similar patients who received CEA were constructed and followed up for 5 years. The target trial method was used to compute weighted Kaplan-Meier curves and estimate the risk of fatal and nonfatal strokes in each cohort in the pragmatic sample across 5 years of follow-up. This analysis was repeated after restricting the sample to patients who met RCT inclusion criteria. Cumulative incidence functions for fatal and nonfatal strokes were estimated, accounting for nonstroke deaths as competing risks in both the pragmatic and RCT-like samples. Exposures:Receipt of CEA vs initial medical therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures:Fatal and nonfatal strokes. Results:Of the total 5221 patients, 2712 (51.9%; mean [SD] age, 73.6 [6.0] years; 2678 men [98.8%]) received CEA and 2509 (48.1%; mean [SD] age, 73.6 [6.0] years; 2479 men [98.8%]) received initial medical therapy within 1 year after the index carotid imaging. The observed rate of stroke or death (perioperative complications) within 30 days in the CEA cohort was 2.5% (95% CI, 2.0%-3.1%). The 5-year risk of fatal and nonfatal strokes was lower among patients randomized to CEA compared with patients randomized to initial medical therapy (5.6% vs 7.8%; risk difference, -2.3%; 95% CI, -4.0% to -0.3%). In an analysis that incorporated the competing risk of death, the risk difference between the 2 cohorts was lower and not statistically significant (risk difference, -0.8%; 95% CI, -2.1% to 0.5%). Among patients who met RCT inclusion criteria, the 5-year risk of fatal and nonfatal strokes was 5.5% (95% CI, 4.5%-6.5%) among patients randomized to CEA and was 7.6% (95% CI, 5.7%-9.5%) among those randomized to initial medical therapy (risk difference, -2.1%; 95% CI, -4.4% to -0.2%). Accounting for competing risks resulted in a risk difference of -0.9% (95% CI, -2.9% to 0.7%) that was not statistically significant. Conclusions and Relevance:This study found that the absolute reduction in the risk of fatal and nonfatal strokes associated with early CEA was less than half the risk difference in trials from 20 years ago and was no longer statistically significant when the competing risk of nonstroke deaths was accounted for in the analysis. Given the nonnegligible perioperative 30-day risks and the improvements in stroke prevention, medical therapy may be an acceptable therapeutic strategy.
| S-EPMC7265126 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceRandomized clinical trials have demonstrated that patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis are eligible for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) if the 30-day surgical complication rate is less than 3% and the patient's life expectancy is at least 5 years.ObjectiveTo develop a risk prediction tool to improve patient selection for CEA among patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis.Design, setting, and participantsIn this cohort study, veterans 65 years and older who received both carotid imaging and CEA in the Veterans Administration between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2009 (n = 2325) were followed up for 5 years. Data were analyzed from January 2005 to December 2015. A risk prediction tool (the Carotid Mortality Index [CMI]) based on 23 candidate variables identified in the literature was developed using Veterans Administration and Medicare data. A simpler model based on the number of 4 key comorbidities that were prevalent and strongly associated with 5-year mortality was also developed (any cancer in the past 5 years, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, and chronic kidney disease [the 4C model]). Model performance was assessed using measures of discrimination (eg, area under the curve [AUC]) and calibration. Internal validation was performed by correcting for optimism using 500 bootstrapped samples.Main outcome and measureFive-year mortality.ResultsAmong 2325 veterans, the mean (SD) age was 73.74 (5.92) years. The cohort was predominantly male (98.8%) and of white race/ethnicity (94.4%). Overall, 29.5% (n = 687) of patients died within 5 years of CEA. On the basis of a backward selection algorithm, 9 patient characteristics were selected (age, chronic kidney disease, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, any cancer diagnosis in the past 5 years, congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, remote stroke or transient ischemic attack, and body mass index) for the final logistic model, which yielded an optimism-corrected AUC of 0.687 for the CMI. The 4C model had slightly worse discrimination (AUC, 0.657) compared with the CMI model; however, the calibration curve was similar to the full model in most of the range of predicted probabilities.Conclusions and relevanceAccording to results of this study, use of the CMI or the simpler 4C model may improve patient selection for CEA among patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis.
| S-EPMC6484803 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCEA is associated with peri-operative risk of brain ischemia, due both to emboli production caused by manipulation of the plaque and to potentially noxious reduction of cerebral blood flow by carotid clamping. Mild hypothermia (34-35°C) is probably the most effective approach to protect brain from ischemic insult. It is therefore a substantial hypothesis that hypothermia lowers the risk of ischemic brain damage potentially associated with CEA. Purpose of the study is to test whether systemic endovascular cooling to a target of 34.5-35°C, initiated before and maintained during CEA, is feasible and safe.MethodsThe study was carried out in 7 consecutive patients referred to the Vascular Surgery Unit and judged eligible for CEA. Cooling was initiated 60-90 min before CEA, by endovascular approach (Zoll system). The target temperature was maintained during CEA, followed by passive, controlled rewarming (0.4°C/h). The whole procedure was carried out under anesthesia.ResultsAll the patients enrolled had no adverse events. Two patients exhibited a transient bradycardia (heart rate 30 beats/min). There were no significant differences in the clinical status, laboratory and physiological data measured before and after CEA.ConclusionsSystemic cooling to 34.5-35.0°C, initiated before and maintained during carotid clamping, is feasible and safe.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02629653.
| S-EPMC4825931 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAmong asymptomatic patients with severe carotid artery stenosis but no recent stroke or transient cerebral ischaemia, either carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can restore patency and reduce long-term stroke risks. However, from recent national registry data, each option causes about 1% procedural risk of disabling stroke or death. Comparison of their long-term protective effects requires large-scale randomised evidence.MethodsACST-2 is an international multicentre randomised trial of CAS versus CEA among asymptomatic patients with severe stenosis thought to require intervention, interpreted with all other relevant trials. Patients were eligible if they had severe unilateral or bilateral carotid artery stenosis and both doctor and patient agreed that a carotid procedure should be undertaken, but they were substantially uncertain which one to choose. Patients were randomly allocated to CAS or CEA and followed up at 1 month and then annually, for a mean 5 years. Procedural events were those within 30 days of the intervention. Intention-to-treat analyses are provided. Analyses including procedural hazards use tabular methods. Analyses and meta-analyses of non-procedural strokes use Kaplan-Meier and log-rank methods. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN21144362.FindingsBetween Jan 15, 2008, and Dec 31, 2020, 3625 patients in 130 centres were randomly allocated, 1811 to CAS and 1814 to CEA, with good compliance, good medical therapy and a mean 5 years of follow-up. Overall, 1% had disabling stroke or death procedurally (15 allocated to CAS and 18 to CEA) and 2% had non-disabling procedural stroke (48 allocated to CAS and 29 to CEA). Kaplan-Meier estimates of 5-year non-procedural stroke were 2·5% in each group for fatal or disabling stroke, and 5·3% with CAS versus 4·5% with CEA for any stroke (rate ratio [RR] 1·16, 95% CI 0·86-1·57; p=0·33). Combining RRs for any non-procedural stroke in all CAS versus CEA trials, the RR was similar in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients (overall RR 1·11, 95% CI 0·91-1·32; p=0·21).InterpretationSerious complications are similarly uncommon after competent CAS and CEA, and the long-term effects of these two carotid artery procedures on fatal or disabling stroke are comparable.FundingUK Medical Research Council and Health Technology Assessment Programme.
| S-EPMC8473558 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionIn recent years, the transcarotid artery revascularisation (TCAR) with flow reversal technique has been developed to treat carotid artery stenosis. The superiority of TCAR over transfemoral carotid artery stenting has been demonstrated. However, the safety and efficacy of TCAR and carotid endarterectomy remain unclear. This study aims to introduce a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the morbidity and mortality rates between TCAR and carotid endarterectomy in the treatment of atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis.Methods and analysisThis protocol was drafted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols statement. Herein, major databases will be searched, including Medline, Web of Science, Embase and the Cochrane Library, and randomised controlled trials and high-quality observational studies will be included. We will screen all studies published from January 2000 to March 2021. Bias risk will be evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration criteria or Methodological Index for Non-randomised Studies criteria, depending on the study type. Two reviewers will select eligible studies and extract the data independently. The primary outcome will include stroke or death during the perioperative period and follow-up. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be performed to explore any potential sources of heterogeneity. Specific results will be described in a narrative form when available eligible studies are insufficient for meta-analysis. Publication bias will be assessed using a funnel plot.Ethics and disseminationThis study will summarise and analyse the existing literature; hence, ethics approval will not be required. The final results may be published at a relevant academic conference or in a journal.Prospero registration numberCRD42020178691.
| S-EPMC8098965 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionTraditional carotid endarterectomy is considered to be the standard technique for prevention of a new stroke in patients with a symptomatic carotid stenosis. Use of plexus anesthesia or general anesthesia in traditional carotid endarterectomy is, to date, not unequivocally proven to be superior to one other. A systematic review was needed for evaluation of benefits and harms to determine which technique, plexus anesthesia or general anesthesia is more effective for traditional carotid endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis.MethodsThe review was conducted according to our protocol following the recommendations of Cochrane and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Searches were updated on the October 1, 2020. We did not find any randomized clinical trial comparing plexus anesthesia and general anesthesia in carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty matching our protocol criteria in patients with a symptomatic and significant (≥50%) carotid stenosis.ConclusionsBased on the current, high risk of bias evidence, we concluded there is a need for new randomized clinical trials with overall low risk of bias comparing plexus anesthesia with general anesthesia in carotid endarterectomy with patch closure of the arterial wall in patients with a symptomatic and significant (≥50%) stenosis of the internal carotid artery.Protocol unique identification number (UIN): CRD42019139913, (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=139913).
| S-EPMC8094902 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and purposeCarotid endarterectomy (CEA) with patch angioplasty produces greater results than with primary closure; however, there remains uncertainty on the optimal patch material in CEA. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed to evaluate the effect of angioplasty using venous patch versus synthetic patch material, and Dacron patch versus polytetrafluoroethelene (PTFE) patch material during CEA.MethodsA multiple electronic health database screening was performed including the Cochrane library, Pubmed, Ovid, EMBASE and Google Scholar on all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before November 2012 that compared the outcomes of patients undergoing CEA with venous patch versus synthetic patch. RCTs were included if they compared carotid patch angioplasty with autologus venous patch versus synthetic patch material, or compared one type of synthetic patch with another.ResultsThirteen RCTs were identified. Ten trials, involving 1946 CEAs, compared venous patch with synthetic patch materials. Two trials, involving 400 CEAs in 380 patients, compared Dacron patch with PTFE patch. The hemostasis time in CEA with PTFE patch was significantly longer than with venous patch (P<0.0001), and longer than with Dacron patch (P<0.0001). There was no significant difference of mortality rate, stroke rate, restenosis, and operative time in CEA with venous patch versus synthetic patch material, or in CEA with Dacron patch versus PTFE patch (all P>0.05). One RCT of 95 CEAs in 92 patients compared bovine pericardium with Dacron patch, and demonstrated a statistically significant decrease in intraoperative suture line bleeding with bovine pericardium compared with Dacron patch (P<0.001).ConclusionsThe hemostasis time in CEA with PTFE patch was longer than with venous patch or Dacron patch. The overall perioperative and long-term mortality rate, stroke rate, restenosis, and operative time were similar when using venous patch versus synthetic patch material or Dacron patch versus PTFE patch material during CEA. More data are required to clarify differences between different patch materials.
| S-EPMC3561447 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDeclining perioperative stroke and death rates over the past 3 decades have been paralleled by an increasing use of intraoperative completion studies (ICS) following carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Techniques applied include angiography, intraoperative duplex ultrasound (IDUS), flowmetry, and angioscopy. This systematic review and meta-analysis is aiming on providing an overview of techniques and corresponding outcomes.MethodsA PubMed based systematic literature review comprising the years 1980 through 2020 was performed using predefined keywords to identify articles on different ICS techniques. Pooled analyses and meta-analyses estimating risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were performed to compare outcomes of different ICS modes to nonapplication of any ICS. I2 values were assessed to quantify study heterogeneities.ResultsIdentification of 34 studies including patients undergoing CEA with angiography (n=53,218), IDUS (n=20,030), flowmetry (n=16,812), and angioscopy (n=2,291). Corresponding rates of perioperative stroke were 1.5%, 1.8%, 3.6%, and 1.5%, perioperative stroke or death occurred in 1.7%, 1.9%, 2.2%, and 2.0%. Intraoperative surgical revision rates were 6.2%, 5.9%, and 7.9% after CEA with angiography, IDUS, and angioscopy, respectively. Compared to nonapplication of any ICS, the pooled analysis revealed angiography to be significantly associated with lower rates of stroke (RR 0.47; 95% CI, 0.36-0.62; P<0.0001) and stroke or death (RR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.70-0.83; P<0.0001). IDUS was significantly associated with lower rates of stroke (RR 0.56; 95% CI, 0.43-0.73; P<0.0001) and stroke or death (RR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74-0.93; P=0.0018), whereas angioscopy showed a significant association with a lower stroke rate (RR 0.48; 95% CI, 0.033-0.68; P=0.0001), but no effect on the combined stroke or death rate. Angioscopy was associated with a higher intraoperative revision rate compared to angiography (RR 1.29; 95% CI, 1.07-1.54; P=0.006). The meta-analyses confirmed lower perioperative stroke or death rates for angiography (RR 0.83; 95% CI, 0.76-0.91) and IDUS (RR 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.98) compared to non-application of any ICS, whereas flowmetry showed no significant association.ConclusionsThis study represents the first systematic literature review and meta-analysis on usage of ICSs in CEA. Data strongly indicate a significant beneficial effect of angiography, IDUS, and angioscopy on perioperative CEA outcomes. Any carotid surgeon should consider implementation of ICSs in his routine armamentarium.
| S-EPMC8350645 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCarotid endarterectomy (CEA) for asymptomatic patients with limited life expectancy may not be beneficial or cost-effective. The purpose of this study was to examine relationships among survival, outcomes, and costs within 2 years following CEA among asymptomatic patients.MethodsProspectively collected data from 3097 patients undergoing CEA for asymptomatic disease from Vascular Quality Initiative VQI registry were linked to Medicare. Models were used to identify predictors of 2-year mortality following CEA. Patients were classified as low, medium, or high risk of death based on this model. Next, we examined costs related to cerebrovascular care, occurrence of stroke, rehospitalization, and reintervention within 2 years following CEA across risk strata.ResultsOverall, 2-year mortality was 6.7%. Age, diabetes, smoking, congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, renal insufficiency, absence of statin use, and contralateral internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis were independently associated with a higher risk of death following CEA. In-hospital costs averaged $7500 among patients defined as low risk for death, and exceeded $10,800 among high risk patients. Although long-term costs related to cerebrovascular disease were 2 times higher in patients deemed high risk for death compared with low risk patents ($17,800 vs. $8800, P = 0.001), high risk of death was not independently associated with a high probability of high cost. Predictors of high cost at 2 years were severe contralateral ICA stenosis, dialysis dependence, and American Society for Anesthesia Class 4. Both statin use and CHF were protective of high cost.ConclusionsGreater than 90% of patients undergoing CEA live long enough to realize the benefits of their procedure. Moreover, the long-term costs are supported by the effectiveness of this procedure at all levels of patient risk.
| S-EPMC6615062 | biostudies-literature