Dataset Information

Association of Adoption of Transcarotid Artery Revascularization With Center-Level Perioperative Outcomes.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) may serve as a safer alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for certain patients with carotid artery stenosis.

Objective

To determine the center-level association of TCAR adoption with overall perioperative outcomes for TCAR and CEA combined at centers performing both procedures.

Design, setting, and participants

This comparative-effectiveness research was conducted with a difference-in-difference analysis using retrospective data from 2015 to 2019 from the Vascular Quality Initiative registry, a consortium of more than 400 centers in North America. Included patients underwent TCAR or CEA for carotid artery stenosis. Patients who underwent transfemoral carotid stenting were excluded. Data were analyzed from December 2019 through August 2020.

Exposures

Center-level adoption of TCAR vs not.

Main outcomes and measures

The rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), a composite of in-hospital stroke, myocardial infarction, or death at 30 days, was measured.

Results

Among 86?027 patients who underwent revascularization for carotid artery stenosis, 7664 patients (8.9%) underwent TCAR (mean [SD] age, 73.1 [9.6] years; 2788 [36.4%] women; 6938 White patients [90.6%]; and 3741 patients with symptoms [48.8%]) and 78?363 patients (91.1%) underwent CEA (mean [SD] age, 70.6 [9.2] years; 30?928 [39.5%] women; 70?663 White patients [90.2%]; and 37?883 patients with symptoms [48.3%]). The number of centers performing both TCAR and CEA increased from 15 centers in 2015 to 247 centers in 2019, a more than 16-fold increase. The proportion of all carotid procedures that were TCARs increased from 90 of 12?276 (0.7%) in 2015 to 2718 of 15?956 (17.0%) in 2019, a 24-fold increase. Overall, the crude rate of MACE was similar for TCAR and CEA (178 patients [2.3%] after TCAR vs 1842 patients [2.4%] after CEA; P?=?.91). However, the rate of MACE over time decreased for CEA (406 of 16?404 patients [2.5%] in 2015 vs 189 of 10?097 patients [1.9%] in 2019; P for trend?Conclusions and relevanceThis comparative-effectiveness study of a cohort of patients who underwent TCAR or CEA found that availability of TCAR at a hospital was associated with a decrease in the likelihood of perioperative MACE after carotid revascularization.

SUBMITTER: Columbo JA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7900862 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association of Adoption of Transcarotid Artery Revascularization With Center-Level Perioperative Outcomes.

Columbo Jesse A JA Martinez-Camblor Pablo P O'Malley A James AJ Stone David H DH Kashyap Vikram S VS Powell Richard J RJ Schermerhorn Marc L ML Malas Mahmoud M Nolan Brian W BW Goodney Philip P PP

JAMA network open 20210201 2

<h4>Importance</h4>Transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) may serve as a safer alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for certain patients with carotid artery stenosis.<h4>Objective</h4>To determine the center-level association of TCAR adoption with overall perioperative outcomes for TCAR and CEA combined at centers performing both procedures.<h4>Design, setting, and participants</h4>This comparative-effectiveness research was conducted with a difference-in-difference analysis using r ...[more]

PMID: 33616666

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivePrevious studies on carotid endarterectomy and transfemoral carotid artery stenting demonstrated that perioperative outcomes differed according to preoperative neurologic injury severity, but this has not been assessed in transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR). In this study, we examined contemporary perioperative outcomes in patients who underwent TCAR stratified by specific preprocedural symptom status.MethodsPatients who underwent TCAR between 2016 and 2021 in the Vascular Quality Initiative were included. We stratified patients into the following groups based on preprocedural symptoms: asymptomatic, recent (symptoms occurring <180 days before TCAR) ocular transient ischemic attack (TIA), recent hemispheric TIA, recent stroke, or formerly symptomatic (symptoms occurring >180 days before TCAR). First, we used trend tests to assess outcomes in asymptomatic patients versus those with an increasing severity of recent neurologic injury (recent ocular TIA vs recent hemispheric TIA vs recent stroke). Then, we compared outcomes between asymptomatic and formerly symptomatic patients. Our primary outcome was in-hospital stroke/death rates. Multivariable logistic regression was used to adjust for demographics and comorbidities across groups.ResultsWe identified 18,477 patients undergoing TCAR, of whom 62.0% were asymptomatic, 3.2% had a recent ocular TIA, 7.6a % had recent hemispheric TIA, 18.0% had a recent stroke, and 9.2% were formerly symptomatic. In patients with recent symptoms, we observed higher rates of stroke/death with increasing neurologic injury severity: asymptomatic 1.1% versus recent ocular TIA 0.8% versus recent hemispheric TIA 2.1% versus recent stroke 3.1% (Ptrend < .01). In formerly symptomatic patients, the rate of stroke/death was higher compared with asymptomatic patients, but this difference was not statistically significant (1.7% vs 1.1%; P = .06). After risk adjustment, compared with asymptomatic patients, there was a higher odds of stroke/death in patients with a recent stroke (odds ratio [OR], 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-3.7; P < .01), a recent hemispheric TIA (OR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.3-3.0; P < .01), and former symptoms (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.5; P = .02), but there was no difference in stroke/death rates in patients with a recent ocular TIA (OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.4-2.2; P = .78).ConclusionsAfter TCAR, compared with asymptomatic status, a recent stroke and a recent hemispheric TIA were associated with higher stroke/death rates, whereas a recent ocular TIA was associated with similar stroke/death rates. In addition, a formerly symptomatic status was associated with higher stroke/death rates compared with an asymptomatic status. Overall, our findings suggest that classifying patients undergoing TCAR as symptomatic versus asymptomatic may be an oversimplification and that patients' specific preoperative neurologic symptoms should instead be used in risk assessment and outcome reporting for TCAR.

Project description:ObjectiveThe current recommendations are to perform carotid endarterectomy within 2 weeks of symptoms for maximum long-term stroke prevention, although urgent carotid endarterectomy within 48 hours has been associated with increased perioperative stroke. With the development and rapid adoption of transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR), we decided to study the effect of timing on the outcomes after TCAR.MethodsThe Vascular Quality Initiative database was searched for symptomatic patients who had undergone TCAR from September 2016 to November 2019. These patients were stratified by the interval to TCAR after symptom onset: urgent, within 48 hours; early, 3 to 14 days; and late, >14 days. The primary outcome was the in-hospital rate of combined stroke and death (stroke/death), evaluated using logistic regression analysis. The secondary outcome was the 1-year rate of recurrent ipsilateral stroke and mortality, evaluated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.ResultsA total of 2608 symptomatic patients who had undergone TCAR were included. The timing was urgent for 144 patients (5.52%), early for 928 patients (35.58%), and late for 1536 patients (58.90%). Patients undergoing urgent intervention had an increased risk of in-hospital stroke/death, which was driven primarily by an increased risk of stroke. No differences were seen for in-hospital death. On adjusted analysis, urgent intervention resulted in a threefold increased risk of stroke (odds ratio [OR], 2.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-6.2; P = .01) and a threefold increased risk of stroke/death (OR, 2.9; 95% CI, 1.3-6.4; P = .01) compared with late intervention. Patients undergoing early intervention had comparable risks of stroke (OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.7-2.3; P = .40) and stroke/death (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.7-2.1; P = .48) compared with late intervention. On subset analysis, the type of presenting symptoms was an effect modifier. Patients presenting with stroke and those presenting with transient ischemic attack or amaurosis fugax both had an increased risk of stroke/death when undergoing urgent compared with late TCAR (OR, 2.7; 95% CI, 1.1-6.6; P = .04; and OR, 4.1; 95% CI, 1.1-15.0; P = .03, respectively). However only patients presenting with transient ischemic attack or amaurosis fugax had experienced an increased risk of stroke with urgent compared with late TCAR (OR, 5.0; 95% CI, 1.4-17.5; P < .01). At 1 year of follow-up, no differences were seen in the incidence of recurrent ipsilateral stroke (urgent, 0.7%; early, 0.2%; late, 0.1%; P = .13) or postdischarge mortality (urgent, 0.7%; early, 1.6%; late, 1.8%; P = .71).ConclusionsWe found that TCAR had a reduced incidence of stroke when performed 48 hours after symptom onset. Urgent TCAR within 48 hours of the onset of stroke was associated with a threefold increased risk of in-hospital stroke/death, with no added benefit for ≤1 year after intervention. Further studies are needed on long-term outcomes of TCAR stratified by the timing of the procedure.

Project description:BackgroundThere is a paucity of data examining the impact of advancing chronic kidney disease stages on outcomes following revascularization for acute limb ischemia. The present study examined the association of chronic kidney disease with in-hospital mortality, amputation, and resource utilization following revascularization for acute limb ischemia using a nationally representative cohort.MethodsThe 2016-2018 National Inpatient Sample was queried to identify all adult hospitalizations with lower extremity acute limb ischemia requiring surgical and/or endovascular interventions. Patients were grouped according to the presence of chronic kidney disease and its severity: no chronic kidney disease, chronic kidney disease 1-3 (chronic kidney disease stages 1 through 3), chronic kidney disease 4-5 (chronic kidney disease stages 4 through 5), and end-stage renal disease. Multivariable logistic and linear models were used to evaluate association of chronic kidney disease stage with outcomes of interest.ResultsOf an estimated 82,610 patients meeting study criteria, 14.8% had chronic kidney disease (chronic kidney disease 1-3: 63.4%, chronic kidney disease 4-5: 12.1%, end-stage renal disease: 24.5%). Compared to those with chronic kidney disease, chronic kidney disease patients were on average older, were more frequently female, and had a higher median Elixhauser Comorbidity Index. Increasing severity of chronic kidney disease was associated with a stepwise increase in unadjusted mortality rates (4.7% in no chronic kidney disease to 12.6% in end-stage renal disease, P < .001). Following risk adjustment, only end-stage renal disease was associated with increased odds of mortality (adjusted odds ratio 3.10, 95% confidence interval 2.28-4.22) and limb amputation (adjusted odds ratio 1.99, 95% confidence interval 1.59-2.48) compared to patients with no chronic kidney disease. Similarly, advancing chronic kidney disease stage conferred increased odds of prolonged length of stay and greater hospitalization costs.ConclusionAdvanced renal dysfunction demonstrated inferior perioperative outcomes and greater health care expenditures in the study population. These findings imply that quality improvement efforts in acute limb ischemia revascularization should target patients with chronic kidney disease 4-5 and end-stage renal disease.

Project description:Hypothermia due to anaesthetic-induced impairment of thermoregulatory control and exposure to a cool environment is common in surgical patients. Peripheral vasodilation due to neuroaxial blockade may aggravate hypothermia. There is few data on perioperative hypothermia in patients undergoing thoracic surgery under combined general and regional anesthesia. We reviewed all thoracic surgical patients between 2006 and 2011 to determine the incidence and extent of hypothermia with or without an epidural anesthesia and evaluated its effect.Around 339 patients underwent lung resection procedures with intraoperative forced-air warming: 197 with general and epidural anesthesia (GA?+?EPI), 199 with general anesthesia alone (GA). Statistical analyses were performed to determine the association between hypothermia (T?<?36°C) and transfusion requirements, length of stay (LOS) in the intensive care unit (ICU), hospital LOS, and in hospital mortality.The overall incidence of hypothermia was 64.3%. Multivariate regression analysis revealed three significant risk factors for the development of hypothermia: long induction time (P?=?.011), small body surface area (P?=?.003), and application of more fluid intraoperatively (P?<?.001). Factors determining the extent of hypothermia were: receiving an open thoracotomy (P?=?.009), placement and use of an epidural catheter (P?=?.002), and a lower body mass index (BMI) (P?<?.001). Additional epidural anesthesia reduced core temperature by 0.26°C (95% CI -0.414 to -0.095°C, P?<?.05). There was no difference in transfusion requirements, ICU LOS or mortality between both groups. Hospital LOS was longer in patients with hypothermia.More than half of all thoracic patients suffered from hypothermia. A long induction time, small body surface area, and large intraoperative fluid application were independent risk factors for the development of perioperative hypothermia. Additional epidural anesthesia to general anesthesia did not increase the incidence of hypothermia but decreased body core temperature to an-albeit not clinically significant-degree. Patients scheduled for thoracic surgery will probably benefit from an additional period of prewarming prior to induction to reduce the high incidence of perioperative hypothermia.

Project description:BackgroundAfter the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services modified reimbursement rates for outpatient peripheral vascular intervention in 2008 with the intent of improving access to care, providers began to increasingly perform peripheral vascular interventions in privately owned office-based clinics. Little is known about the characteristics of patients treated in this setting and their long-term outcomes as compared with those treated in hospital-based centers.MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, Medicare beneficiaries ≥66 years undergoing outpatient femoropopliteal peripheral vascular interventions in office-based clinics and hospital-based centers from 2015 to 2017 were identified. Sociodemographics, comorbidities, and institutional characteristics were compared across sites. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the adjusted associations between practice site location and outcomes. The primary outcome was the composite of major amputation or death analyzed through the end of follow-up.ResultsAmong 134 869 patients, 29.9% were treated in office-based clinics and 70.1% in hospital-based centers. Patients treated in office-based clinics were more often Black (16.9% versus 11.9%), dually enrolled in Medicaid (26.3% versus 19.6%), and residents of lower-resourced regions (32.6% versus 25.6%). Over a median follow-up time of 800 days (interquartile range, 531-1119 days), patients treated in office-based clinics had reduced risks of major amputation or death compared with outpatients treated in hospital-based centers (hazard ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.89-0.95]). They also had lower adjusted all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.90-0.96]), major lower extremity amputation (hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% CI, 0.79-0.89]), and all-cause hospitalization (hazard ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.84-0.88]). These findings persisted after stratification by critical limb ischemia, race, dual enrollment, and regional socioeconomic status, as well as among operators treating patients in both clinical settings.ConclusionsIn this large nationwide analysis of Medicare beneficiaries, office-based clinics treated a more socioeconomically disadvantaged population compared with hospital-based centers. Long-term outcomes were comparable between locations. As such, these clinics appear to be selecting lower-risk patients for outpatient peripheral vascular interventions, although there remains the possibility of unmeasured confounding.

Project description:ObjectiveAlthough an increasing number of patients with peripheral arterial disease undergo multiple revascularization procedures, the effect of prior interventions on outcomes remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate perioperative outcomes of bypass surgery in patients with and those without prior ipsilateral treatment.MethodsPatients undergoing nonemergent infrainguinal bypass between 2011 and 2014 were identified in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Targeted Vascular module. After stratification by symptom status (chronic limb-threatening ischemia [CLTI] and claudication), patients undergoing primary bypass were compared with those undergoing secondary bypass. Within the secondary bypass group, further analysis compared prior bypass with prior endovascular intervention. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to establish the independent association between prior ipsilateral procedure and perioperative outcomes.ResultsA total of 7302 patients were identified, of which 4540 (62%) underwent primary bypass (68% for CLTI), 1536 (21%) underwent secondary bypass after a previous bypass (75% for CLTI), and 1226 (17%) underwent secondary bypass after a previous endovascular intervention (72% for CLTI). Prior revascularization on the same ipsilateral arteries was associated with increased 30-day major adverse limb event in patients with CLTI (9.8% vs 7.4%; odds ratio [OR], 1.4 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.1-1.7]) and claudication (5.2% vs 2.5%; OR, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.3-3.5]). Similarly, secondary bypass was an independent risk factor for 30-day major reintervention (CLTI: OR, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.1-1.8]; claudication: OR, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.3-3.5]), bleeding (CLTI: OR, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.2-1.6]; claudication: OR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.3-2.4]), and unplanned reoperation (CLTI: OR, 1.2 [95% CI, 1.0-1.4]; claudication: OR, 1.6 [95% CI, 1.1-2.1]), whereas major amputation was increased in CLTI patients only (OR, 1.3 [95% CI, 1.01-1.8]). Postoperative mortality was not significantly different in patients undergoing secondary compared with primary bypass (CLTI: 1.7% vs 2.2% [P = .22]; claudication: 0.4% vs 0.6% [P = .76]). Among secondary bypass patients with CLTI, those with prior bypass had higher 30-day reintervention rates (7.8% vs 4.9%; OR, 1.5 [95% CI, 1.0-2.2]) but fewer wound infections (7.3% vs 12%; OR, 0.6 [95% CI, 0.4-0.8]) compared with patients with prior endovascular intervention.ConclusionsPrior revascularization, in both patients with CLTI and patients with claudication, is associated with worse perioperative outcomes compared with primary bypass. Furthermore, prior endovascular intervention is associated with increased wound infections, whereas those with prior bypass had higher reintervention rates. The increasing prevalence of patients undergoing multiple interventions stresses the importance of the selection of patients for initial treatment and should be factored into subsequent revascularization options in an effort to decrease adverse events.

Project description:Objectives Transcarotid arterial revascularization (TCAR) is associated with a lower risk of stroke or death than transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TF-CAS). TCAR infers a lower risk of cranial nerve injury and a similar risk of myocardial infarction (MI) than carotid endarterectomy (CEA). There have been no comparative studies on the cost of TCAR, TF-CAS, and CEA, which may have important implications for institutional support for the new modality to address carotid artery stenosis. Our aim was to compare the estimated cost profiles of TCAR, TF-CAS, and CEA. Methods A review was performed on Medicare patients who underwent TCAR, TF-CAS, or CEA between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020. Demographics, comorbidities, operative details, and postoperative complications were reviewed. Acute stroke presentations and elective procedures were included. Cost data were obtained from the hospital's finance department. Quantitative variables were compared using analysis of variance, and categorical variables were compared using the chi-square analysis. Results In total, 21 TCAR, 97 TF-CAS, and 26 CEA patients were initially identified. After removing the non-Medicare patients, 17 TCAR, 57 TF-CAS, and 13 CEA patients were included in the analysis. In-hospital stroke, MI, and mortality included three deaths in TF-CAS patients. At 30 days, the stroke rates for TCAR, TF-CAS, and CEA groups were 0%, 1.8%, and 0%, respectively. The payments for TCAR, TF-CAS, and CEA were $15,400 ± 2,100, $23,400 ± 11,800 and $14,300 ± 5,700 (p=0.001), respectively. The estimated costs for TCAR, TF-CAS, and CEA were $10,500 ± 3,300, $13,800 ± 14,300, and $12,400 ± 6,000 (p=0.575), respectively. The profit margins for TCAR, TF-CAS, and CEA were $5,100 ± 3,100, $9,600 ± 12,100, and $1,900 ± 6,400 (p=0.032), respectively. There was no significant difference in American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) scores (p=0.635) or age (p=0.485) among the three groups. The length of hospital stay was not significantly different (p=0.107). The TF-CAS maintained the highest profit margin (p<0.001) when matched for the same diagnosis-related code (without complications or comorbidities). Urgency classification within the TF-CAS group included 45 elective, four urgent, and eight emergent cases. The profit margin was significantly higher for the elective group than for the emergent group (p=0.002) but not different for elective versus urgent (p=0.503) or urgent versus emergent (p=0.102). All patients who underwent TCAR and CEA were elective. Conclusion The hospital reimbursement and profit margins are higher for TF-CAS than for TCAR. With the increasing data now demonstrating similar outcomes with TF-CAS and CEA, further research is required to examine the long-term cost-effectiveness of TCAR and how this will compare to TF-CAS.

Dataset Information

Association of Adoption of Transcarotid Artery Revascularization With Center-Level Perioperative Outcomes.

Importance

Objective

Design, setting, and participants

Exposures

Main outcomes and measures

Results

Publications

Association of Adoption of Transcarotid Artery Revascularization With Center-Level Perioperative Outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets