Section of Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Interventions, New York Presbyterian-Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY.
Division of General Surgery, Rutgers-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ.
J Vasc Surg. 2021 Nov;74(5):1602-1608. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2021.05.028. Epub 2021 May 31.
Transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) has higher combined stroke and death rates in elderly patients with carotid artery stenosis compared with carotid endarterectomy (CEA). However, transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) may have similar outcomes to CEA. This study compared outcomes after TCARs relative to those after CEAs and TFCAS, focusing on elderly patients.
We included all patients with carotid artery stenosis and no prior endarterectomy or stenting who underwent either a CEA, TFCAS, or TCAR in the Vascular Quality Initiative from September 2016 (TCAR commercially available) to December 2019. We categorized patients into age decades: 60 to 69 years, 70 to 79 years, and 80 to 90 years. Outcomes included 30-day and 1-year composite rates of stroke or death. Cox proportional hazards models evaluated both outcomes after adjusting for patient demographics, clinical factors, symptomatology, hospital CEA volume, and clustering.
We identified 33,115 patients who underwent either a CEA, TFCAS, or TCAR for carotid artery stenosis (35% in their 60s, 44% in their 70s, and 21% in their 80s), where one-half (50%) were symptomatic. The majority of patients had CEAs (80%), followed by TFCAS (11%) and TCARs (9.1%). The overall rate of 30-day stroke/death was 1.5% and of 1-year stroke/death was 4.4%. Octogenarians had the highest 30-day and 1-year stroke/death rates relative to their peers (2.3% and 6.3%, respectively). Among all patients, the adjusted hazards of TCARs relative to CEAs was similar for 30-day stroke/death (hazard ratio [HR] 1.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-1.62) and slightly higher for 1-year stroke/death (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.02-1.76). Among octogenarians, however, the adjusted hazards of TCARs relative to CEAs was similar for both 30-day stroke/death (HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.59-2.13) and 1-year stroke/death (HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 0.85-1.94). TFCAS relative to CEAs had higher hazards of both 30-day stroke/death (HR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.10-2.89) and 1-year stroke/death (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 1.35-2.54) in octogenarians.
TCARs had similar outcomes relative to CEAs among octogenarians with respect to 30-day and 1-year rates of stroke/death. TCAR may serve as a promising less invasive treatment for carotid disease in older patients who are deemed high anatomic, surgical, or clinical risk for CEAs.
与颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)相比,经股动脉颈动脉支架置入术(TFCAS)在老年颈动脉狭窄患者中具有更高的联合卒中死亡率。然而,经颈动脉血运重建术(TCAR)可能与 CEA 具有相似的结果。本研究比较了 TCA 与 CEA 和 TFCAS 的治疗效果,重点关注老年患者。
我们纳入了 2016 年 9 月(TCAR 商业化)至 2019 年 12 月血管质量倡议期间接受 CEA、TFCAS 或 TCA 治疗的颈动脉狭窄且无颈动脉内膜切除术或支架置入史的所有患者。我们将患者分为年龄组:60-69 岁、70-79 岁和 80-90 岁。主要结局为 30 天和 1 年的卒中或死亡复合发生率。Cox 比例风险模型评估了调整患者人口统计学、临床因素、症状、医院 CEA 量和聚类后的两种结局。
我们确定了 33115 名接受 CEA、TFCAS 或 TCA 治疗颈动脉狭窄的患者(60 岁者占 35%,70 岁者占 44%,80 岁者占 21%),其中一半(50%)为有症状患者。大多数患者接受了 CEA(80%),其次是 TFCAS(11%)和 TCA(9.1%)。总的 30 天卒中/死亡率为 1.5%,1 年卒中/死亡率为 4.4%。与同龄人相比,八旬患者的 30 天和 1 年卒中/死亡率最高(分别为 2.3%和 6.3%)。在所有患者中,与 CEA 相比,TCAR 的 30 天卒中/死亡率调整后的危险比(HR)为 1.10(95%置信区间[CI],0.75-1.62),1 年卒中/死亡率略高(HR,1.34;95%CI,1.02-1.76)。然而,对于 80 岁以上的患者,与 CEA 相比,TCAR 的 30 天卒中/死亡率调整后的危险比(HR,1.12;95%CI,0.59-2.13)和 1 年卒中/死亡率调整后的危险比(HR,1.28;95%CI,0.85-1.94)相似。与 CEA 相比,TFCAS 使 80 岁以上患者的 30 天卒中/死亡率(HR,1.78;95%CI,1.10-2.89)和 1 年卒中/死亡率(HR,1.85;95%CI,1.35-2.54)的风险更高。
在 80 岁以上的患者中,与 CEA 相比,TCAR 治疗 30 天和 1 年的卒中/死亡率相似。对于被认为存在高解剖、手术或临床 CEA 风险的老年患者,TCAR 可能成为治疗颈动脉疾病的一种有前途的微创治疗方法。