Vascular Institute of New York, Brooklyn, NY.
Division of Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD.
J Vasc Surg. 2022 Sep;76(3):769-777.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2022.04.027. Epub 2022 May 25.
Age ≥80 years is known to be an independent risk factor for periprocedural stroke after transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TF-CAS) but not after carotid endarterectomy (CEA). The objective of the present study was to compare the perioperative outcomes for CEA, TF-CAS, and transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) among octogenarian patients (aged ≥80 years) overall and stratified by symptom status and degree of stenosis.
All patients aged ≥80 years with 50% to 99% carotid artery stenosis who had undergone CEA, TF-CAS, or TCAR in the Vascular Quality Initiative (2005-2020) were included. We compared the perioperative (30-day) incidence of ipsilateral stroke or death for CEA vs TF-CAS vs TCAR using analysis of variance and multivariable logistic regression models. The results were confirmed in a sensitivity analysis stratified by symptom status and degree of stenosis.
Overall, 28,571 carotid revascularization procedures were performed in patients aged ≥80 years: CEA, n = 20,912 (73.2%), TF-CAS, n = 3628 (12.7%), and TCAR, n = 4031 (14.1%). The median age was 83 years (interquartile range, 81.0-86.0 years); 49.8% of the patients were symptomatic (51.9% CEA, 46.2% TF-CAS, 42.4% TCAR); and 60.7% had high-grade stenosis (59.0% CEA, 65.2% TF-CAS, 65.4% TCAR). Perioperative stroke/death occurred most frequently following TF-CAS (6.6%), followed by TCAR (3.1%) and CEA (2.5%; P < .001). After adjusting for baseline differences between groups, the odds ratio (OR) for stroke/death was greater for TF-CAS vs CEA (adjusted OR [aOR], 3.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.65-4.23), followed by TCAR vs CEA (aOR 1.49, 95% CI 1.18-1.87). The risk of perioperative stroke/death remained significantly greater for TF-CAS compared with CEA regardless of symptom status and degree of stenosis (P < .05 for all). In contrast, the risk of stroke/death was higher for TCAR vs CEA for asymptomatic patients (aOR, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.41-2.94) and those with high-grade stenosis (aOR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.11-2.05) but similar for patients with symptomatic and moderate-grade disease (P > .05 for both). The risk of myocardial infarction was lower with TCAR (aOR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.40-0.87) and TF-CAS (aOR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.40-0.87) compared with CEA overall.
Overall, TCAR and CEA can be safely offered to older adults, in particular, symptomatic patients and those with moderate-grade stenosis. TF-CAS should be avoided in older patients when possible.
年龄≥80 岁是经股动脉颈动脉支架置入术(TF-CAS)后围手术期卒中的独立危险因素,但不是颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)后围手术期卒中的独立危险因素。本研究的目的是比较 80 岁以上患者(年龄≥80 岁)行 CEA、TF-CAS 和经颈动脉血管重建术(TCAR)的围手术期结果,并根据症状状态和狭窄程度进行分层比较。
纳入了 2005 年至 2020 年血管质量倡议中接受 50%至 99%颈动脉狭窄的 CEA、TF-CAS 或 TCAR 的所有年龄≥80 岁的患者。我们使用方差分析和多变量逻辑回归模型比较了 CEA 与 TF-CAS 与 TCAR 的围手术期(30 天)同侧卒中或死亡发生率。在按症状状态和狭窄程度分层的敏感性分析中确认了结果。
总体而言,在年龄≥80 岁的患者中进行了 28571 例颈动脉血运重建手术:CEA,n=20912(73.2%),TF-CAS,n=3628(12.7%)和 TCAR,n=4031(14.1%)。中位年龄为 83 岁(四分位间距,81.0-86.0 岁);49.8%的患者有症状(51.9% CEA、46.2% TF-CAS、42.4% TCAR);60.7%的患者有重度狭窄(59.0% CEA、65.2% TF-CAS、65.4% TCAR)。TF-CAS 后围手术期卒中/死亡最常见(6.6%),其次是 TCAR(3.1%)和 CEA(2.5%;P<.001)。在调整组间基线差异后,与 CEA 相比,TF-CAS 发生卒中/死亡的比值比(OR)更大(调整 OR [aOR],3.35;95%置信区间 [CI],2.65-4.23),其次是 TCAR 与 CEA(aOR 1.49,95% CI 1.18-1.87)。无论症状状态和狭窄程度如何,与 CEA 相比,TF-CAS 发生围手术期卒中/死亡的风险仍然显著更高(所有 P<.05)。相比之下,对于无症状患者(aOR,2.04;95% CI,1.41-2.94)和重度狭窄患者(aOR,1.49;95% CI,1.11-2.05),TCAR 与 CEA 相比,卒中/死亡的风险更高,但对于有症状和中度疾病的患者,风险相似(两者均 P>.05)。与 CEA 相比,TCAR(aOR,0.59;95% CI,0.40-0.87)和 TF-CAS(aOR,0.56;95% CI,0.40-0.87)的心肌梗死风险较低。
总的来说,TCAR 和 CEA 可以安全地用于老年患者,特别是有症状的患者和中度狭窄的患者。TF-CAS 在可能的情况下应避免用于老年患者。