Search

Background Carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting are common procedures for the treatment of carotid artery stenosis. The aim of this study was to identify factors that modify the effect between type of treatment and outcome, and could thus be used to refine the selection of treatment procedure. Methods All patients who underwent either carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting between 2012 and 2018 in German hospitals were included. The analysis of effect modification was focused on baseline patient characteristics. The outcome was a composite of any stroke or death until discharge from hospital. For multivariable analyses, a generalized linear mixed regression model was used. Results Some 221 282 patients were included, of whom 68% were male. In patients who underwent carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting, the risk of any stroke or death was 2.3% and 3.7% respectively. Patient age was statistically significantly associated with a higher risk of a composite outcome of any stroke or death (main effect of age: adjusted OR 1.21 (95% c.i. 1.17 to 1.26), P < 0.001). The age effect was stronger in patients treated with carotid artery stenting (interaction effect: adjusted OR 1.29 (95% c.i. 1.20 to 1.38), P < 0.001). Statistically significant interaction effects were identified for side of treatment, ASA grade, contralateral degree of stenosis, and the time interval between the index event and treatment. Conclusion This analysis shows that carotid artery stenting may be particularly disadvantageous in older patients, in patients with right-sided stenosis, and in symptomatic patients treated within the first 2 days after the index event. In patients with contralateral occlusion, carotid artery stenting appears equivalent to carotid endarterectomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this study was to analyze the association between center quality certifications and patients' characteristics, clinical management, and outcomes after carotid revascularization. Methods: This study is a pre-planned sub-study of the ISAR-IQ project, which analyzes data from the Bavarian subset of the nationwide German statutory quality assurance carotid database. Hospitals were classified as to whether a certified vascular center (cVC) or a certified stroke unit (cSU) was present on-site or not. The primary outcome event was any stroke or death until discharge from the hospital. Results: In total, 31,793 cases were included between 2012 and 2018. The primary outcome rate in asymptomatic patients treated by CEA ranged from 0.7% to 1.5%, with the highest rate in hospitals with cVC but without cSU. The multivariable regression analysis revealed a significantly lower primary outcome rate in centers with cSU in asymptomatic patients (aOR 0.69; 95% CI 0.56–0.86; p < 0.001). In symptomatic patients needing emergency treatment, the on-site availability of a cSU was associated with a significantly lower primary outcome rate (aOR 0.56; 95% CI 0.40–0.80; p < 0.001), whereas the presence of a cVC was associated with higher risk (aOR 3.07; 95% CI 1.65–5.72). Conclusions: This study provides evidence of statistically significant better results in some sub-cohorts in certified centers. In centers with cSU, the risk of any stroke or death was significantly lower in asymptomatic patients receiving CEA or symptomatic patients treated by emergency CEA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The German–Austrian guideline on the treatment of carotid stenosis recommends specialist neurological assessment (NA) before and after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS). This study analyzes the determinants of NA and the association of NA with the perioperative rate of stroke or death. Materials and Methods: This study is a pre-planned sub-study of the ISAR-IQ project, which analyzes data from the nationwide German statutory quality assurance carotid database. Patients were classified as asymptomatic (group A), elective symptomatic (group B), and others (group C: emergency (C1), simultaneous operation (C2), and other indications (C3)). The primary outcome event (POE) of this study was any in-hospital stroke or death. Adjusted odds ratios for pre- and post-NA and the POE were calculated using multivariable regression analyses. Results: We analyzed 228,133 patients (54% asymptomatic, 68% male, mean age 72 years) undergoing CEA or CAS between 2012 and 2018. Age and sex were not associated with the likelihood of pre-NA or post-NA. The multivariable regression analysis showed an inverse association between pre-NA and POE (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.47; 95% CI 0.44–0.51, p < 0.001), and a direct association of post-NA and POE (aOR 4.39; 95% CI 4.04–4.78, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Pre- and postinterventional specialist NA is strongly associated with the risk of any in-hospital stroke or death after CEA or CAS in Germany. A relevant confounding by indication or reversed causation cannot be ruled out. Nevertheless, to improve the quality assurance of treatment, the NA recommended in the guideline should be carried out consistently. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]