Comparison of outcomes after carotid endarterectomy between type 2 diabetic and non-diabetic patients with significant carotid stenosis.
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:We aimed to compare early and late outcomes after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) between Korean type 2 diabetic and non-diabetic patients and to investigate the impact of diabetes on the overall incidence of cardiovascular events after CEA. METHODS:We retrospectively analyzed 675 CEAs, which were performed on 613 patients with significant carotid stenosis between January 2007 and December 2014. The CEAs were divided into a type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) group (n?=?265, 39.3%) and a non-DM group (n?=?410, 60.7%). The study outcomes included the incidence of major adverse events (MAEs), defined as fatal or nonfatal stroke or myocardial infarction or all-cause mortality, during the perioperative period and within 4 years after CEA. RESULTS:Patients in the DM and non-DM groups did not differ significantly in the incidence of MAEs or any of the individual MAE manifestations during the perioperative period. However, within 4 years after CEA, the difference in the MAE incidence was significantly greater in the DM group (P?=?0.040). Analysis of the individual MAE manifestations indicated a significantly higher risk of stroke in the DM group (P?=?0.006). Multivariate analysis indicated that diabetes was not associated with MAEs or individual MAE manifestations during the perioperative period, whereas within 4 years after CEA, diabetes was an independent risk factor for MAEs overall (hazard ratio [HR], 1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-2.48; P?=?0.026) and stroke (HR, 2.55; 95% CI 1.20-5.41; P?=?0.015) in particular. CONCLUSIONS:Diabetic patients were not at greater risk of perioperative MAEs after CEA; however, the risk of late MAE occurrence was significantly greater in these patients. Within 4 years after CEA, DM was an independent risk factor for the occurrence of MAEs overall and stroke in particular.
Project description:In this single-center, retrospective study, we aimed to compare early and late outcomes after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) between younger and elderly patients and to investigate the impact of patient age on the overall incidence of cardiovascular events after CEA.A total of 613 patients with 675 CEAs between January 2007 and December 2014 were stratified by patient age into 2 groups: younger (?60 years, n?=?103 CEAs, 15.3%) and elderly (>60 years, n?=?572 CEAs, 84.7%) groups. The study outcomes were defined as the occurrence of major adverse events (MAEs), including fatal or nonfatal stroke or myocardial infarction (MI), or any-cause mortality, and overall cardiovascular events (meaning the composite incidence of stroke or MI) during the perioperative period and within 4 years after CEA.Although there were no significant differences in the incidence of 30-day MAEs and any of the individual MAE manifestations between the 2 groups, the differences in the MAE incidence (P?=?.006) and any-cause mortality (P?=?.023) within 4 years after CEA were significantly greater in patients in the elderly group. For overall incidence of cardiovascular events, no significant difference was noted between the 2 groups (P?=?.096). On multivariate analysis, older age (>60 years) did not affect the incidence of perioperative MAEs and individual MAE manifestations; however, older age was significantly associated with an increased risk of 4-year MAEs (hazard ratio [HR], 3.68, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.35-10.0; P?=?.011) and any-cause mortality (HR, 3.26, 95% CI, 1.02-10.5; P?=?.047). With regard to the 4-year overall incidence of cardiovascular events, older age was not an independent predictor of increased risk of these cardiovascular events.Our study indicates that the risks of perioperative MAEs and the 4-year overall incidence of cardiovascular events do not significantly differ between younger and elderly Korean patients undergoing CEA, although there was a higher risk of 4-year any-cause mortality in the elderly patients. Older age does not appear to be an independent risk factor for perioperative MAEs and overall cardiovascular events within 4 years after CEA.
Project description:Purpose:We aimed to compare clinical outcomes after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) between Korean patients with and without severe contralateral extracranial carotid stenosis or occlusion (SCSO). Methods:Between January 2004 and December 2014, a total of 661 patients who underwent 731 CEAs were stratified by SCSO (non-SCSO and SCSO groups) and analyzed retrospectively. The study outcomes included the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as stroke or myocardial infarction, and all-cause mortality during the perioperative period and within 4 years after CEA. Results:There were no significant differences in the incidence of MACE or any individual MACE manifestations between the 2 groups during the perioperative period or within 4 years after CEA. On multivariate analysis to identify clinical variables associated with long-term study outcomes, older age (hazard ratios [HRs], 1.06; 95% confidence intervals [CIs], 1.03-1.09; P < 0.001) and diabetes mellitus (HR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.14-2.57; P = 0.010) were significantly associated with an increased risk of MACE occurrence, while preexisting SCSO was not associated with long-term incidence of MACE and individual MACE components. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed similar MACE-free (P = 0.509), overall (P = 0.642), and stroke-free (P = 0.650) survival rates in the 2 groups. Conclusion:There were no significant differences in MACE incidence after CEA between the non-SCSO and SCSO groups, and preexisting SCSO was not associated with an increased risk of perioperative or long-term MACE occurrence.
Project description:If carotid artery narrowing remains asymptomatic (ie, has caused no recent stroke or other neurological symptoms), successful carotid endarterectomy (CEA) reduces stroke incidence for some years. We assessed the long-term effects of successful CEA.Between 1993 and 2003, 3120 asymptomatic patients from 126 centres in 30 countries were allocated equally, by blinded minimised randomisation, to immediate CEA (median delay 1 month, IQR 0·3-2·5) or to indefinite deferral of any carotid procedure, and were followed up until death or for a median among survivors of 9 years (IQR 6-11). The primary outcomes were perioperative mortality and morbidity (death or stroke within 30 days) and non-perioperative stroke. Kaplan-Meier percentages and logrank p values are from intention-to-treat analyses. This study is registered, number ISRCTN26156392.1560 patients were allocated immediate CEA versus 1560 allocated deferral of any carotid procedure. The proportions operated on while still asymptomatic were 89·7% versus 4·8% at 1 year (and 92·1%vs 16·5% at 5 years). Perioperative risk of stroke or death within 30 days was 3·0% (95% CI 2·4-3·9; 26 non-disabling strokes plus 34 disabling or fatal perioperative events in 1979 CEAs). Excluding perioperative events and non-stroke mortality, stroke risks (immediate vs deferred CEA) were 4·1% versus 10·0% at 5 years (gain 5·9%, 95% CI 4·0-7·8) and 10·8% versus 16·9% at 10 years (gain 6·1%, 2·7-9·4); ratio of stroke incidence rates 0·54, 95% CI 0·43-0·68, p<0·0001. 62 versus 104 had a disabling or fatal stroke, and 37 versus 84 others had a non-disabling stroke. Combining perioperative events and strokes, net risks were 6·9% versus 10·9% at 5 years (gain 4·1%, 2·0-6·2) and 13·4% versus 17·9% at 10 years (gain 4·6%, 1·2-7·9). Medication was similar in both groups; throughout the study, most were on antithrombotic and antihypertensive therapy. Net benefits were significant both for those on lipid-lowering therapy and for those not, and both for men and for women up to 75 years of age at entry (although not for older patients).Successful CEA for asymptomatic patients younger than 75 years of age reduces 10-year stroke risks. Half this reduction is in disabling or fatal strokes. Net benefit in future patients will depend on their risks from unoperated carotid lesions (which will be reduced by medication), on future surgical risks (which might differ from those in trials), and on whether life expectancy exceeds 10 years.UK Medical Research Council, BUPA Foundation, Stroke Association.
Project description:National guidelines on carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for asymptomatic patients state that the procedure should be performed with a ? 3% risk of perioperative death or stroke. We developed and validated a multivariate model of risk of death or stroke within 30 days of CEA for asymptomatic disease and a related clinical prediction rule.We analyzed asymptomatic cases in a population-based cohort of CEAs performed in Medicare beneficiaries in New York State. Medical records were abstracted for sociodemographics, neurologic history, disease severity, diagnostic imaging data, comorbidities, and deaths and strokes within 30 days of surgery. We used multivariate logistic regression to identify independent predictors of perioperative death or stroke. The CEA-8 clinical risk score was derived from the final model.Among the 6553 patients, the mean age was 74 years, 55% were male, 62% had coronary artery disease, and 22% had a history of distant stroke or transient ischemic attack. The perioperative rate of death or stroke was 3.0%. Multivariable predictors of perioperative events were female sex (odds ratio [OR] = 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.9), nonwhite race (OR = 1.8; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.9), severe disability (OR = 3.7; 95% CI, 1.8 to 7.7), congestive heart failure (OR = 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.4), coronary artery disease (OR = 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2 to 2.2), valvular heart disease (OR = 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.3), a distant history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (OR = 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.0), and a nonoperated stenosis ? 50% (OR = 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3 to 2.3). The CEA-8 risk score stratified patients with a predicted probability of death or stroke rate from 0.6% to 9.6%.Several sociodemographic, neurologic severity, and comorbidity factors predicted the risk of perioperative death or stroke in asymptomatic patients. The CEA-8 risk score can help clinicians calculate a predicted probability of complications for an individual patient to help inform the decision about revascularization.
Project description:<h4>Background and purpose</h4>Carotid 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.<h4>Methods</h4>A 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.<h4>Results</h4>Thirteen 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).<h4>Conclusions</h4>The 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.
Project description:Controversy persists regarding the perioperative management of clopidogrel among patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA). This study examined the effect of preoperative dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin and clopidogrel) on in-hospital CEA outcomes.Patients undergoing CEA in the Vascular Quality Initiative were analyzed (2003-2014). Patients on clopidogrel and aspirin (dual therapy) were compared with patients taking aspirin alone preoperatively. Study outcomes included reoperation for bleeding and thrombotic complications defined as transient ischemic attack (TIA), stroke, or myocardial infarction. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital death and composite stroke/death. Univariate and multivariable analyses assessed differences in demographics and operative factors. Propensity score-matched cohorts were derived to control for subgroup heterogeneity.Of 28,683 CEAs, 21,624 patients (75%) were on aspirin and 7059 (25%) were on dual therapy. Patients on dual therapy were more likely to have multiple comorbidities, including coronary artery disease (P < .001), congestive heart failure (P < .001), and diabetes (P < .001). Patients on dual therapy were also more likely to have a drain placed (P < .001) and receive protamine during CEA (P < .001). Multivariable analysis showed that dual therapy was independently associated with increased reoperation for bleeding (odds ratio [OR], 1.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.20-2.42; P = .003) but was protective against TIA or stroke (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43-0.87; P = .007), stroke (OR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.41-0.97; P = .03), and stroke/death (OR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.44-0.98; P = .04). Propensity score matching yielded two groups of 4548 patients and showed that patients on dual therapy were more likely to require reoperation for bleeding (1.3% vs 0.7%; P = .004) but less likely to suffer TIA or stroke (0.9% vs 1.6%; P = .002), stroke (0.6% vs 1.0%; P = .04), or stroke/death (0.7% vs 1.2%; P = .03). Within the propensity score-matched groups, patients on dual therapy had increased rates of reoperation for bleeding regardless of carotid symptom status. However, asymptomatic patients on dual therapy demonstrated reduced rates of TIA or stroke (0.6% vs 1.5%; P < .001), stroke (0.4% vs 0.9%; P = .01), and composite stroke/death (0.5% vs 1.0%; P = .02). Among propensity score-matched patients with symptomatic carotid disease, these differences were not statistically significant.Preoperative dual antiplatelet therapy was associated with a 40% risk reduction for neurologic events but also incurred a significant increased risk of reoperation for bleeding after CEA. Given its observed overall neurologic protective effect, continued dual antiplatelet therapy throughout the perioperative period is justified. Initiating dual therapy in all patients undergoing CEA may lead to decreased neurologic complication rates.
Project description:Background:Perioperative health care utilization and costs in patients undergoing elective fast-track vs standard endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) remain unclear. Methods:The fast-track EVAR group included patients treated with a 14 Fr stent graft, bilateral percutaneous access, no general anesthesia or intensive care monitoring, and next-day hospital discharge. The standard EVAR group was identified from Medicare administrative claims using a matching algorithm to adjust for imbalances in patient characteristics. Hospital outcomes included operating room time, intensive care monitoring, hospital stay, secondary interventions, and major adverse events (MAEs). Perioperative outcomes occurring from hospital discharge to 30 days postdischarge included MAE, secondary interventions, and unrelated readmissions. Results:Among 1000 matched patients (250 fast-track; 750 standard), hospital outcomes favored the fast-track EVAR group, including shorter operating room time (2.30 vs 2.83 hrs, P<0.001), shorter hospital stay (1.16 vs 1.69 d, P<0.001), less need for intensive care monitoring (4.4% vs 48.0%, P<0.001), and lower secondary intervention rate (0% vs 2.4%, P=0.01). Postdischarge outcomes also favored fast-track EVAR with a lower rate of MAE (0% vs 7.2%, P<0.001) and all-cause readmission (1.6% vs 6.8%, P=0.001). The total cost to the health care system during the perioperative period was $26,730 with fast-track EVAR vs $30,730 with standard EVAR. Total perioperative health care costs were $4000 (95% CI: $3130-$4830) lower with fast-track EVAR vs standard EVAR, with $2980 in savings to hospitals and $1030 savings to health care payers. Conclusion:A fast-track EVAR protocol using a 14 Fr stent graft resulted in shorter procedure time, lower intensive care utilization, faster discharge, lower incidence of MAE, lower readmission rates, and lower perioperative costs compared to standard EVAR.
Project description:Single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNA-seq) is becoming a powerful tool to investigate monoallelic expression (MAE) in various developmental and pathological processes. However, our knowledge of MAE during hematopoiesis and leukemogenesis is limited. In this study, we conducted a systematic interrogation of MAEs in bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMMCs) at single-cell resolution to construct a MAE atlas of BMMCs. We identified 1,020 constitutive MAEs in BMMCs, which included imprinted genes such as MEG8, NAP1L5, and IRAIN. We classified the BMMCs into six cell types and identified 74 cell type specific MAEs including MTSS1, MOB1A, and TCF12. We further identified 114 random MAEs (rMAEs) at single-cell level, with 78.1% single-allele rMAE and 21.9% biallelic mosaic rMAE. Many MAEs identified in BMMCs have not been reported and are potentially hematopoietic specific, supporting MAEs are functional relevance. Comparison of BMMC samples from a leukemia patient with multiple clinical stages showed the fractions of constitutive MAE were correlated with fractions of leukemia cells in BMMCs. Further separation of the BMMCs into leukemia cells and normal cells showed that leukemia cells have much higher constitutive MAE and rMAEs than normal cells. We identified the leukemia cell-specific MAEs and relapsed leukemia cell-specific MAEs, which were enriched in immune-related functions. These results indicate MAE is prevalent and is an important gene regulation mechanism during hematopoiesis and leukemogenesis. As the first systematical interrogation of constitutive MAEs, cell type specific MAEs, and rMAEs during hematopoiesis and leukemogenesis, the study significantly increased our knowledge about the features and functions of MAEs.
Project description:The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of patients after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) who developed postoperative hypertension or hypotension requiring the administration of intravenous vasoactive medication (IVMED).We examined consecutive, primary elective CEA performed by 128 surgeons within the Vascular Study Group of New England (VSGNE) database (2003-2010) and compared outcomes of patients who required postoperative IVMED to treat hyper- or hypotension with those who did not. Outcomes included perioperative death, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), congestive heart failure (CHF), hospital length of stay, and 1-year stroke or death. Propensity score matching was performed to facilitate risk-adjusted comparisons. Multivariable regression models were used to compare the association between IVMED and outcomes in unmatched and matched samples. Factors associated with use of IVMED in postoperative hypertension and hypotension were evaluated, and predictive performance of multivariable models was examined using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.Of 7677 elective CEAs identified, 23% received IVMED for treatment of either postoperative hypertension (11%) or hypotension (12%). Preoperative neurological symptomatic status (20%) was similar across cohorts. In the crude sample, the use of IVMED to treat postoperative hypertension was associated with increased 30-day mortality (0.7% vs 0.1%; P < .001), stroke (1.9% vs 1%; P = .018), MI (2.4% vs 0.5%; P < .001), and CHF (1.9% vs 0.5%; P < .001). The use of IVMED to treat postoperative hypotension was also associated with increased perioperative mortality (0.8% vs 0.1%; P < .001), stroke (3.2% vs 1.0%; P < .001), MI (2.7% vs 0.5%; P < .001), and CHF (1.7% vs 0.5%; P < .001), as well as 1-year death (5.1% vs 2.9%; P < .001) or stroke (4.2% vs 2.1%; P < .001). Hospital length of stay was significantly longer among patients who needed IVMED for postoperative hypertension (2.8 ± 4.7 days vs 1.7 ± 5.5 days; P < .001) and hypotension (2.8 ± 5.9 days vs 1.7 ± 5.5 days; P < .001). In multivariable analysis, IVMED for postoperative hypertension was associated with increased MI, stroke, or death (odds ratio, 2.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-4.1; P < .001). Similarly, IVMED for postoperative hypotension was associated with increased MI, stroke, or death (odds ratio, 3.2; 95% CI, 2.1-5.0; P < .001), as well as increased 1-year stroke or death (hazard ratio, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.2-2.2; P = .003). Smoking, coronary artery disease, and clopidogrel (ROC, 0.59) were associated with postoperative hypertension requiring IVMED, whereas conventional endarterectomy and general anesthesia were associated with postoperative hypotension requiring IVMED (ROC, 0.58). The unitization of IVMED varied between 11% and 38% across VSGNE, and center effect did not affect outcomes.Postoperative hypertension requiring IVMED after CEA is associated with increased perioperative mortality, stroke, and cardiac complications, whereas significant postoperative hypotension is associated with increased perioperative mortality, cardiac, or stroke complications, as well as increased 1-year death or stroke following CEA. The utilization of IVMED varied across centers and, as such, further investigation into this practice needs to occur in order to improve outcomes of these at-risk patients.
Project description:This study aims to investigate the complication and middle-term outcome of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) in Chinese patients, which was a retrospective case-control study and perioperative complications and 2-year end points were analyzed. Follow-up was done by a certified doctor, and restenosis was detected by ultrasound. Operation success rate were 100% in two groups. CAS showed the higher incidence rate of all stroke/TIA at 30days post-procedure (7.89% VS 1.85%, P?=?0.038), odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval, 4.54 (1.09-18.97), but there was no difference in the incidence rate of stroke subgroups, mortality and myocardial infarction between two groups. The higher incidence of hypertension with CEA (14.42% VS 5.26%, P?=?0.012), OR: 2.90 (1.26-6.65) and hypotension with CAS (14.91% VS 1.85%, P?=?0.001), OR: 0.11 (0.03-0.42). No difference in all stroke, ipsilateral stroke and mortality between two groups at 24 months post-procedures, however, the total incidence rate of stroke/death was higher in CAS (12.84% VS 4.72%, P?=?0.036), OR: 2.98 (1.08,8.23). Higher restenosis rate of CAS was examined (13.76% VS 5.66%, P?=?0.045), OR: 2.66 (1.02, 6.74). CAS and CEA showed a similar middle-term outcome, but CAS showed a higher incidence rate of stroke and restenosis after operation.