The impact of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services high-risk criteria on outcome after carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting in the SVS Vascular Registry

Objective The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) require high-risk (HR) criteria for carotid artery stenting (CAS) reimbursement. The impact of these criteria on outcomes after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and CAS remains uncertain. Additionally, if these HR criteria are associated wit...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of vascular surgery 2013-05, Vol.57 (5), p.1318-1324
Hauptverfasser: Schermerhorn, Marc L., MD, Fokkema, Margriet, MD, Goodney, Philip, MD, Dillavou, Ellen D., MD, Jim, Jeffrey, MD, Kenwood, Christopher T., MS, Siami, Flora S., MPH, White, Rodney A., MD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objective The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) require high-risk (HR) criteria for carotid artery stenting (CAS) reimbursement. The impact of these criteria on outcomes after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and CAS remains uncertain. Additionally, if these HR criteria are associated with more adverse events after CAS, then existing comparative effectiveness analysis of CEA vs CAS may be biased. We sought to elucidate this using data from the SVS Vascular Registry. Methods We analyzed 10,107 patients undergoing CEA (6370) and CAS (3737), stratified by CMS HR criteria. The primary endpoint was composite death, stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI) (major adverse cardiovascular event [MACE]) at 30 days. We compared baseline characteristics and outcomes using univariate and multivariable analyses. Results CAS patients were more likely to have preoperative stroke (26% vs 21%) or transient ischemic attack (23% vs 19%) than CEA. Although age ≥80 years was similar, CAS patients were more likely to have all other HR criteria. For CEA, HR patients had higher MACEs than normal risk in both symptomatic (7.3% vs 4.6%; P  < .01) and asymptomatic patients (5% vs 2.2%; P  < .0001). For CAS, HR status was not associated with a significant increase in MACE for symptomatic (9.1% vs 6.2%; P  = .24) or asymptomatic patients (5.4% vs 4.2%; P  = .61). All CAS patients had MACE rates similar to HR CEA. After multivariable risk adjustment, CAS had higher rates than CEA for MACE (odds ratio [OR], 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.0-1.5), death (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.0-2.2), and stroke (OR, 1.3; 95% CI,1.0-1.7), whereas there was no difference in MI (OR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.6-1.3). Among CEA patients, age ≥80 (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.02-1.8), congestive heart failure (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.03-2.8), EF 
ISSN:0741-5214
1097-6809
DOI:10.1016/j.jvs.2012.10.107