An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of results of transcervical carotid artery stenting with flow reversal

J Vasc Surg. 2020 Oct;72(4):1489-1498.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2020.04.501. Epub 2020 May 16.

Abstract

Objective: Transcervical carotid artery stenting (CAS) has emerged as an alternative to transfemoral CAS. An earlier systematic review from our group (n = 12 studies; 739 transcervical CAS procedures [489/739 with flow reversal]) demonstrated that transcervical CAS is a safe procedure associated with a low incidence of stroke and complications. Since then, new studies have been published adding nearly 1600 patients to the literature. We aimed to update our early systematic review and also to perform a meta-analysis to investigate outcomes specifically after transcervical CAS with flow reversal.

Methods: An electronic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane databases was carried out to identify studies reporting outcomes after transcervical CAS with flow reversal. Crude event rates for outcomes of interest were estimated by simple pooling of data. A proportion meta-analysis was also performed to estimate pooled outcome rates.

Results: A total of 18 studies (n = 2110 transcervical CAS procedures with flow reversal) were identified. A high technical success (98.25%) and a low mortality rate (0.48%) were recorded. The crude rates of major stroke, minor stroke, transient ischemic attack, and myocardial infarction (MI) were 0.71%, 0.90%, 0.57%, and 0.57%, respectively; a cranial nerve injury occurred in 0.28% of the procedures. A neck hematoma was reported in 1.04% of the procedures, and a carotid artery dissection occurred in 0.76% of the interventions; in 1.09% of the cases, conversion to carotid endarterectomy was required. After a meta-analysis was undertaken, the pooled technical success rate was 98.69% (95% confidence interval [CI], 97.19-99.70). A pooled mortality rate of 0.04% (95% CI, 0.00-0.29) was recorded. The pooled rate of any type of neurologic complications was 1.88 (95% CI, 1.24-2.61), whereas the pooled rates of major stroke, minor stroke, and transient ischemic attack were 0.12% (95% CI, 0.00-0.46), 0.15% (95% CI, 0.00-0.50), and 0.01% (95% CI, 0.00-0.22), respectively. The pooled rate of bradycardia/hypotension was 10.21% (95% CI, 3.99-18.51), whereas the pooled rate of MI was 0.08% (95% CI, 0.00-0.39). A neck hematoma after transcervical CAS was recorded in 1.51% (95% CI, 0.22-3.54) of the procedures; in 0.74% (95% CI, 0.05-1.95) of the interventions, conversion to CEA was required. Finally, a carotid artery dissection during transcervical CAS occurred in 0.47% (95% CI, 0.00-1.38) of the procedures.

Conclusions: This updated systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that transcervical CAS with flow reversal is associated with high technical success, almost zero mortality, and low rates of major stroke, minor stroke, MI, and complications.

Keywords: Carotid artery stenosis; Carotid artery stenting; Flow reversal; Stroke; Transcervical access.

Publication types

  • Meta-Analysis
  • Systematic Review

MeSH terms

  • Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical / adverse effects*
  • Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical / instrumentation
  • Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical / methods
  • Carotid Artery, Common / surgery
  • Carotid Stenosis / mortality
  • Carotid Stenosis / surgery*
  • Femoral Vein / surgery
  • Humans
  • Incidence
  • Ischemic Attack, Transient / epidemiology
  • Ischemic Attack, Transient / etiology
  • Jugular Veins / surgery
  • Myocardial Infarction / epidemiology
  • Myocardial Infarction / etiology
  • Postoperative Complications / epidemiology*
  • Postoperative Complications / etiology
  • Risk Assessment / statistics & numerical data
  • Risk Factors
  • Stents
  • Stroke / epidemiology
  • Stroke / etiology
  • Treatment Outcome