OBJECTIVE: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has become an alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for select patients with carotid atherosclerosis. We hypothesized that the choice of CAS vs CEA varies as a function of treating physician specialty, which would result in regional variation in the relative use of these treatment types. METHODS: We used Medicare claims (2002-2010) to calculate annual rates of CAS and CEA and examined changes by procedure type over time. To assess regional preferences surrounding CAS, we calculated the proportion of revascularizations by CAS, across hospital referral regions, defined according to the Dartmouth Atlas of Healthcare. We then examined relationships between patient factors, physician specialty, and regional use of CAS. RESULTS: The annual number of all carotid revascularization procedures decreased by 30% from 2002 to 2010 (3.2 to 2.3 per 1000; P = .005). Whereas rates of CEA declined by 35% during these 8 years (3.0 to 1.9 per 1000; P < .001), CAS utilization increased by 5% during the same interval (0.30 to 0.32 per 1000; P = .014). Variation in utilization of carotid revascularization varied across the Unites States, with some regions performing as few as 0.7 carotid procedure per 1000 beneficiaries (Honolulu, Hawaii) and others performing nearly 8 times as many (5.3 per 1000 in Houma, La). Variation in procedure type (CEA vs CAS) was evident as well, as the proportion of carotid revascularization procedures that were constituted by CAS varied from 0% (Casper, Wyo, and Meridian, Miss) to 53% (Bend, Ore). The majority of CAS procedures were performed by cardiologists (49% of all CAS cases), who doubled their rates of CAS during the study period from 0.07 per 1000 in 2002 to 0.15 per 1000 in 2010. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in rates of carotid revascularization exists. Whereas rates of carotid revascularization have declined by more than 30% in recent years, utilization of CAS has increased. The proportion of all carotid revascularization procedures performed as CAS varies markedly by geographic region, and regions with the highest proportion of cardiologists perform the most CAS procedures. Evidence-based guidelines for carotid revascularization will require a multidisciplinary approach to ensure uniform adoption across specialties that care for patients with carotid artery disease.
OBJECTIVE: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has become an alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for select patients with carotid atherosclerosis. We hypothesized that the choice of CAS vs CEA varies as a function of treating physician specialty, which would result in regional variation in the relative use of these treatment types. METHODS: We used Medicare claims (2002-2010) to calculate annual rates of CAS and CEA and examined changes by procedure type over time. To assess regional preferences surrounding CAS, we calculated the proportion of revascularizations by CAS, across hospital referral regions, defined according to the Dartmouth Atlas of Healthcare. We then examined relationships between patient factors, physician specialty, and regional use of CAS. RESULTS: The annual number of all carotid revascularization procedures decreased by 30% from 2002 to 2010 (3.2 to 2.3 per 1000; P = .005). Whereas rates of CEA declined by 35% during these 8 years (3.0 to 1.9 per 1000; P < .001), CAS utilization increased by 5% during the same interval (0.30 to 0.32 per 1000; P = .014). Variation in utilization of carotid revascularization varied across the Unites States, with some regions performing as few as 0.7 carotid procedure per 1000 beneficiaries (Honolulu, Hawaii) and others performing nearly 8 times as many (5.3 per 1000 in Houma, La). Variation in procedure type (CEA vs CAS) was evident as well, as the proportion of carotid revascularization procedures that were constituted by CAS varied from 0% (Casper, Wyo, and Meridian, Miss) to 53% (Bend, Ore). The majority of CAS procedures were performed by cardiologists (49% of all CAS cases), who doubled their rates of CAS during the study period from 0.07 per 1000 in 2002 to 0.15 per 1000 in 2010. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in rates of carotid revascularization exists. Whereas rates of carotid revascularization have declined by more than 30% in recent years, utilization of CAS has increased. The proportion of all carotid revascularization procedures performed as CAS varies markedly by geographic region, and regions with the highest proportion of cardiologists perform the most CAS procedures. Evidence-based guidelines for carotid revascularization will require a multidisciplinary approach to ensure uniform adoption across specialties that care for patients with carotid artery disease.
Authors: Roman Nowygrod; Natalia Egorova; Giampaolo Greco; Patrice Anderson; Annetine Gelijns; Alan Moskowitz; James McKinsey; Nicholas Morrissey; K Craig Kent Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Jessica B Wallaert; Randall R De Martino; Samuel R G Finlayson; Daniel B Walsh; Matthew A Corriere; David H Stone; Jack L Cronenwett; Philip P Goodney Journal: Stroke Date: 2012-05-01 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: H J M Barnett; D W Taylor; R B Haynes; D L Sackett; S J Peerless; G G Ferguson; A J Fox; R N Rankin; V C Hachinski; D O Wiebers; M Eliasziw Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1991-08-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Anne L Abbott; Mark A Adelman; Andrei V Alexandrov; P Alan Barber; Henry J M Barnett; Jonathan Beard; Peter Bell; Martin Björck; David Blacker; Leo H Bonati; Martin M Brown; Clifford J Buckley; Richard P Cambria; John E Castaldo; Anthony J Comerota; E Sander Connolly; Ronald L Dalman; Alun H Davies; Hans-Henning Eckstein; Rishad Faruqi; Thomas E Feasby; Gustav Fraedrich; Peter Gloviczki; Graeme J Hankey; Robert E Harbaugh; Eitan Heldenberg; Michael G Hennerici; Michael D Hill; Timothy J Kleinig; Dimitri P Mikhailidis; Wesley S Moore; Ross Naylor; Andrew Nicolaides; Kosmas I Paraskevas; David M Pelz; James W Prichard; Grant Purdie; Jean-Baptiste Ricco; Peter A Ringleb; Thomas Riles; Peter M Rothwell; Peter Sandercock; Henrik Sillesen; J David Spence; Francesco Spinelli; Jonathon Sturm; Aaron Tan; Ankur Thapar; Frank J Veith; Tissa Wijeratne; Wei Zhou Journal: Stroke Date: 2013-03-19 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Laura Barrie Smith; Nihar R Desai; Bryan Dowd; Alexander Everhart; Jeph Herrin; Lucas Higuera; Molly Moore Jeffery; Anupam B Jena; Joseph S Ross; Nilay D Shah; Pinar Karaca-Mandic Journal: Int J Health Econ Manag Date: 2020-04-30
Authors: Katie E Shean; John C McCallum; Peter A Soden; Sarah E Deery; Joseph R Schneider; Brian W Nolan; Caron B Rockman; Marc L Schermerhorn Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2017-03-27 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Alexander Everhart; Nihar R Desai; Bryan Dowd; Jeph Herrin; Lucas Higuera; Molly Moore Jeffery; Anupam B Jena; Joseph S Ross; Nilay D Shah; Laura Barrie Smith; Pinar Karaca-Mandic Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2021-02-10 Impact factor: 3.734