Impact of acute silent ischemic lesions on clinical outcomes of carotid revascularization

Abstract

Background: Previous literature has established an association between acute silent ischemic lesions (ASILs) and elevated susceptibility to future adverse clinical outcomes. The present study endeavors to scrutinize the prognostic significance of pre-procedural ASILs, as detected through diffusion-weighted imaging and apparent diffusion coefficient metrics, in relation to subsequent adverse events—namely, stroke, myocardial infarction, and all-cause death—following carotid revascularization in a cohort of patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis. Materials and Methods: Subjects were extracted from a comprehensive retrospective dataset involving symptomatic carotid stenosis cases that underwent carotid revascularization at a tertiary healthcare institution in China, spanning January 2019 to March 2022. Of the 2,663 initially screened patients (symptomatic carotid stenosis=1,600; asymptomatic carotid stenosis=1,063), a total of 1,172 individuals with symptomatic carotid stenosis were retained for subsequent analysis. Stratification was implemented based on the presence or absence of ASILs. The primary endpoint constituted a composite measure of in-hospital stroke, myocardial infarction, or all-cause death. Both carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) treatment modalities were individually subjected to propensity score-matched analyses. Results: Among the 584 subjects who underwent CEA, 91 ASIL-positive and 91 ASIL-negative (NASIL) cases were propensity score-matched. Notably, the ASIL cohort demonstrated a statistically significant augmentation in the risk of primary outcomes relative to the NASIL group (10.99% vs. 1.10%; absolute risk difference, 9.89% [95% CI, 3.12%-16.66%]; RR, 10.00 [95% CI, 1.31-76.52]; P=0.01). Similarly, within the 588 CAS-treated patients, 107 ASIL-positive and 107 NASIL cases were matched, revealing a correspondingly elevated risk of primary outcomes in the ASIL group (9.35% vs. 1.87%; absolute risk difference, 7.48% [95% CI, 1.39%-13.56%]; RR, 5.00 [95% CI, 1.12-22.28]; P=0.02). Conclusions: ASILs portend an elevated risk for grave adverse events post-carotid revascularization, irrespective of the specific revascularization technique employed—be it CEA or CAS. Thus, ASILs may serve as a potent biomarker for procedural risk stratification in the context of carotid revascularization.