Abstract:Background: COVID-19 confronted medical care with many challenges. During the pandemic, several resources were limited resulting in renouncing or postponing medical care like carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for patients with significant carotid artery stenosis. Although according to international guidelines CEA is the first choice, carotid artery stenting (CAS) could potentially be a reasonable alternative especially during logistical restraints. Purpose: To evaluate outcomes of CAS versus CEA before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Our hypothesis was that a CAS first approach yielded comparable outcomes compared to a CEA first approach. Methods: Retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with significant carotid artery stenosis treated with CEA or CAS between September 2018 and March 2023. Each consecutive period of 1.5 year marked a new (treatment) period: pre-COVID (CEA first strategy), during COVID (CAS first strategy) and post-COVID (patient-tailored approach). Primary outcome was the composite endpoint of stroke, transient ischemic attack or death within 30 days. Secondary outcome consisted of the rate of technical success, cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome, myocardial infarction or other cardiac complications needing intervention, bleeding of the surgical site needing intervention, nerve palsy, unintended IC admission, pseudoaneurysm, restenosis, or occlusion. Results: A total of 318 patients were included. Out of 137 patients treated with CEA, 55, 36 and 46 were treated pre-COVID, during COVID and post-COVID, respectively. Out of 181 CAS procedures, 38, 59 and 84, respectively, were performed in each time period. Primary outcome occurred in 5.5%, 0% and 2.2% in the CEA group and 0%, 1.7% and 3.6% in the CAS group (P = 0.27; P = 1.00; P = 1.00, respectively). Overall technical success was 100% for CEA and 99.4% for CAS (P = 1.00). Rate of restenosis was the only secondary outcome measure which was significantly better after CAS compared to CEA in the pre- and post-COVID period (CEA vs. CAS, 12.7% vs. 7.9%, and 23.9% vs. 4.8% with a P-value of 0.03 and 0.03, respectively). Hospital presentation to treatment interval did not differ significantly during the pandemic. Conclusions: Outcomes were comparable between CAS versus CEA in patients with significant carotid artery stenosis before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. CAS showed better results in terms of other complications (i.e., restenosis rate) in the pre- and post-COVID period compared to CEA. Our results may support a CAS first approach when no relevant contra-indications exist without exposing the patient to complications associated with an open surgical approach. Discussion in a multidisciplinary team is advised.

Development of a carpark cardiac implantable electronic device clinic to improve time efficiency and patient satisfaction in the context of restrictions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic

Optimizing Treatment of Significant Carotid Artery Stenosis in Times of Logistic Restraints as a Result of COVID-19 Pandemic

Hello, can you hear me? Orthopaedic clinic telephone consultations in the COVID-19 era- a patient and clinician perspective

Development, implementation and evaluation of high-quality virtual preoperative anaesthetic assessment during COVID-19 and beyond: a quality improvement report

Telehealth during COVID‐19 restrictions in patients with cardiovascular disease: impact on medication prescriptions and patient satisfaction

COVID Pandemic Impact on Healthcare Provision and Patient Psychosocial Distress: A Multi-National Cross-Sectional Survey among Asia-Pacific Countries.

Implantation of cardiac electronic devices in active COVID-19 patients: Results from an international survey

Developing and delivering a hybrid Cardiac Rehabilitation Phase II exercise program during the COVID-19 pandemic: a quality improvement program

Do patients prefer face-to-face or telephone consultations in an outpatient cardiology department?

Patient Experiences with a Tertiary Care Post-COVID-19 Clinic

Exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on provision of cardiology services: a scoping review

Time, cost and carbon-efficiency: a silver lining of COVID era virtual urology clinics?

Effectiveness of chest pain centre accreditation on the management of acute coronary syndrome: a retrospective study using a national database

Enhanced Safety and Efficiency of Ambulatory Cardiology Admissions: A Quality Improvement Initiative

Low and Delayed Patient Arrival Rates during COVID-19 Pandemic in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients: A Study from Tertiary Cardiac Center

Embedding the Use of Patient Multimedia Educational Resources Into Cardiac Acute Care: Prospective Observational Study

Pandemic intake questionnaire to improve quality, effectiveness, and efficiency of outpatient neurologic and developmental care at the Kennedy Krieger institute during the COVID-19 pandemic

Patient preferences using telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic in four Victorian tertiary hospital services

Barriers to and facilitators of advance care planning implementation for medical staff after the COVID-19 pandemic: an overview of reviews

FC39: Quality Improvement to Manage Long Wait Lists in an Ambulatory Geriatric Mental Health Program

COVID-19 pandemic and elderly: is the curtain dropped for urgent pacemaker implantations?