Carotid Artery Stenting May Be Losing the Battle against Carotid Endarterectomy for the Management of Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis, But the Jury Is Still Out

Vascular ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 183-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kosmas I. Paraskevas ◽  
Dimitri P. Mikhailidis ◽  
Frank J. Veith

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has emerged as a potential alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for the management of carotid artery stenosis. The purpose of this article is to provide an evaluation and critical overview of the trials comparing the early and later results of CAS with CEA for symptomatic carotid stenosis. The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, PubMed/Medline, and EMBASE databases were searched up to February 1, 2009, to identify trials comparing the long-term outcomes of CAS with CEA. The MeSH terms used were “carotid artery stenting,” “carotid endarterectomy,” “symptomatic carotid artery stenosis,” “treatment,” “clinical trial,” “randomized,” and “long-term results,” in various combinations. One single-center and three multicenter randomized studies reporting their long-term results from the comparison of CAS with CEA for symptomatic carotid stenosis were identified. All four studies independently reached the conclusion that CAS may not provide results equivalent to those of CEA for the management of symptomatic carotid stenosis. A higher incidence of recurrent stenosis and peri- and postprocedural events accounted for the inferior results reported for CAS compared with CEA. Current data from randomized studies indicate that CAS provides inferior long-term results compared with CEA for the management of symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. However, it can be argued that all of these trials were performed when both CAS equipment and CAS operators had not evolved to their current status. Given that current equipment and mature experience are required for CAS before comparing it with the current “gold standard” procedure (CEA), the results of soon-to-be reported trials (Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial [CREST], International Carotid Stenting Study [ICSS], or others) may alter the current impression that CAS is inferior to CEA for the treatment of symptomatic carotid stenosis.

2013 ◽  
Vol 62 (18) ◽  
pp. C236
Author(s):  
Hakan Muhammed Taş ◽  
Ziya Simsek ◽  
Abdurrahim Colak ◽  
Pınar Demir ◽  
Recep Demir ◽  
...  

2022 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aravind Ganesh ◽  
Benjamin Beland ◽  
Gordon A.E. Jewett ◽  
David J.T. Campbell ◽  
Malavika Varma ◽  
...  

Background Evidence informing the choice between carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting for acutely symptomatic carotid stenosis (“hot carotid”) is dated and does not factor in contemporary therapies or techniques. The optimal imaging modality is also uncertain. We explored the attitudes of stroke physicians regarding imaging and revascularization of patients with acute symptomatic carotid stenosis. Methods We used a qualitative descriptive methodology to examine decision‐making approaches and opinions of physicians regarding the choice of imaging and revascularization procedures for hot carotids. We conducted semistructured interviews with purposive sampling of 22 stroke physicians from 16 centers in 6 world regions and various specialties: 11 neurologists, 3 geriatricians, 5 interventional neuroradiologists, and 3 neurovascular surgeons. Results Qualitative analysis revealed several themes regarding clinical decision‐making for hot carotids. Whereas CT angiography was favored by most participants, timely imaging availability, breadth of information gained, and surgeon/interventionalist preferences were important themes influencing the choice of imaging modality. Carotid endarterectomy was generally favored over carotid artery stenting, but participants’ choice of intervention was influenced by healthcare system factors such as use of multidisciplinary vascular teams and operating room or angiography suite availability, and patient factors like age and infarct size. Areas of uncertainty included choice of imaging modality for borderline stenosis, utility of carotid plaque imaging, timing of revascularization, and the role of intervention with borderline stenosis or intraluminal thrombus. Conclusions This qualitative study highlights practice patterns common in different centers around the world, such as the general preference for CT angiography imaging and carotid endarterectomy over carotid artery stenting but also identified important differences in availability, selection, and timing of imaging and revascularization options. To gain widespread support, future carotid trials will need to accommodate identified variations in practice patterns and address areas of uncertainty, such as optimal timing of revascularization with modern best medical management and risk‐stratification with imaging features other than just degree of stenosis.


2010 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc S. Randall ◽  
Fiona M. McKevitt ◽  
Sanjeev Kumar ◽  
Trevor J. Cleveland ◽  
Keith Endean ◽  
...  

1990 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 323-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Vermassen ◽  
Albert Flamme ◽  
Joseph De Roose ◽  
Guyla Berszenyi ◽  
Fritz Derom

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Xiao Chen ◽  
Jing Su ◽  
Guojun Wang ◽  
Han Zhao ◽  
Shizhong Zhang ◽  
...  

Background and Purpose. This study is aimed at assessing the differences in postoperative stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and mortality in patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis (sCAS) treated with early or late carotid endarterectomy (CEA) to determine and compare the safety of different operation timing. Design. A systematic document retrieval of studies published in the past 10 years reporting periprocedural stroke/mortality/MI after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) related to the time between CEA and qualifying neurological symptoms. The application database has “PubMed, EMbase and Cochrane databases.” RevMan5.3 software provided by the Cochrane collaboration was used for meta-analysis. Results. A systematic literature search was conducted in databases. A total of 10 articles were included in this study. They were divided into early CEA and delayed CEA with operation within 48 h, 1 w, or 2 w after onset of neurological symptoms. Incidence of the postoperative stroke in patients undergoing delayed CEA (≥48 h) was significantly higher than patients with delayed CEA (<48 h) ( OR = 2.14 , 95% CI: 1.43-3.21, P = 0.0002 ). The postoperative mortality of patients after delayed CEA (≥48 h) was significantly higher than patients after early CEA (<48 h) ( OR = 1.35 , 95% CI: 1.06-1.71, P = 0.02 ). The risk of postoperative mortality of patients treated with delayed CEA (≥7 d) was significantly higher than patients after the early CEA group (<7 d) ( OR = 1.69 , 95% CI: 1.21-2.32, P = 0.001 ). Conclusion. Early CEA is safe and effective for a part of patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis, but a comprehensive preoperative evaluation of patients with carotid stenosis must be performed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document