Impact of risk scoring on decision-making in symptomatic moderate carotid atherosclerosis

Abstract

Abstract Background Benefit from carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in symptomatic moderate (50–69 per cent) carotid stenosis remains marginal. The Fourth National Clinical Guideline for Stroke recommends use of the risk score from the European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST) to aid decision-making in symptomatic carotid disease. It is not known whether clinicians are, in fact, influenced by it. Methods Using the ECST risk prediction model, three scenarios of patients with a low (less than 10 per cent), moderate (20–25 per cent) and high (40–45 per cent) 5-year risk of stroke were devised and validated. Invitations to complete an online survey were sent by e-mail to vascular surgeons and stroke physicians, with responses gathered. The questionnaire was then repeated with the addition of the ECST risk score. Results Two hundred and one completed surveys were analysed (21·5 per cent response rate): 107 by stroke physicians and 94 by vascular surgeons. The high-risk scenario after the introduction of the ECST risk score showed an increased use of CEA (66·7 versus 80·1 per cent; P = 0·009). The low-risk scenario after risk score analysis demonstrated a swing towards best medical therapy (23·4 versus 57·2 per cent; P < 0·001). CEA was preferred in the moderate-risk scenario and this was not altered significantly by introduction of the risk score (71·6 versus 75·6 per cent; P = 0·609). Vascular surgeons exhibited a preference towards CEA compared with stroke physicians in both low- and moderate-risk scenarios (P < 0·001 and P = 0·003 respectively). Conclusion The addition of a risk score appeared to influence clinicians in their decision-making towards CEA in high-risk patients and towards best medical therapy in low-risk patients.