Carotid Angioplasty with or without Stent Placement versus Carotid Endarterectomy for Treatment of Carotid Stenosis: A Meta-analysis

Author:

Qureshi Adnan I.1,Kirmani Jawad F.2,Divani Afshin A.2,Hobson Robert W.3

Affiliation:

1. Zeenat Qureshi Stroke Research Center, Department of Neurology and Neurosciences, and The Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stent Trial Investigators, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Newark, New Jersey

2. Zeenat Qureshi Stroke Research Center, Department of Neurology and Neurosciences, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Newark, New Jersey

3. The Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stent Trial Investigators, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Newark, New Jersey

Abstract

Abstract OBJECTIVE: Carotid angioplasty with or without stent placement (CAS) has been proposed as an alternative method to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for treatment of carotid stenosis. Small randomized trials have evaluated the comparative efficacy of both methods; however, definitive evidence is lacking. METHODS: A search was made for randomized clinical trials comparing CAS and CEA for treatment of carotid stenosis. A literature search of MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane databases was supplemented by a review of bibliographies of relevant articles and personal files. A meta-analysis was performed using a random effects model because significant heterogeneity was observed. Outcomes compared included 1-month composite rates of stroke or death, all strokes, disabling strokes, myocardial infarction, cranial nerve injury, and major bleeding and 1-year rates of both minor and major ipsilateral strokes. RESULTS: We analyzed five randomized trials totaling 1154 patients (577 randomized to CEA and 577 randomized to CAS). The composite end point of 1-month stroke or death rate was not different between patients treated with CAS compared with those treated with CEA (relative risk [RR], 1.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6–2.8; P = 0.5). The 1-month stroke rate (831 patients analyzed: RR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.4–3.6; P = 0.7) and disabling stroke rate (831 patients analyzed: RR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.2–3.5; P = 0.9) was similar for CAS and CEA. The 1-month rates of myocardial infarction (814 patients analyzed: RR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1–0.9) and cranial nerve injury (918 patients analyzed: RR, 0.05; 95% CI, 0.01–0.3) were significantly lower for CAS. No significant differences were observed in 1-year rates of ipsilateral stroke (814 patients analyzed: RR, 0.8; 95% CI, 0.5–1.2; P = 0.2). CONCLUSION: The 30-day stroke and death rates associated with CAS and CEA were not significantly different. Lower rates of myocardial infarction and cranial nerve injury were observed with CAS compared with CEA.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Neurology (clinical),Surgery

Reference60 articles.

1. Use of the Parodi anti-embolism system in carotid stenting: Italian trial results;Adami;J Endovasc Ther,2002

2. Results of a multicenter prospective randomized trial of carotid stenting versus carotid endarterectomy;Alberts;Stroke,2001

3. Schneider WALLSTENT Endoprosthesis Clinical Investigators: A randomized clinical trial of carotid stenting versus endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis—Study design;Alberts;J Neurovasc Dis,1997

4. Multicenter evaluation of carotid artery stenting with a filter protection system;Al-Mubarak;J Am Coll Cardiol,2002

5. Study design for randomized prospective trial of carotid endarterectomy for asymptomatic atherosclerosis;Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study Group;Stroke,1989

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3