Carotid endarterectomy compared with carotid artery stenting for extracranial carotid artery stenosis: a retrospective single-centre study

Author:

Birdal Oğuzhan1ORCID,Çalık Eyüp S.2ORCID,Arslan Ümit2ORCID,Koza Yavuzer1ORCID,Kaya Uğur2ORCID,Çolak Abdurrahim2ORCID,Hakan Taş M.3ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Cardiology, Ataturk University Medical Faculty, Erzurum 25240, Türkiye

2. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Ataturk University Medical Faculty, Erzurum 25240, Türkiye

3. M. Department of Cardiology, Ataturk University Medical Faculty, Erzurum 25240, Türkiye

Abstract

Aim: One of the main risk factors for an ischemic stroke is significant carotid artery stenosis, and extracranial severe carotid artery stenosis accounts for 20% of ischemic strokes. Prior to the development of carotid artery stenting (CAS), the only effective and reliable treatment for carotid artery stenosis was carotid endarterectomy (CEA). This study compares the results of CAS and CEA in patients with significant carotid artery stenosis. Methods: Between 2018 and 2022, hospital records of all patients who underwent carotid artery revascularization at the institution were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups depending on whether CEA or CAS was performed for carotid revascularization. Propensity score matching was performed to reduce bias by equating the baseline clinical characteristics of the groups. To compare 30-day, 1-year, and long-term outcomes, rates of transient ischemic attack (TIA), myocardial infarction, stroke, all-cause mortality, and composite endpoints were analyzed. Results: After PSM, 76 patients each in the CEA and CAS groups were compared. The mean age was 69.80 years ± 11.35 years and 121 (80%) were male. The patients were followed up for a mean of 33 months ± 6 months. The incidence of TIA in the perioperative period [9 (12%) vs. 4 (5%); P < 0.05], TIA and composite endpoint at 1-year period [11 (15%) vs. 2 (3%); P < 0.05 and 27 (36%) vs. 16 (21%); P < 0.05, respectively] were significantly higher in the CAS group than in the CEA group. No difference was observed between the groups in the long-term. Conclusions: There was no noticeable difference between the CEA and CAS groups in the examination of cases with severe carotid artery stenosis in terms of 1-month, and 1-year results (apart from TIA and composite endpoints), or long-term outcomes. Extracranial carotid artery stenosis can be treated safely and effectively also by CAS.

Publisher

Open Exploration Publishing

Subject

General Medicine,General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Environmental Science,General Medicine,Ocean Engineering,General Medicine,General Medicine,General Medicine,General Medicine,General Earth and Planetary Sciences,General Environmental Science,General Medicine

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