Key result
Carotid artery stenting linked to ~60% lower risk of perioperative MI versus carotid endarterectomy.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to estimate the incidence of periprocedural outcomes after carotid revascularization, with a special emphasis on myocardial infarction, and assess the safety of CAS versus CEA.
Does carotid artery stenting compared to carotid endarterectomy alter the risk of periprocedural myocardial infarction, stroke, and death in patients undergoing carotid revascularization?
Meta-Analysis (n=11,153)
Does carotid artery stenting compared to carotid endarterectomy alter the risk of periprocedural myocardial infarction, stroke, and death in patients undergoing carotid revascularization?
Odds Ratio: 0.4 (95% CI 0.2–0.7)
p-value: p=< 0.05
While carotid artery stenting is associated with a lower risk of periprocedural myocardial infarction compared to endarterectomy, it carries a higher risk of stroke and the composite of stroke, MI, or death.
CAS lowers periprocedural MI but raises composite stroke/MI/death risk; reinforces CEA preference in carotid revascularization.
Background and Aim The aim of this study is to estimate the incidence of periprocedural outcomes after carotid revascularization with special emphasis on myocardial infarction and assess the safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) through systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods A multiple electronic search was performed in Medline (database provider PubMed), Web of Science Core Collection, EMBASE (database provider Ovid) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for articles from 2000 up to 2023 reporting outcomes after carotid revascularization. Randomized control trials comparing the perioperative events (30-day results) after CAS and CEA stating the perioperative risk of myocardial infarction were included in the present meta-analysis according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Results A total of twelve randomized control trials (RCTs) with 11 153 patients were identified and considered eligible. The pooled risk of periprocedural stroke was found to be reduced after CEA compared to CAS [OR: 1.6, CI 95%:1.3-2.1, P < 0.05], while PMI was found to be more frequent after CEA, favoring CAS [OR: 0.4, CI 95%: 0.2-0.7, P < 0.05]. Periprocedural mortality was lower but not reaching statistical significance in the CEA compared to CAS [OR: 1.1, CI 95%: 0.6-2.1, P = 0.68]. The pooled OR for composite endpoint of stroke, MI or death was in favor of CEA as safer treatment [OR: 1.3, CI 95%: 1-1.5, P < 0.05]. Conclusions PMI risk was lower after CAS, although the currently available data do not demonstrate any increase in mortality rates.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Valaki et al. (2025) conducted a meta-analysis in Carotid revascularization (n=11,153). Carotid artery stenting (CAS) vs. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) was evaluated on Perioperative myocardial infarction (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.2-0.7, p=< 0.05). Carotid artery stenting was associated with a lower risk of perioperative myocardial infarction compared to carotid endarterectomy (OR 0.4; 95% CI 0.2-0.7; P<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: