Why the study?
Previous trials and meta-analyses comparing CEA and CAS had heterogeneous diagnosis, treatment selection, and performance, prompting an evaluation of outcomes following both procedures in patients with carotid artery stenosis.
Does carotid endarterectomy compared to carotid artery stenting improve periprocedural outcomes in patients with carotid artery stenosis?
Does carotid endarterectomy compared to carotid artery stenting improve periprocedural outcomes in patients with carotid artery stenosis?
In a small retrospective cohort, there was no significant difference in periprocedural stroke or event-free survival between carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting.
BACKGROUND Previous randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses comparing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) included a large number of patients, but the diagnosis, treatment selection, and performance were heterogeneous. This retrospective study from a single center in South Korea aimed to evaluate outcomes following CEA and CAS in patients with carotid artery stenosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrospective analysis was performed using the data of patients who underwent carotid revascularization between September 2016 and June 2021 at a single institution. The primary outcomes were stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and death during the periprocedural period. RESULTS We enrolled a total of 61 (44 symptomatic and 17 asymptomatic) patients who underwent CEA or CAS. Among them, 36 (59%) underwent CEA and 25 (41%) underwent CAS. Statistically significant differences were found between the groups in degree of carotid stenosis (CEA: 87.0±9.1, CAS: 80.5±9.3, P=0.007). All patients with confirmed plaque ulceration before carotid revascularization underwent CEA. Two (3.3%) periprocedural strokes occurred, 1 in each group, on the ipsilateral side. There were no significant differences between CEA and CAS in the event-free survival rate for stroke during the follow-up (log-rank test=0.806). CONCLUSIONS Favorable outcomes in terms of periprocedural stroke were observed. We found no significant difference between the 2 carotid revascularization techniques in the incidence of periprocedural stroke in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. To confirm our findings, further studies involving a larger number of patients and continuous follow-up are necessary.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: