Why the study?
Does extracranial arterial surgery improve morbidity and mortality compared to medical therapy in patients with TIA?
Does extracranial arterial surgery improve morbidity and mortality compared to medical therapy in patients with TIA?
The author argues that demonstrating the statistical superiority of carotid surgery over medical therapy in TIA patients requires an impractically low perioperative complication rate of 1.4% or less.
To the Editor:Dr. Mohr has provided a valuable review of asymptomatic carotid artery disease.'However, he misquotes the findings of Jonas and Hass. 2 Jonas and Hass concluded that after extracranial arterial surgery for TIA, a stroke complication rate of >2.9% is unacceptable if one wishes to have results that are significantly better than the results for the medical group in the Joint Study.The figure of 2.9% applies only to strokes, not to the combined morbidity-mortality rate as Dr. Mohr states.I have applied that same % 2 analysis used by Jonas and Hass to the total stroke and death rate reported for TIA patients in the Joint Study 3 (table).In the non-surgical group the total morbidity and mortality was 25.9%.In order to reach statistical superiority at the 5% level, the total morbidity and mortality in the surgical group would have to be no more than 16.8%.Subtracting the 15.4% long-term (42 month) morbidity and mortality rate yields an "acceptable" post-operative stroke or death rate of 1.4% or less.As non-surgical patients do not require arteriography, a combined morbidity-mortality rate of over 1.4% for arteriography, endarterectomy, and the post-operative period is unacceptable.It is unlikely that such a low morbidity-mortality rate could be achieved.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Robert Karis (1983) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: