Key result
CEA and CAS yield similar long-term stroke-free survival for recurrent carotid artery stenosis.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to evaluate perioperative and long-term outcomes in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy or stenting for symptomatic or asymptomatic high-grade restenosis of the internal carotid artery.
Does carotid endarterectomy or stenting provide better perioperative and long-term outcomes in patients with recurrent carotid artery stenosis?
Observational (n=111)
No
Does carotid endarterectomy or stenting provide better perioperative and long-term outcomes in patients with recurrent carotid artery stenosis?
Redo-CEA and CAS for recurrent carotid artery stenosis demonstrate favorable periprocedural and long-term outcomes with no significant difference in stroke-free survival between the two approaches.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Both CEA and CAS for carotid restenosis show low periprocedural risk and high stroke-free survival; leaves open optimal strategy in prospective studies.
Summary: Background: The aim of this study is to evaluate perioperative as well as long-term outcomes in patients operated with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or stenting (CAS) due to symptomatic or asymptomatic high-grade restenosis of the internal carotid artery (ICA). Patients and methods: In a retrospective analysis of our electronic database including 2980 patients who underwent carotid endarterectomy or stenting due to a symptomatic or asymptomatic high-grade stenosis of the ICA, between 2000 and 2016, we enrolled 111 patients with recurrent ICA stenosis. Results: An ipsilateral 2nd time restenosis (> 80 % in the asymptomatic and > 50 % in the symptomatic patients according to NASCET criteria) of ICA was detected in 13 patients (12 %); 3 of them were symptomatic. These patients were managed with either CEA (n = 5/38 %) or CAS (n = 8/62 %) with no perioperative stroke or death. The stroke-free survival rates at 2 and 8 years for CEA were 98 % and 98 % versus 100 % and 100 % for CAS respectively (P = .271). The type of the initial procedure (patch, CAS or interposition) did not play any significant role for the development of a 2nd time restenosis (P = .841). Conclusions: Redo-CEA/CAS seem to have similar results as primary procedures (as reported in the literature) with favorable periprocedural and long-term outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ahmad et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Recurrent carotid artery stenosis (n=111). Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) vs. Carotid artery stenting (CAS) was evaluated on Stroke-free survival at 8 years (p=0.271). Carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting yielded similar 8-year stroke-free survival rates (98% vs 100%, P=0.271) for the treatment of recurrent carotid artery stenosis.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: