Carotid artery stenting showed no significant difference in the primary composite outcome of periprocedural death, stroke, or myocardial infarction compared to carotid endarterectomy (RR 1.02).
Meta-Analysis (n=15,251)
Yes
Does carotid artery stenting reduce periprocedural death, stroke, or MI compared to carotid artery endarterectomy in asymptomatic patients with severe carotid stenosis?
15,251 asymptomatic patients with severe carotid artery stenosis from 15 studies (7 RCTs, 8 observational). Mean age ~69 years, 29.2% female in CAS group and 26.3% female in CEA group.
Carotid artery stenting (CAS)
Carotid artery endarterectomy (CEA)
Composite of periprocedural (within 30 days of index procedure) death, any stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI)composite
In asymptomatic patients with severe carotid stenosis, carotid artery stenting and endarterectomy demonstrate similar periprocedural rates of the composite of death, stroke, or MI, confirming clinical equipoise between the two revascularization strategies.
Effect estimate: RR 1.02 (95% CI 0.69-1.51)
p-value: p=0.93
Carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid artery endarterectomy (CEA) are revascularization options for the management of severe carotid disease in asymptomatic patients. We aimed to compare the peri-procedural outcomes of the two modalities. A systematic review of the databases PUBMED, EBSCO, and Cochrane Library was performed. All the studies that reported periprocedural outcomes (within 30 days) in asymptomatic carotid stenosis patients were included in the meta-analysis. Random effects models with inverse-variance weighting were used to estimate pooled risk ratios (RRs) to compare the outcomes. Fifteen studies (including seven randomized controlled trials) met the inclusion criteria. A total of 15251 patients were included, out of which 6419 (42%) underwent CAS and 8832 (57.9%) underwent CEA. There was no statistical difference in the primary composite outcome of death/stroke/myocardial infarction (MI) (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.69-1.51, p 0.93). No difference was found in the secondary outcome of all-cause mortality. CAS was associated with a slightly lower risk of MI and cranial nerve palsy. CAS was associated with a slightly higher risk of stroke with no difference in the occurrence of disabling stroke or ipsilateral stroke. In general terms, the study confirms equipoise in the two treatment strategies with a higher risk of MI and cranial nerve palsy with CEA and a higher risk of non-disabling stroke with CAS.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Ankita Aggarwal
All India Institute of Medical Sciences
Cameron Whitler
McLaren Macomb
Anubhav Jain
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
Cureus
Genesys (United States)
Ascension Providence Hospital
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Aggarwal et al. (Thu,) conducted a meta-analysis in Asymptomatic severe carotid stenosis (n=15,251). Carotid Artery Stenting (CAS) vs. Carotid Artery Endarterectomy (CEA) was evaluated on Composite of periprocedural death, any stroke, or myocardial infarction (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.69-1.51, p=0.93). Carotid artery stenting showed no significant difference in the primary composite outcome of periprocedural death, stroke, or myocardial infarction compared to carotid endarterectomy (RR 1.02).
synapsesocial.com/papers/6a1310aa8f1bac20a09ece42 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.50506