Long-Term Prevention of Stroke

Unit of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, University of Perugia, Hospital S. M. Misericordia, Italy.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology (Impact Factor: 16.5). 02/2011; 57(6):664-71. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2010.09.041
Source: PubMed


This study sought to evaluate long-term outcomes of carotid stenting (CAS) versus carotid endarterectomy (CEA) based on physician-guided indications.
The issue regarding long-term outcome of CAS versus CEA in patients with carotid stenosis is clinically relevant but remains unsettled.
Consecutive patients (71% men, mean age 71.3 years) treated by CEA (n = 1,118) or CAS (n = 1,084) after a training phase were reviewed. Selection of treatment was based on better-suitability characteristics (morphology and clinical). Data were adjusted with propensity score analysis and stratified by symptoms, age, and sex.
Thirty-day stroke/death rates were similar: 2.8% in CAS and 2.0% in CEA (p = 0.27). The risk was higher in symptomatic (3.5%) versus asymptomatic (2.0%) patients (p = 0.04) but without significant difference between CAS and CEA groups. Five-year survival rates were 82.0% in CAS and 87.7% in CEA (p = 0.05). Kaplan-Meier estimates of the composite of any periprocedural stroke/death and ipsilateral stroke at 5 years after the procedure were similar in all patients (4.7% vs. 3.7%; p = 0.4) and the subgroups of symptomatic (8.7% vs. 4.9%; p = 0.7) and asymptomatic (2.5% vs. 3.3%; p = 0.2) patients in CEA versus CAS, respectively. Cox analysis, adjusted by propensity score, identified statin treatment (p = 0.016) and symptomatic disease (p = 0.003) associated with the composite end point. There were no sex- or age-related significant outcome differences.
When physicians use their clinical judgment to select the appropriate technique for carotid revascularization CAS can offer efficacy and durability comparable to CEA with benefits persisting at 5 years.

Download full-text


Available from: Fabio Verzini, Dec 23, 2013
Show more