Abstract 155: Comparative Effectiveness of Carotid Endarterectomy Compared to Medical Therapy Among Patients With Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis

Stroke ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Salomeh Keyhani ◽  
Eric Cheng ◽  
Katherine Hoggatt ◽  
Peter Austin ◽  
Paul Hebert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Endarterectomy ◽  
Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Medical Therapy ◽  
Community Sample ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid ◽  
Immortal Time Bias ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients ◽  
Stroke Death

Background: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) reduces stroke risk compared to medical therapy alone among patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. CEA involves a tradeoff between higher perioperative short-term risks in exchange for a lower long-term risk of stroke. However, overall declines in stroke rates raise concerns that CEA may no longer be a preferred treatment. We examined the effectiveness of CEA compared to medical therapy (MT) among asymptomatic patients in preventing stroke and stroke-death within 5 years of follow-up. Methods: We identified Veterans ≥65 years old with carotid stenosis (n=2712 CEA and n=2509 MT patients) who did not have a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack. We propensity score-matched MT patients to CEA patients to control for baseline confounding and used methods to mimic analyses from the Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis Trial, the last published trial to compare CEA to MT. We accounted for “immortal time” bias by randomizing patients to CEA and MT groups and censoring patients if their actual treatment became inconsistent with the arm in which they were randomized (e.g., patient received CEA, but was randomized to MT). We accounted for the informative censoring by estimating time-dependent inverse probability of censoring weights using measured covariates (demographics and 72 time-varying comorbidities). We computed weighted Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves and estimated the risk of stroke/stroke-death in each group over 5 years of follow-up. Results: The observed stroke or death rate (perioperative complications) within 30 days in the CEA arm was 3%. The 5-year risk were similar among patients randomized to CEA 5.5% (95% CI, 4.3%-6.7%) versus MT 7.6% (95% CI,5.9%-9.2%) (risk difference, -2.1%, 95% CI -4%- 0%) with little difference in the KM curves (logrank p=0.2). Conclusion: CEA was not superior to MT in a community sample of Veterans after 5 years of follow-up, suggesting that CEA may no longer be the preferred treatment strategy.

Carotid Endarterectomy for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael E. Hochman
Keyword(s):  
Vascular Surgery ◽  
Carotid Endarterectomy ◽  
Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Study Design ◽  
Clinical Case ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients ◽  
Study Intervention

This chapter provides a summary of the landmark surgical study known as the ACST trial, which compared surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Is carotid endarterectomy (CEA) beneficial in asymptomatic patients with severe carotid stenosis? Starting with that question, the chapter describes the basics of the study, including funding, year study began, year study was published, study location, who was studied, who was excluded, how many patients, study design, study intervention, follow-up, endpoints, results, and criticism and limitations. The chapter briefly reviews other relevant studies and information, gives a summary and discusses implications, and concludes with a relevant clinical case involving vascular surgery.

scholarly journals Carotid artery stenosis – Current evidence and treatment recommendations

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 2514183X2110016
Author(s):  
Mandy D Müller ◽  
Leo H Bonati
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenosis ◽  
Artery Stenosis ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients

Background: Carotid artery stenosis is an important cause for stroke. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) reduces the risk of stroke in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis and to some extent in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. More than 20 years ago, carotid artery stenting (CAS) emerged as an endovascular treatment alternative to CEA. Objective and Methods: This review summarises the available evidence from randomised clinical trials in patients with symptomatic as well as in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Results: CAS is associated with a higher risk of death or any stroke between randomisation and 30 days after treatment than CEA (odds ratio (OR) = 1.74, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.33, p < 0.0001). In a pre-defined subgroup analysis, the OR for stroke or death within 30 days after treatment was 1.11 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.64) in patients <70 years old and 2.23 (95% CI 1.61 to 3.08) in patients ≥70 years old, resulting in a significant interaction between patient age and treatment modality (interaction p = 0.007). The combination of death or any stroke up to 30 days after treatment or ipsilateral stroke during follow-up also favoured CEA (OR = 1.51, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.85, p < 0.0001). In asymptomatic patients, there is a non-significant increase in death or stroke occurring within 30 days of treatment with CAS compared to CEA (OR = 1.72, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.97, p = 0.05). The risk of peri-procedural death or stroke or ipsilateral stroke during follow-up did not differ significantly between treatments (OR = 1.27, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.84, p = 0.22). Discussion and Conclusion: In symptomatic patients, randomised evidence has consistently shown CAS to be associated with a higher risk of stroke or death within 30 days of treatment than CEA. This extra risk is mostly attributed to an increase in strokes occurring on the day of the procedure in patients ≥70 years. In asymptomatic patients, there may be a small increase in the risk of stroke or death within 30 days of treatment with CAS compared to CEA, but the currently available evidence is insufficient and further data from ongoing randomised trials are needed.

Abstract 2956: Carotid Revascularization in Elderly Asymptomatic Patients: Are the Results Optimal?

Stroke ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 43 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahul H Damani ◽  
Mahmoud Rayes ◽  
Pratik Bhattacharya ◽  
Seemant Chaturvedi
Keyword(s):  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Medical Therapy ◽  
Beta Blockers ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid ◽  
Carotid Revascularization ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients ◽  
Operative Complications ◽  
Best Medical Therapy

Objectives: Assess the hypothesis that patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis older than 75 years are not on “best medical therapy” and their operative complication exceeds the AHA/ASA 3% threshold. Background: According to the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study (ACAS), the Asymptomatic Carotid Surgery Trial (ACST) and recent AHA/ASA guidelines; benefits of carotid revascularization in asymptomatic patient >75 years would be offset if the operative complications rate exceed 3% and it would be more prudent to manage such patients on “best medical therapy”. How often these guidelines are being followed remains unclear. Methods: A retrospective chart review (2009-2011) at three urban, one suburban hospital within 30 miles was performed. Information of carotid revascularization (CEA & CAS) in asymptomatic elderly patients, in-hospital outcomes of stroke/death and/or MI and pre-procedural medications were evaluated. Statistical analysis with chi square testing was used. Results: A total of 114 patients met our inclusion criteria. Their features are described below.At four hospitals, the proportion of carotid revascularization done was 62% (114/185). More then quarter and one-third of patients undergoing carotid revascularization were not on statin and beta-blockers, respectively. Further, the rate of in hospital stroke was 4.4%. Conclusions: The majority of elderly patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis patients are still undergoing carotid revascularization with operative complications that exceeded the AHA/ASA 3% threshold. More then quarter of patients in this subgroup are not on “best medical therapy”. These results reinforce the need for a new clinical trial comparing aggressive medical therapy alone vs. aggressive medical therapy and revascularization.

scholarly journals Comparative Effectiveness of Carotid Endarterectomy vs Initial Medical Therapy in Patients With Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis

2020 ◽  
Vol 77 (9) ◽  
pp. 1110
Author(s):  
Salomeh Keyhani ◽  
Eric M. Cheng ◽  
Katherine J. Hoggatt ◽  
Peter C. Austin ◽  
Erin Madden ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Endarterectomy ◽  
Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Medical Therapy ◽  
Comparative Effectiveness ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid

Abstract 17291: Carotid Revascularization and Medical Management for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis: CREST-2 update

Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
James Meschia ◽  
Brajesh K Lal ◽  
George Howard ◽  
Gary Roubin ◽  
Robert D Brown ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Medical Therapy ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Carotid Stenting ◽  
Current Treatment ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid ◽  
Carotid Revascularization ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients

Purpose: The safety of revascularization for asymptomatic carotid stenosis, and the efficacy of medical therapy for stroke prevention have improved. Therefore, results of prior randomized trials may not apply to current treatment decisions. The NINDS-funded CREST-2 will compare carotid endarterectomy and intensive medical therapy (IMT) versus IMT alone (n=1240), and carotid stenting and IMT versus IMT alone (n=1240) in asymptomatic patients with≥70% stenosis. Materials & Methods: CREST-2 consists of two parallel randomized clinical trials to be conducted at a target of ≈120 centers, including within NINDS StrokeNet. The composite primary outcome is stroke or death during the peri-procedural period or ipsilateral ischemic stroke thereafter up to 4 years. Blinded assessment of cognition will be done periodically. Centrally directed IMT includes tight control of blood pressure (systolic target <140 mm Hg) and cholesterol (LDL target <70 mg/dl) as well as lifestyle coaching. Results: As of June 12, 2015, 94 centers have been approved by the Site Selection Committee. Credentialing is ongoing, with 198 approved surgeons and 64 approved interventionists; 124 additional conditionally approved interventionists will be able to submit additional cases for review under the CREST-2 Registry. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid will offer CAS reimbursement for Registry enrollees. As of June 12, 2015, there are 39 actively enrolling centers, and 37 patients have been randomized. Conclusion: CREST-2 is designed to identify the best approach for asymptomatic carotid stenosis. The first patient was randomized in December, 2014. An update will be provided regarding the numbers of patients randomized, centers certified, as well as surgeons and interventionists fully approved. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02089217

Carotid endarterectomy may be required in addition to best medical treatment for some patient subgroups with asymptomatic carotid stenosis

Vascular ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kosmas I Paraskevas ◽  
Andrew N Nicolaides ◽  
Frank J Veith
Keyword(s):  
Medical Treatment ◽  
Carotid Endarterectomy ◽  
Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Death Rate ◽  
Cerebrovascular Event ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid ◽  
Best Medical Treatment ◽  
Patient Subgroups ◽  
Stroke Death

Several guidelines recommend carotid endarterectomy for patients with severe asymptomatic carotid stenosis to reduce the risk of a future cerebrovascular event, as long as the perioperative stroke/death rate is <3%. Based on improvements in best medical treatment, it was argued that currently best medical treatment alone should comprise the treatment-of-choice for asymptomatic carotid stenosis patients and that no intervention is warranted in these individuals. While it is true that best medical treatment should be used for the management of all asymptomatic carotid stenosis patients, emerging evidence suggests that best medical treatment alone may not prevent disease progression and the development of symptoms in some asymptomatic carotid stenosis patient subgroups. This article analyzes the results of two recent independent studies demonstrating that medical therapy alone may not be adequate for stroke prevention in some asymptomatic carotid stenosis patient subgroups. These results suggest that besides best medical treatment, additional carotid endarterectomy should be considered for specific asymptomatic carotid stenosis patients.

Outcome after carotid endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid stenosis

1994 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 443-449 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard B. Libman ◽  
Ralph L. Sacco ◽  
Tianying Shi ◽  
James W. Correll ◽  
J.P. Mohr
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Endarterectomy ◽  
Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis ◽  
Asymptomatic Carotid
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document