Carotid intervention: stent or surgery? A prospective audit

Abstract

This study represents a prospective audit comparing carotid artery stenting (CAS) with carotid endarterectomy (CEA), performed by a single surgical team. Between January 2005 and December 2008, 440 patients were referred; 177 had CAS and 263 CEA. Selection of procedure was individualised and contra-indications for CAS included internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis > 85-90%, intraluminal thrombus, ICA tortuosity, gross surface ulceration of plaque and excessive calcification. Type III aortic arch and arch calcification also precluded CAS. Standard techniques were used for both procedures with a protection device routinely used for CAS. Most CEAs were performed under general anaesthesia, with selective intraluminal shunting. One hundred and eighty-six patients were selected for CAS; nine (48% ) were converted to CEA for technical reasons. The operative risk profile was similar, but significantly more in the CAS group were hypertensive. Almost half (49% ) in the CAS group were asymptomatic vs 26% in the CEA group. All asymptomatics had 70+ % stenosis on Duplex Doppler. Results were reported within one month of the procedure. The stroke rate was 2.3% for CAS vs 1.9% for CEA (p > 0.05). Stroke and death plus one M1 was 4.5% after CAS vs 3.4% after CEA (p > 0.05). Disabling stroke occurred in 1.1% of CAS patients vs 0.4% of CEA patients. These results are satisfactory and compare favourably with other similar series.