Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2010 Jul 1;363(1):11-23.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0912321. Epub 2010 May 26.

Stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment of carotid-artery stenosis

Collaborators, Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment of carotid-artery stenosis

Thomas G Brott et al. N Engl J Med. .

Erratum in

  • N Engl J Med. 2010 Jul 29;363(5):498
  • N Engl J Med. 2010 Jul 8;363(2):198

Abstract

Background: Carotid-artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy are both options for treating carotid-artery stenosis, an important cause of stroke.

Methods: We randomly assigned patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid stenosis to undergo carotid-artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. The primary composite end point was stroke, myocardial infarction, or death from any cause during the periprocedural period or any ipsilateral stroke within 4 years after randomization.

Results: For 2502 patients over a median follow-up period of 2.5 years, there was no significant difference in the estimated 4-year rates of the primary end point between the stenting group and the endarterectomy group (7.2% and 6.8%, respectively; hazard ratio with stenting, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.51; P=0.51). There was no differential treatment effect with regard to the primary end point according to symptomatic status (P=0.84) or sex (P=0.34). The 4-year rate of stroke or death was 6.4% with stenting and 4.7% with endarterectomy (hazard ratio, 1.50; P=0.03); the rates among symptomatic patients were 8.0% and 6.4% (hazard ratio, 1.37; P=0.14), and the rates among asymptomatic patients were 4.5% and 2.7% (hazard ratio, 1.86; P=0.07), respectively. Periprocedural rates of individual components of the end points differed between the stenting group and the endarterectomy group: for death (0.7% vs. 0.3%, P=0.18), for stroke (4.1% vs. 2.3%, P=0.01), and for myocardial infarction (1.1% vs. 2.3%, P=0.03). After this period, the incidences of ipsilateral stroke with stenting and with endarterectomy were similarly low (2.0% and 2.4%, respectively; P=0.85).

Conclusions: Among patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid stenosis, the risk of the composite primary outcome of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death did not differ significantly in the group undergoing carotid-artery stenting and the group undergoing carotid endarterectomy. During the periprocedural period, there was a higher risk of stroke with stenting and a higher risk of myocardial infarction with endarterectomy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00004732.)

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1. Randomization and Follow-up of the Study Patients
Patients were assessed for eligibility before randomization, but the number of patients assessed is not available, because screening logs were not maintained. CAS denotes carotid-artery stenting, and CEA carotid endarterectomy.
Figure 2
Figure 2. Primary End Point, According to Treatment Group
The primary end point was a composite of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death from any cause during the periprocedural period or ipsilateral stroke within 4 years after randomization. Panel A shows the Kaplan–Meier curves for patients undergoing carotid-artery stenting (CAS) and those undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in whom the primary end point did not occur, according to year of follow-up. Panel B shows the hazard ratios for the primary end point, as calculated for the CAS group versus the CEA group, according to age at the time of the procedure. The hazard ratios were estimated from the proportional-hazards model with adjustment for sex and symptomatic status. Dashed lines indicate the 95% confidence intervals. Panel C shows the numbers of patients in each age group.

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Petty GW, Brown RD, Jr, Whisnant JP, Sicks JD, O’Fallon WM, Wiebers DO. Ischemic stroke subtypes: a population-based study of incidence and risk factors. Stroke. 1999;30:2513–2516. - PubMed
    1. Goldstein LB, Adams R, Alberts MJ, et al. Primary prevention of ischemic stroke: a guideline from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association Stroke Council: cosponsored by the Atherosclerotic Peripheral Vascular Disease Interdisciplinary Working Group; Cardiovascular Nursing Council; Clinical Cardiology Council; Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism Council; and the Quality of Care and Outcomes Research Interdisciplinary Working Group: The American Academy of Neurology affirms the value of this guideline. Stroke. 2006;37:1583–1633. [Erratum, Stroke 2007;38:207.] - PubMed
    1. Adams RJ, Albers G, Alberts MJ, et al. Update to the AHA/ASA recommendations for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack. Stroke. 2008;39:1647–1652. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ederle J, Featherstone RL, Brown MM. Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for carotid artery stenosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;4:CD000515. - PubMed
    1. Yadav JS, Wholey MH, Kuntz RE, et al. Protected carotid-artery stenting versus endarterectomy in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:1493–1501. - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data