Surgery offers no more than medical treatment in the management of transient ischaemic attack

Abstract

This paper debates the motion that 'Surgery offers no more than medical treatment in the management of transient ischaemic attack' (TIA). The arguments in support of this motion are that surgical treatment has a high morbidity and mortality, and that even the investigation of patients by angiography prior to surgery entails a risk of stroke; that TIA is a marker of generalised vascular disease, and that medical treatment can reduce the incidence of stroke after TIA. The counter arguments are that TIA is associated with an increased risk of stroke and this risk can be reduced by surgery; that recent surgical results show an acceptable complication rate, and that modern methods of investigation permit accurate non-invasive assessment of patients at risk of stroke.