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
Meta-Analysis
. 2019 May;20(5):413-423.
doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2018.07.003. Epub 2018 Jul 6.

Carotid Endarterectomy versus Carotid Stenting or Best Medical Treatment in Asymptomatic Patients with Significant Carotid Stenosis: A meta-analysis

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Carotid Endarterectomy versus Carotid Stenting or Best Medical Treatment in Asymptomatic Patients with Significant Carotid Stenosis: A meta-analysis

George Galyfos et al. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2019 May.

Abstract

Background: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate randomized trials (RTs) that compare outcomes among asymptomatic patients with significant carotid stenosis undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) versus carotid stenting (CAS) or best medical treatment (BMT).

Material and methods: The Pubmed, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched to identify eligible studies. Data were analyzed by using the StatsDirect Statistical software (Version 2.8.0, StatsDirect Ltd). Odds ratios (OR) were used to determine effect size, along with 95% confidence interval (CI). PRISMA guidelines for conducting meta-analyses were utilized.

Results: Overall, 10 RTs including 8771 asymptomatic patients were evaluated. Compared to CAS, 30-day all stroke risk was found to be lower after CEA (pooled OR = 0.56; CI 95% [0.312-0.989]; P = 0.046). However, other early and late outcomes were not different between CEA and CAS. Furthermore, 30-day all stroke (pooled OR = 3.43; CI 95% [1.810-6.510]; P = 0.0002), death (pooled OR = 4.75; CI 95% [1.548-14.581]; P = 0.007) and myocardial infarction (MI) (pooled OR = 9.18; CI 95% [1.668-50.524]; P = 0.011) risks were higher after CEA compared to BMT, as expected. Additionally, 30-day all stroke/death and all stroke/death/MI risks were higher after CEA compared to BMT as well. Regarding long-term results, ipsilateral stroke risk was lower after CEA compared to BMT (pooled OR = 0.46; CI 95% [0.361-0.596]; P < 0.0001) although death due to stroke risk was not different (pooled OR = 0.57; CI 95% [0.223-1.457]; P = 0.240). Unfortunately, no study comparing CAS to BMT was found.

Conclusions: CEA is associated with a lower early all stroke risk compared to CAS although other early or late outcomes did not show any difference between the two methods. Additionally, CEA seems to have a benefit over BMT against long-term ipsilateral stroke, although early outcomes are worse after CEA. No studies are available comparing CAS to BMT alone.

Keywords: Best medical treatment; Carotid artery disease; Carotid endarterectomy; Carotid stenting; Meta-analysis.

PubMed Disclaimer

MeSH terms

Substances

LinkOut - more resources