Deans' stroke musings

Changing stroke rehab and research worldwide now.Time is Brain!Just think of all the trillions and trillions of neurons that DIE each day because there are NO effective hyperacute therapies besides tPA(only 12% effective). I have 493 posts on hyperacute therapy, enough for researchers to spend decades proving them out. These are my personal ideas and blog on stroke rehabilitation and stroke research. Do not attempt any of these without checking with your medical provider. Unless you join me in agitating, when you need these therapies they won't be there.

What this blog is for:

Shortly after getting out of the hospital and getting NO information on the process or protocols of stroke rehabilitation and recovery I started searching on the internet and found that no other survivor received useful information. This is an attempt to cover all stroke rehabilitation information that should be readily available to survivors so they can talk with informed knowledge to their medical staff. It's quite disgusting that this information is not available from every stroke association and doctors group.
My back ground story is here:

Wednesday, July 12, 2017

Carotid Stenting Versus Endarterectomy for Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis

If your Circle of Willis is complete there is absolutely no reason to go through the dangers of carotid endarterectomy. Don't listen to me, I know nothing. My solution is to test for a complete Circle of Willis and if it exists close the stenosis up via gluing. I wouldn't put an inflexible metal stent in an artery that needs to be flexible.  I have a carotid artery that is completely closed up with no ill effects.
Paola Moresoli, Bettina Habib, Pauline Reynier, Matthew H. Secrest, Mark J. Eisenberg, Kristian B. Filion


Background and Purpose—There is no consensus on the comparative efficacy and safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) versus carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. To evaluate CAS versus CEA in asymptomatic patients, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Methods—We systematically searched EMBASE, PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials comparing CAS to CEA in asymptomatic patients using a pre-specified protocol. Two independent reviewers identified randomized controlled trials meeting our inclusion/exclusion criteria, extracted relevant data, and assessed quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Random effects models with inverse-variance weighting were used to estimate pooled risk ratios (RRs) comparing the incidences of periprocedural and long-term outcomes between CAS and CEA.
Results—We identified 11 reports of 5 randomized controlled trials for inclusion (n=3019) asymptomatic patients. The pooled incidences of any periprocedural stroke (RR, 1.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99–3.40), periprocedural nondisabling stroke (RR, 1.95; 95% CI, 0.98–3.89), and any periprocedural stroke or death (RR, 1.72; 95% CI, 0.95–3.11) trended toward an increased risk after CAS. We could not rule out clinically significant differences between treatments for long-term stroke (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.76–2.03) and the composite outcome of periprocedural stroke, death or myocardial infarction, or long-term ipsilateral stroke (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.70–1.21).
Conclusions—Although uncertainty surrounds the long-term outcomes of CAS versus CEA, the potential for increased risks of periprocedural stroke and periprocedural stroke or death with CAS suggests that CEA is the preferred option for the management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

No comments:

Post a Comment