http://stroke.ahajournals.org/content/early/2017/07/05/STROKEAHA.117.016824
Abstract
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