• J. Vasc. Surg. · Mar 2011

    Review Meta Analysis

    A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials of carotid endarterectomy vs stenting.

    • Mohammad Hassan Murad, Anas Shahrour, Nilay D Shah, Victor M Montori, and John J Ricotta.
    • Knowledge and Encounter Research Unit, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn 55905, USA. murad.mohammad@mayo.edu
    • J. Vasc. Surg. 2011 Mar 1;53(3):792-7.

    ObjectiveThe purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesize the available evidence derived from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) regarding the relative efficacy and safety of endarterectomy vs stenting in patients with carotid artery disease.MethodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Current Contents, and Cochrane CENTRAL through July 2010 to update previous systematic reviews. Two reviewers determined trial eligibility and extracted descriptive, methodologic, and outcome data (death, nonfatal stroke, and nonfatal myocardial infarction). Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool relative risks and the I(2) statistic was used to assess heterogeneity.ResultsThirteen RCTs proved eligible enrolling 7484 patients, of which 80% had symptomatic disease. Methodological quality was moderate to high, with better quality among RCTs published after 2008. Compared with carotid endarterectomy, stenting was associated with increased risk of any stroke (relative risk [RR], 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06-1.99; I(2) = 40%), decreased risk of periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI; RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.26- 0.71; I(2) = 0%), and nonsignificant increase in mortality (RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.85-2.33; I(2) = 5%). When analysis was restricted to the two most recent trials with the better methodology and more contemporary technique, we found stenting to be associated with a significant increase in the risk of any stroke (RR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.35-2.45) and mortality (RR, 2.53; 95% CI, 1.27-5.08) and a nonsignificant reduction of the risk of MI (RR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.12-1.23). For every 1000 patients opting for stenting rather than endarterectomy, 19 more patients would have strokes and 10 fewer would have MIs. Outcome data in asymptomatic patients were sparse and imprecise; hence, these conclusions apply primarily to symptomatic patients.ConclusionCompared with endarterectomy, carotid artery stenting (CAS) significantly increases the risk of any stroke and decreases the risk of MI.Copyright © 2011 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Free full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.