Carotid stenting vs endarterectomy: New results in perspective

William J. Perkins, Guiseppe Lanzino, Thomas G Brott

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Carotid artery stenosis is a major risk factor for stroke, and treatments for this condition to decrease the risk of stroke include medical therapy, carotid endarterectomy (CEA), and, more recently, carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS). Randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of CEA vs medical therapy showed a clear benefit for CEA in patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis of greater than 70% and a lesser benefit in patients with 50% to 69% stenosis. Treatments have evolved in the ensuing 20 years, and a new method, CAS, has emerged as a possible alternative to CEA. In early results, CAS proved feasible but did not compare favorably with CEA. Later and larger-scale studies comparing CAS to CEA failed to reach conclusions regarding a clear neurologic outcome advantage of one method over the other. This subject was of sufficient interest that 2 larger-scale randomized controlled trials comparing CAS and CEA, the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial and the International Carotid Stenting Study, were undertaken to further explore this issue. This brief review places the new data arising from these studies in the context of prior efforts to address the problem of carotid artery stenosis and explores further opportunities for improvement and patient recommendations in light of these new findings.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1101-1108
Number of pages8
JournalMayo Clinic Proceedings
Volume85
Issue number12
DOIs
StatePublished - 2010

Fingerprint

Endarterectomy
Carotid Endarterectomy
Angioplasty
Carotid Stenosis
Randomized Controlled Trials
Stroke
Therapeutics
Nervous System
Pathologic Constriction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Carotid stenting vs endarterectomy : New results in perspective. / Perkins, William J.; Lanzino, Guiseppe; Brott, Thomas G.

In: Mayo Clinic Proceedings, Vol. 85, No. 12, 2010, p. 1101-1108.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Perkins, William J. ; Lanzino, Guiseppe ; Brott, Thomas G. / Carotid stenting vs endarterectomy : New results in perspective. In: Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 2010 ; Vol. 85, No. 12. pp. 1101-1108.
@article{09b05d3fc04f4f6a9fe1aba604ab3f54,
title = "Carotid stenting vs endarterectomy: New results in perspective",
abstract = "Carotid artery stenosis is a major risk factor for stroke, and treatments for this condition to decrease the risk of stroke include medical therapy, carotid endarterectomy (CEA), and, more recently, carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS). Randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of CEA vs medical therapy showed a clear benefit for CEA in patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis of greater than 70{\%} and a lesser benefit in patients with 50{\%} to 69{\%} stenosis. Treatments have evolved in the ensuing 20 years, and a new method, CAS, has emerged as a possible alternative to CEA. In early results, CAS proved feasible but did not compare favorably with CEA. Later and larger-scale studies comparing CAS to CEA failed to reach conclusions regarding a clear neurologic outcome advantage of one method over the other. This subject was of sufficient interest that 2 larger-scale randomized controlled trials comparing CAS and CEA, the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial and the International Carotid Stenting Study, were undertaken to further explore this issue. This brief review places the new data arising from these studies in the context of prior efforts to address the problem of carotid artery stenosis and explores further opportunities for improvement and patient recommendations in light of these new findings.",
author = "Perkins, {William J.} and Guiseppe Lanzino and Brott, {Thomas G}",
year = "2010",
doi = "10.4065/mcp.2010.0588",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "85",
pages = "1101--1108",
journal = "Mayo Clinic Proceedings",
issn = "0025-6196",
publisher = "Elsevier Science",
number = "12",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Carotid stenting vs endarterectomy

T2 - New results in perspective

AU - Perkins, William J.

AU - Lanzino, Guiseppe

AU - Brott, Thomas G

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Carotid artery stenosis is a major risk factor for stroke, and treatments for this condition to decrease the risk of stroke include medical therapy, carotid endarterectomy (CEA), and, more recently, carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS). Randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of CEA vs medical therapy showed a clear benefit for CEA in patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis of greater than 70% and a lesser benefit in patients with 50% to 69% stenosis. Treatments have evolved in the ensuing 20 years, and a new method, CAS, has emerged as a possible alternative to CEA. In early results, CAS proved feasible but did not compare favorably with CEA. Later and larger-scale studies comparing CAS to CEA failed to reach conclusions regarding a clear neurologic outcome advantage of one method over the other. This subject was of sufficient interest that 2 larger-scale randomized controlled trials comparing CAS and CEA, the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial and the International Carotid Stenting Study, were undertaken to further explore this issue. This brief review places the new data arising from these studies in the context of prior efforts to address the problem of carotid artery stenosis and explores further opportunities for improvement and patient recommendations in light of these new findings.

AB - Carotid artery stenosis is a major risk factor for stroke, and treatments for this condition to decrease the risk of stroke include medical therapy, carotid endarterectomy (CEA), and, more recently, carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS). Randomized controlled trials comparing the efficacy of CEA vs medical therapy showed a clear benefit for CEA in patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis of greater than 70% and a lesser benefit in patients with 50% to 69% stenosis. Treatments have evolved in the ensuing 20 years, and a new method, CAS, has emerged as a possible alternative to CEA. In early results, CAS proved feasible but did not compare favorably with CEA. Later and larger-scale studies comparing CAS to CEA failed to reach conclusions regarding a clear neurologic outcome advantage of one method over the other. This subject was of sufficient interest that 2 larger-scale randomized controlled trials comparing CAS and CEA, the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial and the International Carotid Stenting Study, were undertaken to further explore this issue. This brief review places the new data arising from these studies in the context of prior efforts to address the problem of carotid artery stenosis and explores further opportunities for improvement and patient recommendations in light of these new findings.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=78650163545&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=78650163545&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4065/mcp.2010.0588

DO - 10.4065/mcp.2010.0588

M3 - Article

C2 - 21123637

AN - SCOPUS:78650163545

VL - 85

SP - 1101

EP - 1108

JO - Mayo Clinic Proceedings

JF - Mayo Clinic Proceedings

SN - 0025-6196

IS - 12

ER -