A clinical rule (sex, contralateral occlusion, age, and restenosis) to select patients for stenting versus carotid endarterectomy: Systematic review of observational studies with validation in randomized trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE - Compared with carotid endarterectomy (CEA), carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is associated with a higher risk of procedural stroke or death especially in patients with symptomatic stenosis. However, after the perioperative period, risk is similar with both treatments,...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Emmanuel Touzé, Ludovic Trinquart, Rui Felgueiras, Kittipan Rerkasem, Leo H. Bonati, Gayané Meliksetyan, Peter A. Ringleb, Jean Louis Mas, Martin M. Brown, Peter M. Rothwell
Format: Journal
Published: 2018
Online Access:https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84889262737&origin=inward
http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/47474
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Institution: Chiang Mai University
id th-cmuir.6653943832-47474
record_format dspace
spelling th-cmuir.6653943832-474742018-04-25T08:40:26Z A clinical rule (sex, contralateral occlusion, age, and restenosis) to select patients for stenting versus carotid endarterectomy: Systematic review of observational studies with validation in randomized trials Emmanuel Touzé Ludovic Trinquart Rui Felgueiras Kittipan Rerkasem Leo H. Bonati Gayané Meliksetyan Peter A. Ringleb Jean Louis Mas Martin M. Brown Peter M. Rothwell BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE - Compared with carotid endarterectomy (CEA), carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is associated with a higher risk of procedural stroke or death especially in patients with symptomatic stenosis. However, after the perioperative period, risk is similar with both treatments, suggesting that CAS could be an acceptable option in selected patients. METHODS - We performed systematic reviews of observational studies of procedural risks of CEA or CAS and extracted data on 9 predefined risk factors (age, contralateral carotid occlusion, coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, sex, hypertension, peripheral artery disease, and type and side of stenosis). We calculated pooled relative risks of procedural stroke or death. Factors with differential effects on risk of CAS versus CEA were identified by interaction tests and used to derive a rule. The rule was tested using individual patient data from randomized trials of CAS versus CEA from the Carotid Stenting Trialists' Collaboration (CSTC). RESULTS - We identified 170 studies. The effects of sex, contralateral occlusion, age, and restenosis (SCAR) on the procedural risk of stroke or death differed. Patients with contralateral occlusion or restenosis and women < 75 years were at relatively low risk for CAS (SCAR negative), with all others being high risk (SCAR positive). Among the 3049 patients in the CSTC validation, 694 (23%) patients were SCAR negative. The pooled RR of procedural stroke and death with CAS versus CEA was 0.93 (0.49-1.77; P=0.83) in SCAR-negative and 2.41 (1.68-3.45; P < 0.0001) in SCAR-positive patients (P [interaction]=0.05). CONCLUSIONS - The SCAR rule is potentially useful to identify patients in whom CAS has a similar risk of perioperative stroke or death to CEA. © 2013 American Heart Association, Inc. 2018-04-25T08:40:26Z 2018-04-25T08:40:26Z 2013-12-01 Journal 15244628 00392499 2-s2.0-84889262737 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.002756 https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84889262737&origin=inward http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/47474
institution Chiang Mai University
building Chiang Mai University Library
country Thailand
collection CMU Intellectual Repository
description BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE - Compared with carotid endarterectomy (CEA), carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is associated with a higher risk of procedural stroke or death especially in patients with symptomatic stenosis. However, after the perioperative period, risk is similar with both treatments, suggesting that CAS could be an acceptable option in selected patients. METHODS - We performed systematic reviews of observational studies of procedural risks of CEA or CAS and extracted data on 9 predefined risk factors (age, contralateral carotid occlusion, coronary artery disease, diabetes mellitus, sex, hypertension, peripheral artery disease, and type and side of stenosis). We calculated pooled relative risks of procedural stroke or death. Factors with differential effects on risk of CAS versus CEA were identified by interaction tests and used to derive a rule. The rule was tested using individual patient data from randomized trials of CAS versus CEA from the Carotid Stenting Trialists' Collaboration (CSTC). RESULTS - We identified 170 studies. The effects of sex, contralateral occlusion, age, and restenosis (SCAR) on the procedural risk of stroke or death differed. Patients with contralateral occlusion or restenosis and women < 75 years were at relatively low risk for CAS (SCAR negative), with all others being high risk (SCAR positive). Among the 3049 patients in the CSTC validation, 694 (23%) patients were SCAR negative. The pooled RR of procedural stroke and death with CAS versus CEA was 0.93 (0.49-1.77; P=0.83) in SCAR-negative and 2.41 (1.68-3.45; P < 0.0001) in SCAR-positive patients (P [interaction]=0.05). CONCLUSIONS - The SCAR rule is potentially useful to identify patients in whom CAS has a similar risk of perioperative stroke or death to CEA. © 2013 American Heart Association, Inc.
format Journal
author Emmanuel Touzé
Ludovic Trinquart
Rui Felgueiras
Kittipan Rerkasem
Leo H. Bonati
Gayané Meliksetyan
Peter A. Ringleb
Jean Louis Mas
Martin M. Brown
Peter M. Rothwell
spellingShingle Emmanuel Touzé
Ludovic Trinquart
Rui Felgueiras
Kittipan Rerkasem
Leo H. Bonati
Gayané Meliksetyan
Peter A. Ringleb
Jean Louis Mas
Martin M. Brown
Peter M. Rothwell
A clinical rule (sex, contralateral occlusion, age, and restenosis) to select patients for stenting versus carotid endarterectomy: Systematic review of observational studies with validation in randomized trials
author_facet Emmanuel Touzé
Ludovic Trinquart
Rui Felgueiras
Kittipan Rerkasem
Leo H. Bonati
Gayané Meliksetyan
Peter A. Ringleb
Jean Louis Mas
Martin M. Brown
Peter M. Rothwell
author_sort Emmanuel Touzé
title A clinical rule (sex, contralateral occlusion, age, and restenosis) to select patients for stenting versus carotid endarterectomy: Systematic review of observational studies with validation in randomized trials
title_short A clinical rule (sex, contralateral occlusion, age, and restenosis) to select patients for stenting versus carotid endarterectomy: Systematic review of observational studies with validation in randomized trials
title_full A clinical rule (sex, contralateral occlusion, age, and restenosis) to select patients for stenting versus carotid endarterectomy: Systematic review of observational studies with validation in randomized trials
title_fullStr A clinical rule (sex, contralateral occlusion, age, and restenosis) to select patients for stenting versus carotid endarterectomy: Systematic review of observational studies with validation in randomized trials
title_full_unstemmed A clinical rule (sex, contralateral occlusion, age, and restenosis) to select patients for stenting versus carotid endarterectomy: Systematic review of observational studies with validation in randomized trials
title_sort clinical rule (sex, contralateral occlusion, age, and restenosis) to select patients for stenting versus carotid endarterectomy: systematic review of observational studies with validation in randomized trials
publishDate 2018
url https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84889262737&origin=inward
http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/47474
_version_ 1681423067680604160