Endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic moderate carotid stenosis of 50 to 69 percent yielded only a moderate reduction in the risk of stroke. Decisions about treatment for patients in this category must take into account recognized risk factors, and exceptional surgical skill is obligatory if carotid endarterectomy is to be performed. Patients with stenosis of less than 50 percent did not benefit from surgery. Patients with severe stenosis (> or =70 percent) had a durable benefit from endarterectomy at eight years of follow-up.

No abstract

Background and Purpose-This study reports the surgical results in those patients who underwent carotid endarterectomy in the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET). Methods-The rates of perioperative stroke and death at 30 days and the final assessment of stroke severity at 90 days were calculated. Regression modeling was used to identify variables that increased or decreased perioperative risk. Nonoutcome surgical complications were summarized. The durability of carotid endarterectomy was examined. Results-In 1415 patients there were 92 perioperative outcome events, for an overall rate of 6.5%. At 30 days the results were as follows: death, 1.1%; disabling stroke, 1.8%; and nondisabling stroke, 3.7%. At 90 days, because of improvement in the neurological status of patients judged to have been disabled at 30 days, the results were as follows: death, 1.1%; disabling stroke, 0.9%; and nondisabling stroke, 4.5%. Thirty events occurred intraoperatively; 62 were delayed. Most strokes resulted from thromboembolism. Five baseline variables were predictive of increased surgical risk: hemispheric versus retinal transient ischemic attack as the qualifying event, left-sided procedure, contralateral carotid occlusion, ipsilateral ischemic lesion on CT scan, and irregular or ulcerated ipsilateral plaque. History of coronary artery disease with prior cardiac procedure was associated with reduced risk. The risk of perioperative wound complications was 9.3%, and that of cranial nerve injuries was 8.6%; most were of mild severity. At 8 years, the risk of disabling ipsilateral stroke was 5.7%, and that of any ipsilateral stroke was 17.1%. Conclusions-The overall rate of perioperative stroke and death was 6.5%, but the rate of permanently disabling stroke and death was only 2.0%. Other surgical complications were rarely clinically important. Carotid endarterectomy is a durable procedure. (Stroke. 1999;30:1751-1758.)

BACKGROUND It is unknown whether warfarin or aspirin therapy is superior for patients with heart failure who are in sinus rhythm. METHODS We designed this trial to determine whether warfarin (with a target international normalized ratio of 2.0 to 3.5) or aspirin (at a dose of 325 mg per day) is a better treatment for patients in sinus rhythm who have a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). We followed 2305 patients for up to 6 years (mean [±SD], 3.5±1.8). The primary outcome was the time to the first event in a composite end point of ischemic stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, or death from any cause. RESULTS The rates of the primary outcome were 7.47 events per 100 patient-years in the warfarin group and 7.93 in the aspirin group (hazard ratio with warfarin, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.10; P = 0.40). Thus, there was no significant overall difference between the two treatments. In a time-varying analysis, the hazard ratio changed over time, slightly favoring warfarin over aspirin by the fourth year of follow-up, but this finding was only marginally significant (P = 0.046). Warfarin, as compared with aspirin, was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of ischemic stroke throughout the follow-up period (0.72 events per 100 patient-years vs. 1.36 per 100 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.82; P = 0.005). The rate of major hemorrhage was 1.78 events per 100 patient-years in the warfarin group as compared with 0.87 in the aspirin group (P<0.001). The rates of intracerebral and intracranial hemorrhage did not differ significantly between the two treatment groups (0.27 events per 100 patient-years with warfarin and 0.22 with aspirin, P = 0.82). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with reduced LVEF who were in sinus rhythm, there was no significant overall difference in the primary outcome between treatment with warfarin and treatment with aspirin. A reduced risk of ischemic stroke with warfarin was offset by an increased risk of major hemorrhage. The choice between warfarin and aspirin should be individualized.

The risk of stroke among patients with asymptomatic carotid-artery stenosis is relatively low. Forty-five percent of strokes in patients with asymptomatic stenosis of 60 to 99 percent are attributable to lacunes or cardioembolism. These observations have implications for the use of endarterectomy in asymptomatic patients. Without analysis of the risk of stroke according to cause, the absolute benefit associated with endarterectomy may be overestimated.