Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for carotid artery stenosis

Stent-protected angioplasty versus carotid endarterectomy in patients with carotid artery stenosis: meta-analysis of randomized trial data

“…Values <1 indicate an advantage of CAS; values >1 indicate an advantage of CEA. The results of our study are mostly in line with the metaanalysis published by Ederle et al [32]. Differences are due to the fact that we excluded the results from the Leicester study due to its irregular results and small sample size.…”

Stent-protected angioplasty versus carotid endarterectomy in patients with carotid artery stenosis: meta-analysis of randomized trial data

“…Values <1 indicate an advantage of CAS; values >1 indicate an advantage of CEA. The results of our study are mostly in line with the metaanalysis published by Ederle et al [32]. Differences are due to the fact that we excluded the results from the Leicester study due to its irregular results and small sample size.…”

The European Society for Vascular Surgery Guidelines for Carotid Intervention: An Updated Independent Assessment and Literature Review

“…The recommendation was based on a meta-analysis by The Cochrane Collaboration of eight randomised trials comparing CEA with CAS (CAVATAS, Kentucky, Leicester, Wallstent, SAPPHIRE, EVA-3S, SPACE and BACASS) showing that surgery is associated with lower stroke and death rate within 30 days of treatment (odds ratio (OR): 1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05e1.84, P ¼ 0.02). 25 The results of two more trials were published thereafter, both of which lending further support to the ESVS recommendation. The ICSS trial showed that the risk of any stroke or death within 120 days of randomisation was higher in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group (8.5% vs. 4.7%, hazard ratio (HR) 1.86, 1.26e2.74).…”

An Update on Italian Stroke Organization Guidelines on Carotid Endarterectomy and Stenting

“…The conclusion was, however, that due to the substantial heterogeneity of the compared studies, and because of the uncertainties about the risk of restenosis and stroke subsequent to stenting, it was not, at the moment, recommended to modify the current tendency favoring CEA to one preferring endovascular interventions as the treatment of choice for CS. Nonetheless, authoritative experts in the field have consented that primary stenting plus cerebral protection may be undertaken with a certain degree of safety in selected cases – i.e., ‘high risk’ patients – in experienced centers (58). A systematic review of the literature on patient selection for CAS vs. CEA, including patients considered ‘high risk’, reported that stenting was preferable in cases presenting with restenosis, tracheostomy, hostile neck, paralysis of the contralateral laryngeal nerve, or high bifurcation, and after radiotherapy of the neck (59).…”

Stent-protected angioplasty versus carotid endarterectomy in patients with carotid artery stenosis: meta-analysis of randomized trial data

“…Values <1 indicate an advantage of CAS; values >1 indicate an advantage of CEA. The results of our study are mostly in line with the metaanalysis published by Ederle et al [32]. Differences are due to the fact that we excluded the results from the Leicester study due to its irregular results and small sample size.…”

The European Society for Vascular Surgery Guidelines for Carotid Intervention: An Updated Independent Assessment and Literature Review

“…The recommendation was based on a meta-analysis by The Cochrane Collaboration of eight randomised trials comparing CEA with CAS (CAVATAS, Kentucky, Leicester, Wallstent, SAPPHIRE, EVA-3S, SPACE and BACASS) showing that surgery is associated with lower stroke and death rate within 30 days of treatment (odds ratio (OR): 1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05e1.84, P ¼ 0.02). 25 The results of two more trials were published thereafter, both of which lending further support to the ESVS recommendation. The ICSS trial showed that the risk of any stroke or death within 120 days of randomisation was higher in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group (8.5% vs. 4.7%, hazard ratio (HR) 1.86, 1.26e2.74).…”

An Update on Italian Stroke Organization Guidelines on Carotid Endarterectomy and Stenting

“…The conclusion was, however, that due to the substantial heterogeneity of the compared studies, and because of the uncertainties about the risk of restenosis and stroke subsequent to stenting, it was not, at the moment, recommended to modify the current tendency favoring CEA to one preferring endovascular interventions as the treatment of choice for CS. Nonetheless, authoritative experts in the field have consented that primary stenting plus cerebral protection may be undertaken with a certain degree of safety in selected cases – i.e., ‘high risk’ patients – in experienced centers (58). A systematic review of the literature on patient selection for CAS vs. CEA, including patients considered ‘high risk’, reported that stenting was preferable in cases presenting with restenosis, tracheostomy, hostile neck, paralysis of the contralateral laryngeal nerve, or high bifurcation, and after radiotherapy of the neck (59).…”

Stent-protected angioplasty versus carotid endarterectomy in patients with carotid artery stenosis: meta-analysis of randomized trial data

“…Values <1 indicate an advantage of CAS; values >1 indicate an advantage of CEA. The results of our study are mostly in line with the metaanalysis published by Ederle et al [32]. Differences are due to the fact that we excluded the results from the Leicester study due to its irregular results and small sample size.…”

The European Society for Vascular Surgery Guidelines for Carotid Intervention: An Updated Independent Assessment and Literature Review

“…The recommendation was based on a meta-analysis by The Cochrane Collaboration of eight randomised trials comparing CEA with CAS (CAVATAS, Kentucky, Leicester, Wallstent, SAPPHIRE, EVA-3S, SPACE and BACASS) showing that surgery is associated with lower stroke and death rate within 30 days of treatment (odds ratio (OR): 1.39, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05e1.84, P ¼ 0.02). 25 The results of two more trials were published thereafter, both of which lending further support to the ESVS recommendation. The ICSS trial showed that the risk of any stroke or death within 120 days of randomisation was higher in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group (8.5% vs. 4.7%, hazard ratio (HR) 1.86, 1.26e2.74).…”

An Update on Italian Stroke Organization Guidelines on Carotid Endarterectomy and Stenting

“…The conclusion was, however, that due to the substantial heterogeneity of the compared studies, and because of the uncertainties about the risk of restenosis and stroke subsequent to stenting, it was not, at the moment, recommended to modify the current tendency favoring CEA to one preferring endovascular interventions as the treatment of choice for CS. Nonetheless, authoritative experts in the field have consented that primary stenting plus cerebral protection may be undertaken with a certain degree of safety in selected cases – i.e., ‘high risk’ patients – in experienced centers (58). A systematic review of the literature on patient selection for CAS vs. CEA, including patients considered ‘high risk’, reported that stenting was preferable in cases presenting with restenosis, tracheostomy, hostile neck, paralysis of the contralateral laryngeal nerve, or high bifurcation, and after radiotherapy of the neck (59).…”