PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) performed by a dedicated multidisciplinary team in a community hospital. METHODS: Forty-nine patients (30 men; mean age 74.3 +/- 7.4 years, range 51-88) with 14 symptomatic and 35 asymptomatic >50% carotid stenoses were enrolled into the study and treated with self-expanding stents without cerebral protection. The patients were evaluated at 30 days for death, neurological sequelae, and length of stay. A contemporaneous group of 140 patients (80 men; mean age 72.3 +/- 7.7 years, range 43-89) undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) was used for comparison of the outcome measures. Owing to crossover of failed CAS patients to the CEA group, the data were analyzed according to intention-to-treat and treatment-received. RESULTS: The only difference in baseline characteristics between the treatment and control groups was the greater frequency of bilateral disease in the CEA group (p=0.009). The CAS procedures were successful in 47 (96.0%) patients; 2 access failures were converted to endarterectomy, and 1 access-site pseudoaneurysm was treated surgically. There were no deaths or myocardial infarctions in either group. In the CAS group, there were no major and only 2 (4.1%) minor strokes compared to 4 (2.9%) major and 4 (2.9%) minor strokes in the CEA group (p>0.05). Median LOS was significantly lower in the CAS group (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Careful case selection and multidisciplinary collaboration facilitate the safe performance of carotid stenting in a community setting with acceptable early results.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility and safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) performed by a dedicated multidisciplinary team in a community hospital. METHODS: Forty-nine patients (30 men; mean age 74.3 +/- 7.4 years, range 51-88) with 14 symptomatic and 35 asymptomatic >50% carotid stenoses were enrolled into the study and treated with self-expanding stents without cerebral protection. The patients were evaluated at 30 days for death, neurological sequelae, and length of stay. A contemporaneous group of 140 patients (80 men; mean age 72.3 +/- 7.7 years, range 43-89) undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) was used for comparison of the outcome measures. Owing to crossover of failed CASpatients to the CEA group, the data were analyzed according to intention-to-treat and treatment-received. RESULTS: The only difference in baseline characteristics between the treatment and control groups was the greater frequency of bilateral disease in the CEA group (p=0.009). The CAS procedures were successful in 47 (96.0%) patients; 2 access failures were converted to endarterectomy, and 1 access-site pseudoaneurysm was treated surgically. There were no deaths or myocardial infarctions in either group. In the CAS group, there were no major and only 2 (4.1%) minor strokes compared to 4 (2.9%) major and 4 (2.9%) minor strokes in the CEA group (p>0.05). Median LOS was significantly lower in the CAS group (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Careful case selection and multidisciplinary collaboration facilitate the safe performance of carotid stenting in a community setting with acceptable early results.