R Bond1, K Rerkasem, R Cuffe, P M Rothwell. 1. Stroke Prevention Research Unit, University Department of Clinical Neurology, Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Randomized trials of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for both symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis have demonstrated that benefit is decreased in women, due partly to a high operative risk, which is independent of age. However, it is uncertain whether these trial-based observations are generalisable to routine clinical practice. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of all publications reporting data on the association between age and/or sex and procedural risk of stroke and/or death following CEA from 1980 to 2004. RESULTS: 62 eligible papers reported relevant data. Females had a higher rate of operative stroke and death (25 studies, OR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.17-1.47, p < 0.001) than males, but no increase in operative mortality (15 studies, OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.81-0.86, p = 0.78). Compared with younger patients, operative mortality was increased at > or =75 years (20 studies, OR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.07-1.68, p = 0.02), at age > or =80 years (15 studies, OR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.26-2.45, p < 0.001) and in older patients overall (35 studies, OR = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.26-1.78, p < 0.001). In contrast, risk of non-fatal stroke did not increase with age and so the combined perioperative risk was only slightly increased at age > or =75 years (21 studies, OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 0.94-1.44, p = 0.06), at age > or =80 years (10 studies, OR = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.92-1.36, p = 0.34) and in older patients overall (36 studies, OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.04-1.31, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The effects of age and sex on the operative risk of CEA in published case series are consistent with those observed in the trials. Operative risk of stroke is increased in women and operative mortality is increased in patients aged > or =75 years. Copyright (c) 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel.
BACKGROUND: Randomized trials of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for both symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis have demonstrated that benefit is decreased in women, due partly to a high operative risk, which is independent of age. However, it is uncertain whether these trial-based observations are generalisable to routine clinical practice. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of all publications reporting data on the association between age and/or sex and procedural risk of stroke and/or death following CEA from 1980 to 2004. RESULTS: 62 eligible papers reported relevant data. Females had a higher rate of operative stroke and death (25 studies, OR = 1.31, 95% CI = 1.17-1.47, p < 0.001) than males, but no increase in operative mortality (15 studies, OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.81-0.86, p = 0.78). Compared with younger patients, operative mortality was increased at > or =75 years (20 studies, OR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.07-1.68, p = 0.02), at age > or =80 years (15 studies, OR = 1.80, 95% CI = 1.26-2.45, p < 0.001) and in older patients overall (35 studies, OR = 1.50, 95% CI = 1.26-1.78, p < 0.001). In contrast, risk of non-fatal stroke did not increase with age and so the combined perioperative risk was only slightly increased at age > or =75 years (21 studies, OR = 1.18, 95% CI = 0.94-1.44, p = 0.06), at age > or =80 years (10 studies, OR = 1.14, 95% CI = 0.92-1.36, p = 0.34) and in older patients overall (36 studies, OR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.04-1.31, p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The effects of age and sex on the operative risk of CEA in published case series are consistent with those observed in the trials. Operative risk of stroke is increased in women and operative mortality is increased in patients aged > or =75 years. Copyright (c) 2005 S. Karger AG, Basel.
Authors: Kate C Young; Babak S Jahromi; Michael J Singh; Karl A Illig; Curtis G Benesch Journal: J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2010-06-09 Impact factor: 2.136
Authors: Paola De Rango; Martin M Brown; Didier Leys; Leys Didier; Virginia J Howard; Wesley S Moore; Maurizio Paciaroni; Peter Ringleb; Caron Rockman; Valeria Caso Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-06-11 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Gabriel Assis Lopes Carmo; Daniela Calderaro; Danielle Menosi Gualandro; Ivan Benaduce Casella; Pai Ching Yu; André Coelho Marques; Bruno Caramelli Journal: Intern Emerg Med Date: 2013-09-21 Impact factor: 3.397
Authors: Virginia J Howard; Helmi L Lutsep; Ariane Mackey; Bart M Demaerschalk; Albert D Sam; Nicole R Gonzales; Alice J Sheffet; Jenifer H Voeks; James F Meschia; Thomas G Brott Journal: Lancet Neurol Date: 2011-05-05 Impact factor: 44.182