BACKGROUND: Previous studies show that black patients undergo carotid endarterectomy (CEA) less frequently than white patients. Diagnostic imaging is necessary to determine whether a patient is a candidate for the operation. We determined whether there were differences in the use of diagnostic carotid imaging and the frequency of CEA between elderly black and white ischemic stroke patients. METHODS: Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with discharge diagnoses of ischemic stroke (International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision codes 433, 434, and 436) were randomly selected for inclusion in the National Stroke Project 1998-1999, 2000-2001. Receipt of at least one type of carotid imaging study was compared for black and white patients. Binomial logistic regression models were used to evaluate the associations between race and receipt of carotid imaging and CEA with adjustment for demographics, degree of carotid artery stenosis, and other clinical covariates. RESULTS: Among 19,639 stroke patients (1974 black, 17,655 white), 69.6% received at least 1 diagnostic carotid imaging test (blacks 68.4%; whites 69.7%; P = .233). After risk adjustment, blacks were less likely to receive carotid imaging (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-0.97). There was no relationship between race and the receipt of CEA after adjustment for degree of carotid stenosis and other covariates (adjusted OR 1.14; 95% CI 0.66-1.96). CONCLUSIONS: Black ischemic stroke patients were less likely to receive diagnostic carotid imaging than white patients, although the difference was small and only significant after risk adjustment. There was no difference in the proportion having CEA after adjustment for degree of carotid artery stenosis and other clinical factors.
BACKGROUND: Previous studies show that black patients undergo carotid endarterectomy (CEA) less frequently than white patients. Diagnostic imaging is necessary to determine whether a patient is a candidate for the operation. We determined whether there were differences in the use of diagnostic carotid imaging and the frequency of CEA between elderly black and white ischemic strokepatients. METHODS: Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with discharge diagnoses of ischemic stroke (International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision codes 433, 434, and 436) were randomly selected for inclusion in the National Stroke Project 1998-1999, 2000-2001. Receipt of at least one type of carotid imaging study was compared for black and white patients. Binomial logistic regression models were used to evaluate the associations between race and receipt of carotid imaging and CEA with adjustment for demographics, degree of carotid artery stenosis, and other clinical covariates. RESULTS: Among 19,639 strokepatients (1974 black, 17,655 white), 69.6% received at least 1 diagnostic carotid imaging test (blacks 68.4%; whites 69.7%; P = .233). After risk adjustment, blacks were less likely to receive carotid imaging (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-0.97). There was no relationship between race and the receipt of CEA after adjustment for degree of carotid stenosis and other covariates (adjusted OR 1.14; 95% CI 0.66-1.96). CONCLUSIONS: Black ischemic strokepatients were less likely to receive diagnostic carotid imaging than white patients, although the difference was small and only significant after risk adjustment. There was no difference in the proportion having CEA after adjustment for degree of carotid artery stenosis and other clinical factors.
Authors: J Biller; W M Feinberg; J E Castaldo; A D Whittemore; R E Harbaugh; R J Dempsey; L R Caplan; T F Kresowik; D B Matchar; J F Toole; J D Easton; H P Adams; L M Brass; R W Hobson; T G Brott; L Sternau Journal: Circulation Date: 1998-02-10 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: S Chaturvedi; A Bruno; T Feasby; R Holloway; O Benavente; S N Cohen; R Cote; D Hess; J Saver; J D Spence; B Stern; J Wilterdink Journal: Neurology Date: 2005-09-27 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: P A Wolf; G P Clagett; J D Easton; L B Goldstein; P B Gorelick; M Kelly-Hayes; R L Sacco; J P Whisnant Journal: Stroke Date: 1999-09 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: S F Jencks; T Cuerdon; D R Burwen; B Fleming; P M Houck; A E Kussmaul; D S Nilasena; D L Ordin; D R Arday Journal: JAMA Date: 2000-10-04 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Eric M Cheng; Salomeh Keyhani; Susan Ofner; Linda S Williams; Paul L Hebert; Diana L Ordin; Dawn M Bravata Journal: Neurology Date: 2012-06-13 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Hannah Gardener; Erica C Leifheit; Judith H Lichtman; Kefeng Wang; Yun Wang; Carolina M Gutierrez; Maria A Ciliberti-Vargas; Chuanhui Dong; Mary Robichaux; Jose G Romano; Ralph L Sacco; Tatjana Rundek Journal: J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis Date: 2019-10-11 Impact factor: 2.136
Authors: Caitlin W Hicks; Natalie R Daya; James H Black; Kunihiro Matsushita; Elizabeth Selvin Journal: Atherosclerosis Date: 2019-11-01 Impact factor: 5.162
Authors: Eric S Wise; Travis R Ladner; Jun Song; Susan S Eagle; J Mocco; Justine E Wergin; Kyle M Hocking; Colleen M Brophy Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2015-03-14 Impact factor: 4.268
Authors: Alice J Sheffet; George Howard; Albert Sam; Zafar Jamil; Fred Weaver; David Chiu; Jenifer H Voeks; Virginia J Howard; Susan E Hughes; Linda Flaxman; Mary E Longbottom; Thomas G Brott Journal: Stroke Date: 2017-11-30 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Brajesh K Lal; James F Meschia; Thomas G Brott; Michael Jones; Herbert D Aronow; Angelica Lackey; George Howard Journal: Stroke Date: 2021-05-04 Impact factor: 10.170