A Ross Naylor1. 1. The Department of Vascular Surgery at Leicester Royal Infirmary, Leicester, United Kingdom. Electronic address: ross.naylor@uhl-tr.nhs.uk.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite level I evidence supporting a role for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in the management of patients with asymptomatic carotid disease, there is surprisingly little international consensus regarding the optimal way to manage these patients. METHODS: Review of current strategies for managing asymptomatic carotid disease MAIN FINDINGS: Those favouring a pro-interventional approach argue that: (i) until new randomised trials demonstrate that best medical therapy (BMT) is better than CEA or carotid artery stenting (CAS) in preventing stroke, guidelines of practice should remain unchanged; (ii) strokes secondary to carotid thromboembolism harboured a potentially treatable asymptomatic lesion prior to the event. Because 80% of strokes are not preceded by a TIA/minor stroke, CEA/CAS is the only way of preventing these strokes; (iii) screening for carotid disease could identify patients with significant asymptomatic stenoses who could undergo prophylactic CEA/CAS in order to prevent avoidable stroke; (iv) international guidelines already advise that only 'highly-selected' patients should undergo CEA/CAS; (v) the 30-day risks of death/stroke after CEA/CAS are diminishing and this will increase long-term stroke prevention and (vi) the alleged decline in annualized stroke rates in medically treated patients is based upon flawed data. CONCLUSIONS: The inescapable conclusion is that only a relatively small proportion of asymptomatic patients benefit from prophylactic CEA/CAS. The key question, therefore, remains; is society prepared to invest sufficient resources in identifying these 'high risk for stroke' patients so that they can benefit from aggressive BMT and CEA or CAS, leaving the majority of lower risk patients to be treated medically?
BACKGROUND: Despite level I evidence supporting a role for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in the management of patients with asymptomatic carotid disease, there is surprisingly little international consensus regarding the optimal way to manage these patients. METHODS: Review of current strategies for managing asymptomatic carotid disease MAIN FINDINGS: Those favouring a pro-interventional approach argue that: (i) until new randomised trials demonstrate that best medical therapy (BMT) is better than CEA or carotid artery stenting (CAS) in preventing stroke, guidelines of practice should remain unchanged; (ii) strokes secondary to carotid thromboembolism harboured a potentially treatable asymptomatic lesion prior to the event. Because 80% of strokes are not preceded by a TIA/minor stroke, CEA/CAS is the only way of preventing these strokes; (iii) screening for carotid disease could identify patients with significant asymptomatic stenoses who could undergo prophylactic CEA/CAS in order to prevent avoidable stroke; (iv) international guidelines already advise that only 'highly-selected' patients should undergo CEA/CAS; (v) the 30-day risks of death/stroke after CEA/CAS are diminishing and this will increase long-term stroke prevention and (vi) the alleged decline in annualized stroke rates in medically treated patients is based upon flawed data. CONCLUSIONS: The inescapable conclusion is that only a relatively small proportion of asymptomatic patients benefit from prophylactic CEA/CAS. The key question, therefore, remains; is society prepared to invest sufficient resources in identifying these 'high risk for stroke' patients so that they can benefit from aggressive BMT and CEA or CAS, leaving the majority of lower risk patients to be treated medically?
Authors: Donald V Heck; Gary S Roubin; Kenneth G Rosenfield; William A Gray; Christopher J White; Tudor G Jovin; Jon S Matsumura; Brajesh K Lal; Barry T Katzen; Guilherme Dabus; Brian T Jankowitz; Thomas G Brott Journal: Neurology Date: 2017-04-26 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Gilson Soares Feitosa-Filho; José Maria Peixoto; José Elias Soares Pinheiro; Abrahão Afiune Neto; Afonso Luiz Tavares de Albuquerque; Álvaro César Cattani; Amit Nussbacher; Ana Amelia Camarano; Angela Hermínia Sichinels; Antonio Carlos Sobral Sousa; Aristóteles Comte de Alencar Filho; Claudia F Gravina; Dario Celestino Sobral Filho; Eduardo Pitthan; Elisa Franco de Assis Costa; Elizabeth da Rosa Duarte; Elizabete Viana de Freitas; Emilio Hideyuki Moriguchi; Evandro Tinoco Mesquita; Fábio Fernandes; Gilson Soares Feitosa; Humberto Pierre; Ilnei Pereira Filho; Izo Helber; Jairo Lins Borges; Jéssica Myrian de Amorim Garcia; José Antonio Gordillo de Souza; José Carlos da Costa Zanon; Josmar de Castro Alves; Kalil Lays Mohallem; Laura Mariana de Siqueira Mendonça Chaves; Lídia Ana Zytynski Moura; Márcia Cristina Amélia da Silva; Maria Alice de Vilhena Toledo; Maria Elisa Lucena Sales de Melo Assunção; Mauricio Wajngarten; Mauro José Oliveira Gonçalves; Neuza Helena Moreira Lopes; Nezilour Lobato Rodrigues; Paulo Roberto Pereira Toscano; Pedro Rousseff; Ricardo Antonio Rosado Maia; Roberto Alexandre Franken; Roberto Dischinger Miranda; Roberto Gamarski; Ronaldo Fernandes Rosa; Silvio Carlos de Moraes Santos; Siulmara Cristina Galera; Stela Maris da Silva Grespan; Teresa Cristina Rogerio da Silva; William Antonio de Magalhães Esteves Journal: Arq Bras Cardiol Date: 2019-06-06 Impact factor: 2.000
Authors: Qingyu Wang; Dalin Tang; Liang Wang; Gador Canton; Zheyang Wu; Thomas S Hatsukami; Kristen L Billiar; Chun Yuan Journal: Int J Cardiol Date: 2019-07-04 Impact factor: 4.164
Authors: Eli Lechtman; Indranil Balki; Kiersten Thomas; Kevin Chen; Alan R Moody; Pascal N Tyrrell Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2017-11-21 Impact factor: 3.039