Pavlos Texakalidis1, Stefanos Giannopoulos2, Damianos G Kokkinidis3, Theofilos Karasavvidis4, Leonardo Rangel-Castilla5, John Reavey-Cantwell6. 1. Department of Neurologic Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA. Electronic address: pavlostex.med@gmail.com. 2. 251 Hellenic Air Force General Hospital, Athens, Greece. 3. Department of Medicine, Jacobi Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA. 4. Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece. 5. Department of Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA. 6. Department of Neurologic Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University Hospital, Richmond, Virginia, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Results from studies investigating the effect of contralateral carotid occlusion (CCO) in patients with carotid artery stenosis undergoing carotid artery endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) are variable in the literature. We sought to determine whether CEA or CAS is the optimal revascularization approach for patients with CCO. METHODS: This meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A random effects model meta-analysis was conducted, and the I2 statistic was used to assess for heterogeneity. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed as needed. RESULTS: Five retrospective observational cohort studies comprising 6346 patients were included. Patients in the CEA group had a significantly lower risk of 30-day periprocedural mortality (odds ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.30-0.71; I2 = 0%). However, no significant differences were identified in terms of stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) between the 2 groups. Subgroup analyses of symptomatic and asymptomatic patients did not yield significant differences for stroke, MI, and death. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CCO can safely undergo both CAS and CEA with similar risks of stroke, MI, and MACE. However, patients treated with CEA have a lower risk of 30-day periprocedural mortality. Future studies can help further clarify the ideal approach for these patients.
BACKGROUND: Results from studies investigating the effect of contralateral carotid occlusion (CCO) in patients with carotid artery stenosis undergoing carotid artery endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) are variable in the literature. We sought to determine whether CEA or CAS is the optimal revascularization approach for patients with CCO. METHODS: This meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A random effects model meta-analysis was conducted, and the I2 statistic was used to assess for heterogeneity. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed as needed. RESULTS: Five retrospective observational cohort studies comprising 6346 patients were included. Patients in the CEA group had a significantly lower risk of 30-day periprocedural mortality (odds ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.30-0.71; I2 = 0%). However, no significant differences were identified in terms of stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) between the 2 groups. Subgroup analyses of symptomatic and asymptomatic patients did not yield significant differences for stroke, MI, and death. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with CCO can safely undergo both CAS and CEA with similar risks of stroke, MI, and MACE. However, patients treated with CEA have a lower risk of 30-day periprocedural mortality. Future studies can help further clarify the ideal approach for these patients.