Aravind Ganesh1, Luca Bartolini1, Ravinder-Jeet Singh1, Abdulaziz S Al-Sultan1, David J T Campbell1, John H Wong1, Bijoy K Menon1. 1. Department of Clinical Neurosciences (AG, R-JS, ASA-S, JHW, BKM), University of Calgary, Canada; Clinical Epilepsy Section (LB), National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD; Centre for Urban Health Solutions (DJTC), St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Canada; and Department of Medicine (DJTC), Department of Community Health Sciences (DJTC, BKM), Department of Radiology (JHW, BKM), and The Hotchkiss Brain Institute (JHW, BKM), University of Calgary, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore differences in antithrombotic management of patients with acutely symptomatic carotid stenosis ("hot carotid") awaiting revascularization with endarterectomy or stenting (CEA/CAS). METHODS: We used a worldwide electronic survey with practice-related questions and clinical questions about 3 representative scenarios. Respondents chose their preferred antithrombotic regimen (1) in general, (2) if the patient was already on aspirin, or (3) had associated intraluminal thrombus (ILT) and identified clinical/imaging factors that increased or decreased their enthusiasm for additional antithrombotic agents. Responses among different groups were compared using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: We received 668 responses from 71 countries. The majority favored CT angiography (70.2%) to evaluate carotid stenosis, CEA (69.1%) over CAS, an aspirin-containing regimen (88.5%), and a clopidogrel-containing regimen (64.4%) if already on aspirin. Whereas diverse antithrombotic regimens were chosen, monotherapy was favored by 54.4%-70.6% of respondents across 3 scenarios. The preferred dual therapy was low-dose aspirin (75-100 mg) plus clopidogrel (22.2%) or high-dose aspirin (160-325 mg) plus clopidogrel if already on aspirin (12.2%). Respondents favoring CAS more often chose ≥2 agents (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] vs CEA: 2.00, 95% confidence interval 1.36-2.95, p = 0.001) or clopidogrel-containing regimens (aOR: 1.77, 1.16-2.70, p = 0.008). Regional differences included respondents from Europe less commonly choosing multiple agents if already on aspirin (aOR vs United States/Canada: 0.57, 0.35-0.93, p = 0.023), those from Asia more often favoring multiple agents (aOR: 1.95, 1.11-3.43, p = 0.020), vs those from the United States/Canada preferentially choosing heparin-containing regimens with ILT (aOR vs rest: 3.35, 2.23-5.03, p < 0.001). Factors increasing enthusiasm for ≥2 antithrombotics included multiple TIAs (57.2%), ILT (58.5%), and ulcerated plaque (57.4%); 56.3% identified MRI microbleeds as decreasing enthusiasm. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight the heterogeneous management and community equipoise surrounding optimal antithrombotic regimens for hot carotids.
OBJECTIVE: To explore differences in antithrombotic management of patients with acutely symptomatic carotid stenosis ("hot carotid") awaiting revascularization with endarterectomy or stenting (CEA/CAS). METHODS: We used a worldwide electronic survey with practice-related questions and clinical questions about 3 representative scenarios. Respondents chose their preferred antithrombotic regimen (1) in general, (2) if the patient was already on aspirin, or (3) had associated intraluminal thrombus (ILT) and identified clinical/imaging factors that increased or decreased their enthusiasm for additional antithrombotic agents. Responses among different groups were compared using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: We received 668 responses from 71 countries. The majority favored CT angiography (70.2%) to evaluate carotid stenosis, CEA (69.1%) over CAS, an aspirin-containing regimen (88.5%), and a clopidogrel-containing regimen (64.4%) if already on aspirin. Whereas diverse antithrombotic regimens were chosen, monotherapy was favored by 54.4%-70.6% of respondents across 3 scenarios. The preferred dual therapy was low-dose aspirin (75-100 mg) plus clopidogrel (22.2%) or high-dose aspirin (160-325 mg) plus clopidogrel if already on aspirin (12.2%). Respondents favoring CAS more often chose ≥2 agents (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] vs CEA: 2.00, 95% confidence interval 1.36-2.95, p = 0.001) or clopidogrel-containing regimens (aOR: 1.77, 1.16-2.70, p = 0.008). Regional differences included respondents from Europe less commonly choosing multiple agents if already on aspirin (aOR vs United States/Canada: 0.57, 0.35-0.93, p = 0.023), those from Asia more often favoring multiple agents (aOR: 1.95, 1.11-3.43, p = 0.020), vs those from the United States/Canada preferentially choosing heparin-containing regimens with ILT (aOR vs rest: 3.35, 2.23-5.03, p < 0.001). Factors increasing enthusiasm for ≥2 antithrombotics included multiple TIAs (57.2%), ILT (58.5%), and ulcerated plaque (57.4%); 56.3% identified MRI microbleeds as decreasing enthusiasm. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight the heterogeneous management and community equipoise surrounding optimal antithrombotic regimens for hot carotids.
Authors: Martin Hlavica; Jatta Berberat; Benjamin Victor Ineichen; Javier Añon; Michael Diepers; Krassen Nedeltchev; Timo Kahles; Luca Remonda Journal: J Neuroradiol Date: 2017-03-22 Impact factor: 3.447
Authors: P M Rothwell; M Eliasziw; S A Gutnikov; A J Fox; D W Taylor; M R Mayberg; C P Warlow; H J M Barnett Journal: Lancet Date: 2003-01-11 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Volker Puetz; Imanuel Dzialowski; Shelagh B Coutts; Michael D Hill; Andrea Krol; Christine O'Reilly; Mayank Goyal; Andrew M Demchuk Journal: Stroke Date: 2008-11-06 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Elias Johansson; Elisa Cuadrado-Godia; Derek Hayden; Jakob Bjellerup; Angel Ois; Jaume Roquer; Per Wester; Peter J Kelly Journal: Neurology Date: 2016-01-08 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Francisco Alcocer; Zdenek Novak; Bart R Combs; Bruce Lowman; Marc A Passman; Marjan Mujib; William D Jordan Journal: J Vasc Surg Date: 2014-01-31 Impact factor: 4.268