Editor's Choice – Comparison of Early Outcomes and Restenosis Rate Between Carotid Endarterectomy and Carotid Artery Stenting Using Propensity Score Matching Analysis

Despite randomised evidence, the debate continues about the preferred treatment strategy for carotid stenosis in routine clinical practice. The aim of this study was to compare early outcomes and restenosis rates after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) in unselected patients us...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery 2017-11, Vol.54 (5), p.573-578
Hauptverfasser: Heo, Seon-Hee, Yoon, Kyoung-Won, Woo, Shin-Young, Park, Yang-Jin, Kim, Young-Wook, Kim, Keon-Ha, Chung, Chin-Sang, Bang, Oh-Young, Kim, Dong-Ik
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 578
container_issue 5
container_start_page 573
container_title European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery
container_volume 54
creator Heo, Seon-Hee
Yoon, Kyoung-Won
Woo, Shin-Young
Park, Yang-Jin
Kim, Young-Wook
Kim, Keon-Ha
Chung, Chin-Sang
Bang, Oh-Young
Kim, Dong-Ik
description Despite randomised evidence, the debate continues about the preferred treatment strategy for carotid stenosis in routine clinical practice. The aim of this study was to compare early outcomes and restenosis rates after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) in unselected patients using propensity score matching (PSM). The 30 day incidence of major adverse clinical events (MACE; defined as stroke, transient ischaemic attack, myocardial infarction, or death) and procedure related complications, as well as restenosis rates during follow-up were compared between unselected patients undergoing CEA or CAS between January 2002 and December 2015 at a single institution. PSM was used to balance the following factors between the CEA and CAS cohorts: age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidaemia, smoking, atrial fibrillation, previous percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting, valvular heart disease, contralateral carotid occlusion, degree of carotid stenosis, and symptomatic status. Statistical comparisons of outcomes were based on logistic regression analysis and log rank test. Of 1184 patients (654 CEA and 530 CAS), 452 PSM pairs of CEA and CAS patients were created. The CAS group showed a relatively higher 30 day incidence of MACE (7.5% vs. 2.4%; odds ratio [OR] 3.261, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.634–6.509; p = .001) but a lower incidence of procedure related complications (1.5% vs. 5.3%; OR 0.199, 95% CI 0.075–0.528; p = .001). During a mean follow-up of 49.1 months (range 1–180 months), restenosis rates were higher after CAS than after CEA (1.5% vs. 1.0% at 12 months and 5.4% vs. 1.2% at 24 months, respectively; p = .008). This PSM based observation reconfirmed previous trial results in both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients with carotid artery stenosis in routine clinical practice: CEA showed lower 30 day MACE and mid-term restenosis rates than CAS.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.08.006
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1938194384</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1078588417305026</els_id><sourcerecordid>1938194384</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-599bd44aa93b7761f8c62a5a955e4f3be773661e374413f697de7336cd9b87f83</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc2O1SAYhhujccbRG3Bh2OmmFQqlNHFzpjn-JGPGjM6aUPjqcNLCEThjuvMevAmvyyuRemZcugHC-0M-nqJ4TnBFMOGvdxXsbmNVY9JWWFQY8wfFKWloXdaENw_zGbeibIRgJ8WTGHcY44bQ5nFxUgvRUSbq0-LX1tjkw8uI-htvNaDfP36i3s97FWz0DvkRbVWYFnR5SNrPEJFyBl1BTOB8tBFdqQToHNJ3AId6FXyyBm2dUSFBAJ38vPyN3Eub9X5Bn3M-WfcVXcd1_RT8Hly0KSvaB0AfVdI3q7JxalryQ0-LR6OaIjy728-K67fbL_378uLy3Yd-c1Fqxnkqm64bDGNKdXRoW05GoXmtGtU1DbCRDtC2lHMCtGWM0JF3rYGWUq5NN4h2FPSseHXs3Qf_7ZDnlLONGqZJOfCHKElHBekYFSxb66NVBx9jgFHug51VWCTBciUkd3IlJFdCEguZCeXQi7v-wzCD-Re5R5INb44GyFPeWggyagtOg7Hrf0rj7f_6_wASmaXN</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1938194384</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Editor's Choice – Comparison of Early Outcomes and Restenosis Rate Between Carotid Endarterectomy and Carotid Artery Stenting Using Propensity Score Matching Analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Heo, Seon-Hee ; Yoon, Kyoung-Won ; Woo, Shin-Young ; Park, Yang-Jin ; Kim, Young-Wook ; Kim, Keon-Ha ; Chung, Chin-Sang ; Bang, Oh-Young ; Kim, Dong-Ik</creator><creatorcontrib>Heo, Seon-Hee ; Yoon, Kyoung-Won ; Woo, Shin-Young ; Park, Yang-Jin ; Kim, Young-Wook ; Kim, Keon-Ha ; Chung, Chin-Sang ; Bang, Oh-Young ; Kim, Dong-Ik</creatorcontrib><description>Despite randomised evidence, the debate continues about the preferred treatment strategy for carotid stenosis in routine clinical practice. The aim of this study was to compare early outcomes and restenosis rates after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) in unselected patients using propensity score matching (PSM). The 30 day incidence of major adverse clinical events (MACE; defined as stroke, transient ischaemic attack, myocardial infarction, or death) and procedure related complications, as well as restenosis rates during follow-up were compared between unselected patients undergoing CEA or CAS between January 2002 and December 2015 at a single institution. PSM was used to balance the following factors between the CEA and CAS cohorts: age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidaemia, smoking, atrial fibrillation, previous percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting, valvular heart disease, contralateral carotid occlusion, degree of carotid stenosis, and symptomatic status. Statistical comparisons of outcomes were based on logistic regression analysis and log rank test. Of 1184 patients (654 CEA and 530 CAS), 452 PSM pairs of CEA and CAS patients were created. The CAS group showed a relatively higher 30 day incidence of MACE (7.5% vs. 2.4%; odds ratio [OR] 3.261, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.634–6.509; p = .001) but a lower incidence of procedure related complications (1.5% vs. 5.3%; OR 0.199, 95% CI 0.075–0.528; p = .001). During a mean follow-up of 49.1 months (range 1–180 months), restenosis rates were higher after CAS than after CEA (1.5% vs. 1.0% at 12 months and 5.4% vs. 1.2% at 24 months, respectively; p = .008). This PSM based observation reconfirmed previous trial results in both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients with carotid artery stenosis in routine clinical practice: CEA showed lower 30 day MACE and mid-term restenosis rates than CAS.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1078-5884</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-2165</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.08.006</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28893482</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Angioplasty - adverse effects ; Carotid endarterectomy ; Carotid stenosis ; Carotid Stenosis - diagnosis ; Carotid Stenosis - epidemiology ; Carotid Stenosis - surgery ; Carotid stenting ; Endarterectomy, Carotid - adverse effects ; Female ; Humans ; Incidence ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology ; Propensity Score ; Propensity score-matching analysis ; Recurrence ; Retrospective Studies ; Stents ; Time Factors ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery, 2017-11, Vol.54 (5), p.573-578</ispartof><rights>2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery</rights><rights>Copyright © 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-599bd44aa93b7761f8c62a5a955e4f3be773661e374413f697de7336cd9b87f83</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-599bd44aa93b7761f8c62a5a955e4f3be773661e374413f697de7336cd9b87f83</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.08.006$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,782,786,3552,27931,27932,46002</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28893482$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Heo, Seon-Hee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yoon, Kyoung-Won</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Woo, Shin-Young</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Park, Yang-Jin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Young-Wook</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Keon-Ha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chung, Chin-Sang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bang, Oh-Young</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Dong-Ik</creatorcontrib><title>Editor's Choice – Comparison of Early Outcomes and Restenosis Rate Between Carotid Endarterectomy and Carotid Artery Stenting Using Propensity Score Matching Analysis</title><title>European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery</title><addtitle>Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg</addtitle><description>Despite randomised evidence, the debate continues about the preferred treatment strategy for carotid stenosis in routine clinical practice. The aim of this study was to compare early outcomes and restenosis rates after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) in unselected patients using propensity score matching (PSM). The 30 day incidence of major adverse clinical events (MACE; defined as stroke, transient ischaemic attack, myocardial infarction, or death) and procedure related complications, as well as restenosis rates during follow-up were compared between unselected patients undergoing CEA or CAS between January 2002 and December 2015 at a single institution. PSM was used to balance the following factors between the CEA and CAS cohorts: age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidaemia, smoking, atrial fibrillation, previous percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting, valvular heart disease, contralateral carotid occlusion, degree of carotid stenosis, and symptomatic status. Statistical comparisons of outcomes were based on logistic regression analysis and log rank test. Of 1184 patients (654 CEA and 530 CAS), 452 PSM pairs of CEA and CAS patients were created. The CAS group showed a relatively higher 30 day incidence of MACE (7.5% vs. 2.4%; odds ratio [OR] 3.261, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.634–6.509; p = .001) but a lower incidence of procedure related complications (1.5% vs. 5.3%; OR 0.199, 95% CI 0.075–0.528; p = .001). During a mean follow-up of 49.1 months (range 1–180 months), restenosis rates were higher after CAS than after CEA (1.5% vs. 1.0% at 12 months and 5.4% vs. 1.2% at 24 months, respectively; p = .008). This PSM based observation reconfirmed previous trial results in both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients with carotid artery stenosis in routine clinical practice: CEA showed lower 30 day MACE and mid-term restenosis rates than CAS.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Angioplasty - adverse effects</subject><subject>Carotid endarterectomy</subject><subject>Carotid stenosis</subject><subject>Carotid Stenosis - diagnosis</subject><subject>Carotid Stenosis - epidemiology</subject><subject>Carotid Stenosis - surgery</subject><subject>Carotid stenting</subject><subject>Endarterectomy, Carotid - adverse effects</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Incidence</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications - epidemiology</subject><subject>Propensity Score</subject><subject>Propensity score-matching analysis</subject><subject>Recurrence</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Stents</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1078-5884</issn><issn>1532-2165</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc2O1SAYhhujccbRG3Bh2OmmFQqlNHFzpjn-JGPGjM6aUPjqcNLCEThjuvMevAmvyyuRemZcugHC-0M-nqJ4TnBFMOGvdxXsbmNVY9JWWFQY8wfFKWloXdaENw_zGbeibIRgJ8WTGHcY44bQ5nFxUgvRUSbq0-LX1tjkw8uI-htvNaDfP36i3s97FWz0DvkRbVWYFnR5SNrPEJFyBl1BTOB8tBFdqQToHNJ3AId6FXyyBm2dUSFBAJ38vPyN3Eub9X5Bn3M-WfcVXcd1_RT8Hly0KSvaB0AfVdI3q7JxalryQ0-LR6OaIjy728-K67fbL_378uLy3Yd-c1Fqxnkqm64bDGNKdXRoW05GoXmtGtU1DbCRDtC2lHMCtGWM0JF3rYGWUq5NN4h2FPSseHXs3Qf_7ZDnlLONGqZJOfCHKElHBekYFSxb66NVBx9jgFHug51VWCTBciUkd3IlJFdCEguZCeXQi7v-wzCD-Re5R5INb44GyFPeWggyagtOg7Hrf0rj7f_6_wASmaXN</recordid><startdate>201711</startdate><enddate>201711</enddate><creator>Heo, Seon-Hee</creator><creator>Yoon, Kyoung-Won</creator><creator>Woo, Shin-Young</creator><creator>Park, Yang-Jin</creator><creator>Kim, Young-Wook</creator><creator>Kim, Keon-Ha</creator><creator>Chung, Chin-Sang</creator><creator>Bang, Oh-Young</creator><creator>Kim, Dong-Ik</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201711</creationdate><title>Editor's Choice – Comparison of Early Outcomes and Restenosis Rate Between Carotid Endarterectomy and Carotid Artery Stenting Using Propensity Score Matching Analysis</title><author>Heo, Seon-Hee ; Yoon, Kyoung-Won ; Woo, Shin-Young ; Park, Yang-Jin ; Kim, Young-Wook ; Kim, Keon-Ha ; Chung, Chin-Sang ; Bang, Oh-Young ; Kim, Dong-Ik</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-599bd44aa93b7761f8c62a5a955e4f3be773661e374413f697de7336cd9b87f83</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Angioplasty - adverse effects</topic><topic>Carotid endarterectomy</topic><topic>Carotid stenosis</topic><topic>Carotid Stenosis - diagnosis</topic><topic>Carotid Stenosis - epidemiology</topic><topic>Carotid Stenosis - surgery</topic><topic>Carotid stenting</topic><topic>Endarterectomy, Carotid - adverse effects</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Incidence</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications - epidemiology</topic><topic>Propensity Score</topic><topic>Propensity score-matching analysis</topic><topic>Recurrence</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Stents</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Heo, Seon-Hee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yoon, Kyoung-Won</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Woo, Shin-Young</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Park, Yang-Jin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Young-Wook</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Keon-Ha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chung, Chin-Sang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bang, Oh-Young</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kim, Dong-Ik</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Heo, Seon-Hee</au><au>Yoon, Kyoung-Won</au><au>Woo, Shin-Young</au><au>Park, Yang-Jin</au><au>Kim, Young-Wook</au><au>Kim, Keon-Ha</au><au>Chung, Chin-Sang</au><au>Bang, Oh-Young</au><au>Kim, Dong-Ik</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Editor's Choice – Comparison of Early Outcomes and Restenosis Rate Between Carotid Endarterectomy and Carotid Artery Stenting Using Propensity Score Matching Analysis</atitle><jtitle>European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg</addtitle><date>2017-11</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>54</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>573</spage><epage>578</epage><pages>573-578</pages><issn>1078-5884</issn><eissn>1532-2165</eissn><abstract>Despite randomised evidence, the debate continues about the preferred treatment strategy for carotid stenosis in routine clinical practice. The aim of this study was to compare early outcomes and restenosis rates after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) in unselected patients using propensity score matching (PSM). The 30 day incidence of major adverse clinical events (MACE; defined as stroke, transient ischaemic attack, myocardial infarction, or death) and procedure related complications, as well as restenosis rates during follow-up were compared between unselected patients undergoing CEA or CAS between January 2002 and December 2015 at a single institution. PSM was used to balance the following factors between the CEA and CAS cohorts: age, sex, hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidaemia, smoking, atrial fibrillation, previous percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting, valvular heart disease, contralateral carotid occlusion, degree of carotid stenosis, and symptomatic status. Statistical comparisons of outcomes were based on logistic regression analysis and log rank test. Of 1184 patients (654 CEA and 530 CAS), 452 PSM pairs of CEA and CAS patients were created. The CAS group showed a relatively higher 30 day incidence of MACE (7.5% vs. 2.4%; odds ratio [OR] 3.261, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.634–6.509; p = .001) but a lower incidence of procedure related complications (1.5% vs. 5.3%; OR 0.199, 95% CI 0.075–0.528; p = .001). During a mean follow-up of 49.1 months (range 1–180 months), restenosis rates were higher after CAS than after CEA (1.5% vs. 1.0% at 12 months and 5.4% vs. 1.2% at 24 months, respectively; p = .008). This PSM based observation reconfirmed previous trial results in both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients with carotid artery stenosis in routine clinical practice: CEA showed lower 30 day MACE and mid-term restenosis rates than CAS.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>28893482</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.08.006</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1078-5884
ispartof European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery, 2017-11, Vol.54 (5), p.573-578
issn 1078-5884
1532-2165
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1938194384
source MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)
subjects Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Angioplasty - adverse effects
Carotid endarterectomy
Carotid stenosis
Carotid Stenosis - diagnosis
Carotid Stenosis - epidemiology
Carotid Stenosis - surgery
Carotid stenting
Endarterectomy, Carotid - adverse effects
Female
Humans
Incidence
Male
Middle Aged
Postoperative Complications - epidemiology
Propensity Score
Propensity score-matching analysis
Recurrence
Retrospective Studies
Stents
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
title Editor's Choice – Comparison of Early Outcomes and Restenosis Rate Between Carotid Endarterectomy and Carotid Artery Stenting Using Propensity Score Matching Analysis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-04T13%3A40%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Editor's%20Choice%20%E2%80%93%20Comparison%20of%20Early%20Outcomes%20and%20Restenosis%20Rate%20Between%20Carotid%20Endarterectomy%20and%20Carotid%20Artery%20Stenting%20Using%20Propensity%20Score%20Matching%20Analysis&rft.jtitle=European%20journal%20of%20vascular%20and%20endovascular%20surgery&rft.au=Heo,%20Seon-Hee&rft.date=2017-11&rft.volume=54&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=573&rft.epage=578&rft.pages=573-578&rft.issn=1078-5884&rft.eissn=1532-2165&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.ejvs.2017.08.006&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1938194384%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1938194384&rft_id=info:pmid/28893482&rft_els_id=S1078588417305026&rfr_iscdi=true