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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery 2017-11, Vol.54 (5), p.573-578 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
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 |