Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for carotid artery stenosis

Endovascular treatment by transluminal balloon angioplasty or stent insertion may be a useful alternative to carotid endarterectomy. To assess the benefits and risks of endovascular treatment compared with carotid endarterectomy or medical therapy. We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group trials regist...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2007-01 (4), p.CD000515-CD000515
Hauptverfasser: Ederle, J, Featherstone, R L, Brown, M M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page CD000515
container_issue 4
container_start_page CD000515
container_title Cochrane database of systematic reviews
container_volume
creator Ederle, J
Featherstone, R L
Brown, M M
description Endovascular treatment by transluminal balloon angioplasty or stent insertion may be a useful alternative to carotid endarterectomy. To assess the benefits and risks of endovascular treatment compared with carotid endarterectomy or medical therapy. We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group trials register (last searched 14 March 2007) and the following bibliographic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2007), MEDLINE (1950 to March 2007), EMBASE (1980 to March 2007) and Science Citation Index (1945 to March 2007). We also contacted researchers in the field. We selected randomised trials of endovascular treatment compared with endarterectomy or medical therapy for carotid artery stenosis. One review author independently applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data and assessed trial quality. Search results were validated by a second review author. Data were available from 12 trials (3227 patients) but not all contributed to each analysis. The primary outcome comparison of any stroke or death within 30 days of treatment favoured surgery (odds ratio (OR) 1.39, P = 0.02, not significant (NS) in the random-effects model). The following outcome comparisons favoured endovascular treatment over surgery: cranial neuropathy (OR 0.07, P < 0.01); 30 day neurological complication or death (OR 0.62, P = 0.004, NS in the random-effects model, with significant heterogeneity). The following outcome comparisons showed little difference between endovascular treatment and surgery: 30 day stroke, myocardial infarction or death (OR 1.11, P = 0.57 with significant heterogeneity); stroke during long-term follow up (OR 1.00). Comparison between endovascular treatment with or without protection device showed no significant difference in 30 day stroke or death (OR 0.77, P = 0.42 with significant heterogeneity). Analysis of stroke or death within 30 days of the procedure in asymptomatic carotid stenosis showed no difference (OR 1.06, P = 0.96). In patients not suitable for surgery, there was no significant difference in 30 day stroke or death (OR 0.39, P = 0.09 with significant heterogeneity). The data are difficult to interpret because the trials are heterogeneous (different patients, endovascular procedures, and duration of follow up) and five trials were stopped early, perhaps leading to an over-estimate of the risks of endovascular treatment. The pattern of effects on different outcomes does not support a change in clin
doi_str_mv 10.1002/14651858.CD000515.pub3
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68406316</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>68406316</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c332t-246eae8816315ad94373c37858c88f351fe13a7836cd340adde250731a62cc593</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo1UM1OwzAYi5AQG4NXmHri1pH0S9L0iAoMpAk4gMSt-pakU1D_SNJD357CxsmWbFm2CVkzumGUZreMS8GUUJvynlIqmNgM4x7OyHIWipQX8LkglyF8UQoFY-qCLFhecMi5WJKXN-v1GLGz_RiS6LELzdi6DpsEu4PrhwZDnGZukhBtF113SOreJxp9H51J0Efrpz-tDy5ckfMam2CvT7giH48P7-VTunvdPpd3u1QDZDHNuLRolWISmEDzWwY05PMGrVQNgtWWAeYKpDbAKRpjM0FzYCgzrUUBK3JzzB18_z3aEKvWBW2b5jikkorTOVvOxvXJOO5ba6rBuxb9VP0_AD9Wq15m</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>68406316</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for carotid artery stenosis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Ederle, J ; Featherstone, R L ; Brown, M M</creator><creatorcontrib>Ederle, J ; Featherstone, R L ; Brown, M M</creatorcontrib><description>Endovascular treatment by transluminal balloon angioplasty or stent insertion may be a useful alternative to carotid endarterectomy. To assess the benefits and risks of endovascular treatment compared with carotid endarterectomy or medical therapy. We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group trials register (last searched 14 March 2007) and the following bibliographic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2007), MEDLINE (1950 to March 2007), EMBASE (1980 to March 2007) and Science Citation Index (1945 to March 2007). We also contacted researchers in the field. We selected randomised trials of endovascular treatment compared with endarterectomy or medical therapy for carotid artery stenosis. One review author independently applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data and assessed trial quality. Search results were validated by a second review author. Data were available from 12 trials (3227 patients) but not all contributed to each analysis. The primary outcome comparison of any stroke or death within 30 days of treatment favoured surgery (odds ratio (OR) 1.39, P = 0.02, not significant (NS) in the random-effects model). The following outcome comparisons favoured endovascular treatment over surgery: cranial neuropathy (OR 0.07, P &lt; 0.01); 30 day neurological complication or death (OR 0.62, P = 0.004, NS in the random-effects model, with significant heterogeneity). The following outcome comparisons showed little difference between endovascular treatment and surgery: 30 day stroke, myocardial infarction or death (OR 1.11, P = 0.57 with significant heterogeneity); stroke during long-term follow up (OR 1.00). Comparison between endovascular treatment with or without protection device showed no significant difference in 30 day stroke or death (OR 0.77, P = 0.42 with significant heterogeneity). Analysis of stroke or death within 30 days of the procedure in asymptomatic carotid stenosis showed no difference (OR 1.06, P = 0.96). In patients not suitable for surgery, there was no significant difference in 30 day stroke or death (OR 0.39, P = 0.09 with significant heterogeneity). The data are difficult to interpret because the trials are heterogeneous (different patients, endovascular procedures, and duration of follow up) and five trials were stopped early, perhaps leading to an over-estimate of the risks of endovascular treatment. The pattern of effects on different outcomes does not support a change in clinical practice away from recommending carotid endarterectomy as the treatment of choice for suitable carotid artery stenosis.</description><identifier>EISSN: 1469-493X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD000515.pub3</identifier><identifier>PMID: 17943745</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England</publisher><subject>Angioplasty, Balloon ; Carotid Artery, Internal ; Carotid Stenosis - therapy ; Humans ; Odds Ratio ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Stents</subject><ispartof>Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2007-01 (4), p.CD000515-CD000515</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c332t-246eae8816315ad94373c37858c88f351fe13a7836cd340adde250731a62cc593</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17943745$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ederle, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Featherstone, R L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, M M</creatorcontrib><title>Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for carotid artery stenosis</title><title>Cochrane database of systematic reviews</title><addtitle>Cochrane Database Syst Rev</addtitle><description>Endovascular treatment by transluminal balloon angioplasty or stent insertion may be a useful alternative to carotid endarterectomy. To assess the benefits and risks of endovascular treatment compared with carotid endarterectomy or medical therapy. We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group trials register (last searched 14 March 2007) and the following bibliographic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2007), MEDLINE (1950 to March 2007), EMBASE (1980 to March 2007) and Science Citation Index (1945 to March 2007). We also contacted researchers in the field. We selected randomised trials of endovascular treatment compared with endarterectomy or medical therapy for carotid artery stenosis. One review author independently applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data and assessed trial quality. Search results were validated by a second review author. Data were available from 12 trials (3227 patients) but not all contributed to each analysis. The primary outcome comparison of any stroke or death within 30 days of treatment favoured surgery (odds ratio (OR) 1.39, P = 0.02, not significant (NS) in the random-effects model). The following outcome comparisons favoured endovascular treatment over surgery: cranial neuropathy (OR 0.07, P &lt; 0.01); 30 day neurological complication or death (OR 0.62, P = 0.004, NS in the random-effects model, with significant heterogeneity). The following outcome comparisons showed little difference between endovascular treatment and surgery: 30 day stroke, myocardial infarction or death (OR 1.11, P = 0.57 with significant heterogeneity); stroke during long-term follow up (OR 1.00). Comparison between endovascular treatment with or without protection device showed no significant difference in 30 day stroke or death (OR 0.77, P = 0.42 with significant heterogeneity). Analysis of stroke or death within 30 days of the procedure in asymptomatic carotid stenosis showed no difference (OR 1.06, P = 0.96). In patients not suitable for surgery, there was no significant difference in 30 day stroke or death (OR 0.39, P = 0.09 with significant heterogeneity). The data are difficult to interpret because the trials are heterogeneous (different patients, endovascular procedures, and duration of follow up) and five trials were stopped early, perhaps leading to an over-estimate of the risks of endovascular treatment. The pattern of effects on different outcomes does not support a change in clinical practice away from recommending carotid endarterectomy as the treatment of choice for suitable carotid artery stenosis.</description><subject>Angioplasty, Balloon</subject><subject>Carotid Artery, Internal</subject><subject>Carotid Stenosis - therapy</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Odds Ratio</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Stents</subject><issn>1469-493X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNo1UM1OwzAYi5AQG4NXmHri1pH0S9L0iAoMpAk4gMSt-pakU1D_SNJD357CxsmWbFm2CVkzumGUZreMS8GUUJvynlIqmNgM4x7OyHIWipQX8LkglyF8UQoFY-qCLFhecMi5WJKXN-v1GLGz_RiS6LELzdi6DpsEu4PrhwZDnGZukhBtF113SOreJxp9H51J0Efrpz-tDy5ckfMam2CvT7giH48P7-VTunvdPpd3u1QDZDHNuLRolWISmEDzWwY05PMGrVQNgtWWAeYKpDbAKRpjM0FzYCgzrUUBK3JzzB18_z3aEKvWBW2b5jikkorTOVvOxvXJOO5ba6rBuxb9VP0_AD9Wq15m</recordid><startdate>20070101</startdate><enddate>20070101</enddate><creator>Ederle, J</creator><creator>Featherstone, R L</creator><creator>Brown, M M</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20070101</creationdate><title>Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for carotid artery stenosis</title><author>Ederle, J ; Featherstone, R L ; Brown, M M</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c332t-246eae8816315ad94373c37858c88f351fe13a7836cd340adde250731a62cc593</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Angioplasty, Balloon</topic><topic>Carotid Artery, Internal</topic><topic>Carotid Stenosis - therapy</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Odds Ratio</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Stents</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ederle, J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Featherstone, R L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, M M</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Cochrane database of systematic reviews</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ederle, J</au><au>Featherstone, R L</au><au>Brown, M M</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for carotid artery stenosis</atitle><jtitle>Cochrane database of systematic reviews</jtitle><addtitle>Cochrane Database Syst Rev</addtitle><date>2007-01-01</date><risdate>2007</risdate><issue>4</issue><spage>CD000515</spage><epage>CD000515</epage><pages>CD000515-CD000515</pages><eissn>1469-493X</eissn><abstract>Endovascular treatment by transluminal balloon angioplasty or stent insertion may be a useful alternative to carotid endarterectomy. To assess the benefits and risks of endovascular treatment compared with carotid endarterectomy or medical therapy. We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group trials register (last searched 14 March 2007) and the following bibliographic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2007), MEDLINE (1950 to March 2007), EMBASE (1980 to March 2007) and Science Citation Index (1945 to March 2007). We also contacted researchers in the field. We selected randomised trials of endovascular treatment compared with endarterectomy or medical therapy for carotid artery stenosis. One review author independently applied the inclusion criteria, extracted data and assessed trial quality. Search results were validated by a second review author. Data were available from 12 trials (3227 patients) but not all contributed to each analysis. The primary outcome comparison of any stroke or death within 30 days of treatment favoured surgery (odds ratio (OR) 1.39, P = 0.02, not significant (NS) in the random-effects model). The following outcome comparisons favoured endovascular treatment over surgery: cranial neuropathy (OR 0.07, P &lt; 0.01); 30 day neurological complication or death (OR 0.62, P = 0.004, NS in the random-effects model, with significant heterogeneity). The following outcome comparisons showed little difference between endovascular treatment and surgery: 30 day stroke, myocardial infarction or death (OR 1.11, P = 0.57 with significant heterogeneity); stroke during long-term follow up (OR 1.00). Comparison between endovascular treatment with or without protection device showed no significant difference in 30 day stroke or death (OR 0.77, P = 0.42 with significant heterogeneity). Analysis of stroke or death within 30 days of the procedure in asymptomatic carotid stenosis showed no difference (OR 1.06, P = 0.96). In patients not suitable for surgery, there was no significant difference in 30 day stroke or death (OR 0.39, P = 0.09 with significant heterogeneity). The data are difficult to interpret because the trials are heterogeneous (different patients, endovascular procedures, and duration of follow up) and five trials were stopped early, perhaps leading to an over-estimate of the risks of endovascular treatment. The pattern of effects on different outcomes does not support a change in clinical practice away from recommending carotid endarterectomy as the treatment of choice for suitable carotid artery stenosis.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pmid>17943745</pmid><doi>10.1002/14651858.CD000515.pub3</doi></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier EISSN: 1469-493X
ispartof Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2007-01 (4), p.CD000515-CD000515
issn 1469-493X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68406316
source MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Angioplasty, Balloon
Carotid Artery, Internal
Carotid Stenosis - therapy
Humans
Odds Ratio
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Stents
title Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting for carotid artery stenosis
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T14%3A43%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Percutaneous%20transluminal%20angioplasty%20and%20stenting%20for%20carotid%20artery%20stenosis&rft.jtitle=Cochrane%20database%20of%20systematic%20reviews&rft.au=Ederle,%20J&rft.date=2007-01-01&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=CD000515&rft.epage=CD000515&rft.pages=CD000515-CD000515&rft.eissn=1469-493X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/14651858.CD000515.pub3&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E68406316%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=68406316&rft_id=info:pmid/17943745&rfr_iscdi=true