4.3 Article

Comparison of Trends and Outcomes of Carotid Artery Stenting and Endarterectomy in the United States, 2001 to 2010

Journal

CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
Volume 7, Issue 5, Pages 692-+

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.113.001338

Keywords

carotid artery diseases; endarterectomy, carotid

Funding

  1. Michael Wolk Heart Foundation
  2. New York Cardiac Center, Inc.
  3. Clinical Translational Science Center (CTSC) [UL1-TR000457-06]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background-Given the controversy regarding whether carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) may be superior for stroke prevention, it is uncertain how recent clinical evidence, guidelines, and reimbursement policies have influenced the volume and outcomes after these procedures. Methods and Results-We conducted a serial, cross-sectional study with time trends of patients undergoing CAS (n=124 265) and CEA (n=1 260 647) between 2001 and 2010 from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database. During the 10-year period, the frequency of CEA declined, whereas CAS use slowly increased. After multivariate propensity score-matched analysis, CAS was associated with an increased risk of death (odds ratio [OR], 1.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.40-2.04), stroke (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.23-1.66), and major adverse events including death, stroke, and myocardial infarction (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.13-1.39). In asymptomatic patients, there was no significant difference in major adverse events (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.92-1.20; P=0.16 [P<0.001 for interaction between procedure type and symptom status]) between CAS and CEA. Importantly, there was a significant improvement in CAS outcomes during the course of 10 years (reduction in death [OR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.49-0.67; P for trend=0.03] and major adverse events [OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.66-0.84; P for trend=0.05] comparing years 2010 versus 2001). Conclusions-In US hospitals between 2001 and 2010, CAS was associated with worse in-hospital outcomes, partly attributable to selection and ascertainment bias. Asymptomatic patients undergoing CAS versus CEA had similar adjusted rates of major adverse events. CAS outcomes improved significantly during the course of the decade likely attributable to improvements in patient selection, operator skills, and technological advancements.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available