3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Comparative Effectiveness of Carotid Endarterectomy vs Initial Medical Therapy in Patients With Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This comparative effectiveness study describes the analytical strategy, methods, and results of a target trial emulation examining cohorts of US veterans with carotid stenosis.

          Key Points

          Question

          Among patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis, is carotid endarterectomy superior to initial medical therapy in preventing fatal and nonfatal stroke within 5 years of follow-up in real-world practice?

          Findings

          In this comparative effectiveness study of 5221 patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis, the absolute reduction in the risk of fatal and nonfatal strokes associated with early carotid endarterectomy treatment was less than half the reduction observed in trials initiated more than 2 decades ago. The decrease was not statistically significant when the competing risk of nonstroke deaths was accounted for in the analysis.

          Meaning

          Results of this study suggest that, given the up-front perioperative risks associated with carotid endarterectomy and the reduced benefit derived from revascularization, initial medical therapy may be an acceptable treatment strategy for the management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

          Abstract

          Importance

          Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) among asymptomatic patients involves a trade-off between a higher short-term perioperative risk in exchange for a lower long-term risk of stroke. The clinical benefit observed in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) may not extend to real-world practice.

          Objective

          To examine whether early intervention (CEA) was superior to initial medical therapy in real-world practice in preventing fatal and nonfatal strokes among patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

          Design, Setting, and Participants

          This comparative effectiveness study was conducted from August 28, 2018, to March 2, 2020, using the Corporate Data Warehouse, Suicide Data Repository, and other databases of the US Department of Veterans Affairs. Data analyzed were those of veterans of the US Armed Forces aged 65 years or older who received carotid imaging between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2009. Patients without a carotid imaging report, those with carotid stenosis of less than 50% or hemodynamically insignificant stenosis, and those with a history of stroke or transient ischemic attack in the 6 months before index imaging were excluded. A cohort of patients who received initial medical therapy and a cohort of similar patients who received CEA were constructed and followed up for 5 years. The target trial method was used to compute weighted Kaplan-Meier curves and estimate the risk of fatal and nonfatal strokes in each cohort in the pragmatic sample across 5 years of follow-up. This analysis was repeated after restricting the sample to patients who met RCT inclusion criteria. Cumulative incidence functions for fatal and nonfatal strokes were estimated, accounting for nonstroke deaths as competing risks in both the pragmatic and RCT-like samples.

          Exposures

          Receipt of CEA vs initial medical therapy.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          Fatal and nonfatal strokes.

          Results

          Of the total 5221 patients, 2712 (51.9%; mean [SD] age, 73.6 [6.0] years; 2678 men [98.8%]) received CEA and 2509 (48.1%; mean [SD] age, 73.6 [6.0] years; 2479 men [98.8%]) received initial medical therapy within 1 year after the index carotid imaging. The observed rate of stroke or death (perioperative complications) within 30 days in the CEA cohort was 2.5% (95% CI, 2.0%-3.1%). The 5-year risk of fatal and nonfatal strokes was lower among patients randomized to CEA compared with patients randomized to initial medical therapy (5.6% vs 7.8%; risk difference, −2.3%; 95% CI, −4.0% to −0.3%). In an analysis that incorporated the competing risk of death, the risk difference between the 2 cohorts was lower and not statistically significant (risk difference, −0.8%; 95% CI, −2.1% to 0.5%). Among patients who met RCT inclusion criteria, the 5-year risk of fatal and nonfatal strokes was 5.5% (95% CI, 4.5%-6.5%) among patients randomized to CEA and was 7.6% (95% CI, 5.7%-9.5%) among those randomized to initial medical therapy (risk difference, −2.1%; 95% CI, −4.4% to −0.2%). Accounting for competing risks resulted in a risk difference of −0.9% (95% CI, −2.9% to 0.7%) that was not statistically significant.

          Conclusions and Relevance

          This study found that the absolute reduction in the risk of fatal and nonfatal strokes associated with early CEA was less than half the risk difference in trials from 20 years ago and was no longer statistically significant when the competing risk of nonstroke deaths was accounted for in the analysis. Given the nonnegligible perioperative 30-day risks and the improvements in stroke prevention, medical therapy may be an acceptable therapeutic strategy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references35

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Prevention of disabling and fatal strokes by successful carotid endarterectomy in patients without recent neurological symptoms: randomised controlled trial.

          Among patients with substantial carotid artery narrowing but no recent neurological symptom (stroke or transient ischaemia), the balance of surgical risks and long-term benefits from carotid endarterectomy (CEA) was unclear. During 1993-2003, 3120 asymptomatic patients with substantial carotid narrowing were randomised equally between immediate CEA (half got CEA by 1 month, 88% by 1 year) and indefinite deferral of any CEA (only 4% per year got CEA) and were followed for up to 5 years (mean 3.4 years). Kaplan-Meier analyses of 5-year risks are by allocated treatment. The risk of stroke or death within 30 days of CEA was 3.1% (95% CI 2.3-4.1). Comparing all patients allocated immediate CEA versus all allocated deferral, but excluding such perioperative events, the 5-year stroke risks were 3.8% versus 11% (gain 7.2% [95% CI 5.0-9.4], p<0.0001). This gain chiefly involved carotid territory ischaemic strokes (2.7% vs 9.5%; gain 6.8% [4.8-8.8], p<0.0001), of which half were disabling or fatal (1.6% vs 5.3%; gain 3.7% [2.1-5.2], p<0.0001), as were half the perioperative strokes. Combining the perioperative events and the non-perioperative strokes, net 5-year risks were 6.4% versus 11.8% for all strokes (net gain 5.4% [3.0-7.8], p<0.0001), 3.5% versus 6.1% for fatal or disabling strokes (net gain 2.5% [0.8-4.3], p=0.004), and 2.1% versus 4.2% just for fatal strokes (net gain 2.1% [0.6-3.6], p=0.006). Subgroup-specific analyses found no significant heterogeneity in the perioperative hazards or (apart from the importance of cholesterol) in the long-term postoperative benefits. These benefits were separately significant for males and females; for those with about 70%, 80%, and 90% carotid artery narrowing on ultrasound; and for those younger than 65 and 65-74 years of age (though not for older patients, half of whom die within 5 years from unrelated causes). Full compliance with allocation to immediate CEA or deferral would, in expectation, have produced slightly bigger differences in the numbers operated on, and hence in the net 5-year benefits. The 10-year benefits are not yet known. In asymptomatic patients younger than 75 years of age with carotid diameter reduction about 70% or more on ultrasound (many of whom were on aspirin, antihypertensive, and, in recent years, statin therapy), immediate CEA halved the net 5-year stroke risk from about 12% to about 6% (including the 3% perioperative hazard). Half this 5-year benefit involved disabling or fatal strokes. But, outside trials, inappropriate selection of patients or poor surgery could obviate such benefits.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Endarterectomy for Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              MRC European Carotid Surgery Trial: interim results for symptomatic patients with severe (70-99%) or with mild (0-29%) carotid stenosis

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Neurol
                JAMA Neurol
                JAMA Neurol
                JAMA Neurology
                American Medical Association
                2168-6149
                2168-6157
                September 2020
                1 June 2020
                27 July 2020
                1 June 2020
                : 77
                : 9
                : 1-12
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco
                [2 ]San Francisco Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center, San Francisco, California
                [3 ]Department of Neurology, UCLA (University of California Los Angeles), Los Angeles
                [4 ]VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California
                [5 ]Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
                [6 ]Northern California Institute of Research and Education, San Francisco
                [7 ]University of Washington, Seattle
                [8 ]Puget Sound VA, Seattle, Washington
                [9 ]Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
                [10 ]Department of Population, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
                [11 ]Department of Data Science, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas
                [12 ]Department of Ophthalmology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco
                [13 ]Department of Surgery, University of Nebraska, Omaha
                [14 ]Omaha VA Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska
                [15 ]Biomedical Informatics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City
                [16 ]Salt Lake City VA Health Care System, Salt Lake City, Utah
                [17 ]Now with Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, & Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
                [18 ]University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
                [19 ]Department of Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis
                [20 ]Department of Neurology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis
                [21 ]Richard L. Roudebush VA Medical Center, Indianapolis, Indiana
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Accepted for Publication: March 6, 2020.
                Published Online: June 1, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.1427
                Correction: This article was corrected on July 27, 2020, to fix mislabeled curves in Figure 2.
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2020 Keyhani S et al. JAMA Neurology.
                Corresponding Author: Salomeh Keyhani, MD, MPH, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 4150 Clement St, San Francisco, CA 94121 ( salomeh.keyhani@ 123456ucsf.edu ).
                Author Contributions: Dr Keyhani had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
                Concept and design: Keyhani, Cheng, Hebert, Johanning, Chapman, Bravata.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Keyhani, Cheng, Hoggatt, Austin, Madden, Hebert, Halm, Naseri, Johanning, Mowery, Bravata.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Keyhani, Hoggatt, Madden, Naseri.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Keyhani, Cheng, Austin, Hebert, Halm, Johanning, Mowery, Chapman, Bravata.
                Statistical analysis: Keyhani, Cheng, Hoggatt, Madden, Hebert, Bravata.
                Obtained funding: Keyhani, Cheng, Hebert.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Keyhani, Johanning.
                Supervision: Keyhani, Naseri, Chapman.
                Developed and evaluated natural language processing solution: Mowery.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Cheng reported receiving grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) during the conduct of the study. Dr Johanning reported holding a licensed patent to FUTUREASSURE LLC. No other disclosures were reported.
                Funding/Support: This study was funded by grant RO1 HL114563-01A1 from the NIH (Dr Keyhani).
                Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.
                Additional Contributions: The following individuals contributed to this project over the past 5 years: Ann Abraham, BS, Northern California Institute of Research and Education; Rosa Ahn, BS, Oregon Health Sciences School of Medicine; Mehrnaz Ghasemiesfe, MD, Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center; Susan Saba, BS, MPH, Center for Clinical Research, Stanford; Marzieh Vali, MS, Northern California Institute of Research and Education; Alexandra Woodbridge, BS, Tulane University School of Medicine; Alysandra Zhang, BS, Department of Counseling and Clinical Psychology; and Josh Senyak, Quick Silver Consulting. These individuals received payment from the study grant for their contributions.
                Article
                noi200032
                10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.1427
                7265126
                32478802
                ede8b3c6-d4a8-49e7-81aa-7024fb848a12
                Copyright 2020 Keyhani S et al. JAMA Neurology.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 22 January 2020
                : 6 March 2020
                Categories
                Research
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Featured
                Online First
                Comments

                Comments

                Comment on this article