Home > Journals > Minerva Chirurgica > Past Issues > Minerva Chirurgica 2018 October;73(5) > Minerva Chirurgica 2018 October;73(5):505-11

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as

 

REVIEW   Freefree

Minerva Chirurgica 2018 October;73(5):505-11

DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4733.18.07767-2

Copyright © 2018 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Emergent treatment of carotid stenosis: an evidence-based systematic review

Raffaele SERRA 1, 2 , Andrea BARBETTA 1, 3, Francesco FUGETTO 1, Noemi LICASTRO 2, Giovanni APREA 3, Giuseppe PETRELLA 4, Michele DANZI 3, Aldo ROCCA 3, Rita COMPAGNA 1, 3, Stefano DE FRANCISCIS 1, 2, Bruno AMATO 1, 3

1 Interuniversity Center of Phlebolymphology (CIFL), Magna Græcia University, Catanzaro, Italy; 2 Department of Medical and Surgical Sciences, Magna Græcia University, Catanzaro, Italy; 3 Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, Federico II University, Naples, Italy; 4 Department of Surgery, Tor Vergata University, Rome, Italy



INTRODUCTION: Stroke is one of the major causes of death in the world, but above all is the condition most associated with severe long-term disabilities. It is clear that this condition therefore requires the best therapeutic approach possible to minimize the consequences that this can lead to. The major issues concern the type of treatment to be used for revascularization (carotid endarterectomy [CEA] or stenting of the carotid artery [CAS]) and the timing of the treatment itself. Many studies have been conducted on this issue, but a definitive and unanimous verdict has not yet been reached on account of the great variety of results obtained from the various study group. The aim of this review is to analyze the latest scientific findings focused on revascularization following a symptomatic carotid stenosis (SCS).
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched all publications addressing treatments and timing of approach to SCS. Randomized trials, cohort studies and reviews were contemplated in order to give a breadth of clinical data. Medline and Science Direct were searched from January 2013 to April 2017.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Of the 819 records found, 76 matched our inclusion criteria. After reading the full-text articles, we decided to exclude 54 manuscripts because of the following reasons: 1) no innovative or important content; 2) insufficient data; 3) no clear potential biases or strategies to solve them; 4) no clear endpoints; and 5) inconsistent or arbitrary conclusions. The final set included 22 articles.
CONCLUSIONS: CEA is considered a less problematic method than CAS, especially for patients over the age of 75; CAS remains recommended in patients with a favorable anatomy or high surgical risks. Studies that showed more solid results seem to lead to the conclusion that optimal timing may be between 2 days and the end of the first week from the onset of symptoms in patients who are appropriate candidates for surgery.


KEY WORDS: Emergency medicine - Carotid stenosis - Endovascular procedures - Myocardial revascularization

top of page