Home > Riviste > Italian Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery > Fascicoli precedenti > Italian Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery 2011 June;18(2) > Italian Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery 2011 June;18(2):151-9

ULTIMO FASCICOLO
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
Per abbonarsi
Sottometti un articolo
Segnala alla tua biblioteca
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Estratti
Permessi

 

  CAROTID CONSENSUS UPDATE 

Italian Journal of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery 2011 June;18(2):151-9

Copyright © 2011 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

lingua: Inglese

Carotid artery revascularization in high-risk patients

Natarajan S. K. 1, 2, 4, Snyder K. V. 1, 3, 4, Levy E. I. 1, 4,. Siddiqui A. H. 1, 4, Hopkins L. N. 1, 4

1 Department of Neurosurgery, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo State University of New York Buffalo, NY, USA 2 Department of Neurosurgery, Millard Fillmore Gates Circle Hospital, Kaleida Health, Buffalo, NY, USA 3 Toshiba Stroke Research Center, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA 4 Department of Radiology, School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA


PDF


Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) became an accepted method for carotid revascularization on the basis of early trials, especially North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) and Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study (ACAS). Simultaneously, CAS was being proposed as a minimally invasive alternative to CEA, and the proponents of CAS started evaluating carotid artery stenting (CAS) in patients who would have been excluded from participation in the CEA trials. Patients who were excluded from the CEA trials by the investigators were deemed to be at high-risk for CEA based on many years of experience. These beliefs were reinforced by the results of the SAPPHIRE trial and the CAS reimbursement guidelines from the FDA and the CMS. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) objective performance criteria for CEA were based on an exhaustive literature review, as well as experience factors noted above. Current studies are helping to better define high risk for patients with precise estimates of stroke risks and other CEA-associated risks. As experience with CAS is increasing, there is mounting evidence to identify patients with high-risk for CAS.

inizio pagina