Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2018 Jul;61(4):458-466. doi: 10.3340/jkns.2017.0202.001. Epub 2018 Apr 10.

Protected versus Unprotected Carotid Artery Stenting : Meta-Analysis of the Current Literature.

Author information

1
Department of Radiology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
2
Department of Emergency Medicine, Seoul Emergency Operations Center, Seoul, Korea.
3
Department of Neurosurgery, Chungnam National University College of Medicine, Daejeon, Korea.
4
Department of Neurosurgery, Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Korea.
5
Institute of New Frontier Research, Hallym University College of Medicine, Chuncheon, Korea.

Abstract

Objective:

To compare peri-operative any symptomatic stroke after carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS), based on the application or absence of a cerebral protection device.

Methods:

A systematic literature review using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central was done across an online data base from January 1995 to October 2016. Procedures which were performed due to carotid dissection or aneurysm, procedures using covered stents or conducted in an emergency, were excluded. The primary endpoint was perioperative any symptomatic stroke within 30 days after the procedure. A fixed effect model was used in cases of heterogeneity less than 50%.

Results:

In the 25 articles included in this study, the number of stroke events was 326 (2.0%) in protected CAS and 142 (3.4%) in unprotected CAS. The use of cerebral protection device significantly decreased stroke after CAS (odds ratio [OR] 0.633, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.479-0.837, p=0.001). In the publication bias analysis, Egger's regression test disclosed that the intercept was -0.317 (95% CI -1.015-0.382, p=0.358). Regarding symptomatic patients (four studies, 539 CAS procedures), the number of stroke was six (1.7%) in protected CAS and 11 (5.7%) in unprotected CAS. The protective effect against stroke events by cerebral protection device did not have a statistical significance (OR 0.455, 95% CI 0.151-1.366, p=0.160).

Conclusion:

The use of protection device significantly decreased stroke after CAS. However, its efficacy was not demonstrated in symptomatic patients. Routine use of protection device during CAS should be critically assessed before mandatory use.

KEYWORDS:

Carotid artery stenosis; Meta-analysis; Stents

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Publishing M2Community Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center