Vasc Endovascular Surg. 2025 Mar 29:15385744251330930. doi: 10.1177/15385744251330930. Online ahead of print.
ABSTRACT
Background and AimThe aim of this study is to estimate the incidence of periprocedural outcomes after carotid revascularization with special emphasis on myocardial infarction and assess the safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) through systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsA multiple electronic search was performed in Medline (database provider PubMed), Web of Science Core Collection, EMBASE (database provider Ovid) and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases for articles from 2000 up to 2023 reporting outcomes after carotid revascularization. Randomized control trials comparing the perioperative events (30-day results) after CAS and CEA stating the perioperative risk of myocardial infarction were included in the present meta-analysis according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines.ResultsA total of twelve randomized control trials (RCTs) with 11 153 patients were identified and considered eligible. The pooled risk of periprocedural stroke was found to be reduced after CEA compared to CAS [OR: 1.6, CI 95%:1.3-2.1, P < 0.05], while PMI was found to be more frequent after CEA, favoring CAS [OR: 0.4, CI 95%: 0.2-0.7, P < 0.05]. Periprocedural mortality was lower but not reaching statistical significance in the CEA compared to CAS [OR: 1.1, CI 95%: 0.6-2.1, P = 0.68]. The pooled OR for composite endpoint of stroke, MI or death was in favor of CEA as safer treatment [OR: 1.3, CI 95%: 1-1.5, P < 0.05].ConclusionsPMI risk was lower after CAS, although the currently available data do not demonstrate any increase in mortality rates.
PMID:40156572 | DOI:10.1177/15385744251330930
