FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2145492790> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2145492790 endingPage "1231.e1" @default.
• W2145492790 startingPage "1227" @default.
• W2145492790 abstract "ObjectiveIn medically high-risk patients the choice between carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can be difficult. The purpose of this study was to compare risk-stratified outcomes of CAS and CEA.MethodsPatients who underwent isolated primary CEA (n = 11,336) or primary CAS (n = 544) at 29 centers in the Vascular Study Group of New England were analyzed (2003-2013); patients with previous ipsilateral CEA or CAS, or concomitant coronary artery bypass graft were excluded. A medical risk score based on predicted 5-year mortality was developed for each patient using a Cox proportional hazards model. Patients in the highest risk score quartile were termed high-risk (vs normal-risk for the other three quartiles). Medically high-risk patients had a 5-year survival of 65% and comprised 23% of CEA and 25% of CAS patients. Risk-stratified outcomes were compared within neurologically symptomatic and asymptomatic patients.ResultsAmong asymptomatic patients, rates of in-hospital stroke and/or death were not different between CAS and CEA in normal and high-risk cohorts, ranging from 0.7% in normal-risk CEA patients to 1.6% in high-risk CAS patients. In symptomatic patients, significantly worse outcomes were seen with CAS compared with CEA in normal-risk and high-risk patients. Normal-risk symptomatic patients had a stroke or death rate of 1.3% with CEA, but 5.2% with CAS (P < .01). In high-risk symptomatic patients, the stroke or death rate was 1.5% with CEA and 9.3% with CAS (P < .01). No significant differences were seen between asymptomatic CEA and CAS within risk strata across secondary outcome measures of stroke, death, or myocardial infarction, and ipsilateral stroke, major stroke, or death. However, symptomatic high-risk CAS patients had significantly greater rates of all secondary outcomes compared with CEA except death, and symptomatic normal-risk CAS patients had only significantly greater rates of death and stroke, death, or myocardial infarction.ConclusionsIn the Vascular Study Group of New England, asymptomatic normal- and high-risk patients do equally well after CEA or CAS. However, normal- and high-risk symptomatic patients have substantially worse outcomes with CAS compared with CEA. High medical risk alone might be an insufficient indication for CAS in symptomatic patients. In medically high-risk patients the choice between carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can be difficult. The purpose of this study was to compare risk-stratified outcomes of CAS and CEA. Patients who underwent isolated primary CEA (n = 11,336) or primary CAS (n = 544) at 29 centers in the Vascular Study Group of New England were analyzed (2003-2013); patients with previous ipsilateral CEA or CAS, or concomitant coronary artery bypass graft were excluded. A medical risk score based on predicted 5-year mortality was developed for each patient using a Cox proportional hazards model. Patients in the highest risk score quartile were termed high-risk (vs normal-risk for the other three quartiles). Medically high-risk patients had a 5-year survival of 65% and comprised 23% of CEA and 25% of CAS patients. Risk-stratified outcomes were compared within neurologically symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Among asymptomatic patients, rates of in-hospital stroke and/or death were not different between CAS and CEA in normal and high-risk cohorts, ranging from 0.7% in normal-risk CEA patients to 1.6% in high-risk CAS patients. In symptomatic patients, significantly worse outcomes were seen with CAS compared with CEA in normal-risk and high-risk patients. Normal-risk symptomatic patients had a stroke or death rate of 1.3% with CEA, but 5.2% with CAS (P < .01). In high-risk symptomatic patients, the stroke or death rate was 1.5% with CEA and 9.3% with CAS (P < .01). No significant differences were seen between asymptomatic CEA and CAS within risk strata across secondary outcome measures of stroke, death, or myocardial infarction, and ipsilateral stroke, major stroke, or death. However, symptomatic high-risk CAS patients had significantly greater rates of all secondary outcomes compared with CEA except death, and symptomatic normal-risk CAS patients had only significantly greater rates of death and stroke, death, or myocardial infarction. In the Vascular Study Group of New England, asymptomatic normal- and high-risk patients do equally well after CEA or CAS. However, normal- and high-risk symptomatic patients have substantially worse outcomes with CAS compared with CEA. High medical risk alone might be an insufficient indication for CAS in symptomatic patients." @default.
• W2145492790 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2145492790 creator A5006930769 @default.
• W2145492790 creator A5037862076 @default.
• W2145492790 creator A5044493690 @default.
• W2145492790 creator A5045922184 @default.
• W2145492790 creator A5050102431 @default.
• W2145492790 creator A5053614501 @default.
• W2145492790 creator A5065001569 @default.
• W2145492790 creator A5090442172 @default.
• W2145492790 date "2014-11-01" @default.
• W2145492790 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2145492790 title "Outcomes of carotid endarterectomy versus stenting in comparable medical risk patients" @default.
• W2145492790 cites W1965981448 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W1981211431 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W1996926581 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W1997663201 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2011290673 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2034222513 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2038169486 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2065700756 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2093837272 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2097030777 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2097349400 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2100194095 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2117126193 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2122528416 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2124820341 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2148895634 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2152662337 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2154447272 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2160810667 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2165530226 @default.
• W2145492790 cites W2165912096 @default.
• W2145492790 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2014.05.044" @default.
• W2145492790 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/5292270" @default.
• W2145492790 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24953899" @default.
• W2145492790 hasPublicationYear "2014" @default.
• W2145492790 type Work @default.
• W2145492790 sameAs 2145492790 @default.
• W2145492790 citedByCount "16" @default.
• W2145492790 countsByYear W21454927902015 @default.
• W2145492790 countsByYear W21454927902016 @default.
• W2145492790 countsByYear W21454927902017 @default.
• W2145492790 countsByYear W21454927902018 @default.
• W2145492790 countsByYear W21454927902019 @default.
• W2145492790 countsByYear W21454927902020 @default.
• W2145492790 countsByYear W21454927902021 @default.
• W2145492790 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2145492790 hasAuthorship W2145492790A5006930769 @default.
• W2145492790 hasAuthorship W2145492790A5037862076 @default.
• W2145492790 hasAuthorship W2145492790A5044493690 @default.
• W2145492790 hasAuthorship W2145492790A5045922184 @default.
• W2145492790 hasAuthorship W2145492790A5050102431 @default.
• W2145492790 hasAuthorship W2145492790A5053614501 @default.
• W2145492790 hasAuthorship W2145492790A5065001569 @default.
• W2145492790 hasAuthorship W2145492790A5090442172 @default.
• W2145492790 hasBestOaLocation W21454927901 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConcept C11783203 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConcept C127413603 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConcept C2777910003 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConcept C2779134260 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConcept C2779384505 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConcept C2780645631 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConcept C2781068581 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConcept C2987047532 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConcept C44249647 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConcept C68443243 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConcept C78519656 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConceptScore W2145492790C11783203 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConceptScore W2145492790C126322002 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConceptScore W2145492790C127413603 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConceptScore W2145492790C141071460 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConceptScore W2145492790C2777910003 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConceptScore W2145492790C2779134260 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConceptScore W2145492790C2779384505 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConceptScore W2145492790C2780645631 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConceptScore W2145492790C2781068581 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConceptScore W2145492790C2987047532 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConceptScore W2145492790C44249647 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConceptScore W2145492790C68443243 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConceptScore W2145492790C71924100 @default.
• W2145492790 hasConceptScore W2145492790C78519656 @default.
• W2145492790 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W2145492790 hasLocation W21454927901 @default.
• W2145492790 hasLocation W21454927902 @default.
• W2145492790 hasLocation W21454927903 @default.
• W2145492790 hasLocation W21454927904 @default.
• W2145492790 hasOpenAccess W2145492790 @default.
• W2145492790 hasPrimaryLocation W21454927901 @default.
• W2145492790 hasRelatedWork W1545803792 @default.
• W2145492790 hasRelatedWork W1985757160 @default.
• W2145492790 hasRelatedWork W2007817983 @default.
• W2145492790 hasRelatedWork W2029936860 @default.
• W2145492790 hasRelatedWork W2049567231 @default.

• next