Stenting versus Carotid Endarterectomy for Carotid Stenosis. A Single Center Experience

Aim: The objective was to compare Carotid Endarterectomy (CEA) with Carotid Artery Stenting (CAS) in terms of efficacy and safety in patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic extracranial carotid stenosis. MATERIALS: This study enrolled 285 patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis that underwent either to CAS or CELL. The primary end-points were death, stroke and myocardial infarction. The secondary end-points were restenosis and nerve injury. The Data emerged from the follow-up at 1,3,6,12,24 months that provided for clinical and EcocolorDoppler monitoring. A separate analyse was performed evaluating the prediction of the Ultrasonographic appearance of the atheroma on the symptomatic nature of the lesion. RESULTS: The percentage of neurological symptomatology in the periprocedural period was higher in CAS than in CEA group (9% vs 3%). We didn't report any case of periprocedural death. The results from the follow-up are: myocardial infarction 5% CAS vs 7% CEA; stroke 5% CAS vs 4% CEA; restenosis 3% GAS vs 6% CEA; nerve injury 0% CAS vs 1% CEA; mortality 0% CAS vs 1% CEA. DISCUSSION: CEA is the gold standard for treatment of significant carotid stenosis, although endovascular technique is emerging as a less invasive alternative. CAS has presented a less frequence of myocardial infarction, nerve injury and long-term mortality, but it showed an higher percentage of neurological events both in short and long-term. This last aspect is correlated with the plaque structure. Ultrasonographic study of the atheroma has become a defining moment in the choice of the therapeutic strategy.