Meta‐analysis of the costs of carotid artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy. BJS 2017; 104: 1284-1292.
Published: 7th August 2017
Authors: E. E. de Vries, V. G. M. Baldew, H. M. den Ruijter, G. J. de Borst
Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is currently associated with an increased risk of 30‐day stroke compared with carotid endarterectomy (CEA), whereas both interventions seem equally durable beyond the periprocedural period. Although the clinical outcomes continue to be scrutinized, there are few data summarizing the costs of both techniques.
A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases in August 2016 identifying articles comparing the costs or cost‐effectiveness of CAS and CEA in patients with carotid artery stenosis. Combined overall effect sizes were calculated using random‐effects models. The in‐hospital costs were specified to gain insight into the main heads of expenditure associated with both procedures.
The literature search identified 617 unique articles, of which five RCTs and 12 cohort studies were eligible for analysis. Costs of the index hospital admission were similar for CAS and CEA. Costs of the procedure itself were 51 per cent higher for CAS, mainly driven by the higher costs of devices and supplies, but were balanced by higher postprocedural costs of CEA. Long‐term cost analysis revealed no difference in costs or quality of life after 1 year of follow‐up.
Hospitalization and long‐term costs of CAS and CEA appear similar. Economic considerations should not influence the choice of stenting or surgery in patients with carotid artery stenosis being considered for revascularization.Read more
You may also be interested in
Risk of major amputation in patients with intermittent claudication undergoing early revascularization.
Authors: J. Golledge, J. V. Moxon, S. Rowbotham, J. Pinchbeck, L. Yip, R. Velu et al.
Notes: Early revascularization associated with amputation
Authors: R. E. Clough, R. Spear, K. Van Calster, A. Hertault, R. Azzaoui, J. Sobocinski et al.
Notes: Encouraging results in expert hands
Authors: N. Rudarakanchana, M. P. Jenkins
Notes: Formidable challenge
Cellular and molecular imaging of the arteries in the age of precision medicine. BJS 2018; 105: 311-312.
Authors: R. O. Forsythe, D. E. Newby
Comparative analysis of the outcomes of elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in England and Sweden.
Authors: A. Karthikesalingam, M. J. Grima, P. J. Holt, A. Vidal‐Diez, M. M. Thompson, A. Wanhainen et al.
Notes: Improving in England
Authors: A. J. Quyn, C. G. Fraser, J. Rodger, A. Digan, A. S. Anderson, R. J. C. Steele et al.
Notes: Maximising screening benefits
Cerebral embolization, silent cerebral infarction and neurocognitive decline after thoracic endovascular aortic repair. BJS 2018; 105: 366-378.
Authors: A. H. Perera, N. Rudarakanchana, L. Monzon, C. D. Bicknell, B. Modarai, O. Kirmi et al.
Notes: Occurs in most
Nationwide analysis of risk factors for in‐hospital mortality in patients undergoing abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. BJS 2018; 105: 379-387.
Authors: M. Trenner, A. Kuehnl, B. Reutersberg, M. Salvermoser, H.‐H. Eckstein
Notes: Women and elderly at higher risk
Authors: M. F. Bath, D. Sidloff, A. Saratzis, M. J. Bown, R. Pathak, M. Brooks et al.
Notes: Small initial reduction
Authors: S. Ball, S. Rogers, K. Kanesalingam, R. Taylor, E. Katsogridakis, C. McCollum et al.
Notes: Potential indication for treatment
Lessons learned about prevalence and growth rates of abdominal aortic aneurysms from a 25‐year ultrasound population screening programme. BJS 2018; 105: 68-74.
Authors: C. Oliver‐Williams, M. J. Sweeting, G. Turton, D. Parkin, D. Cooper, C. Rodd et al.
Notes: Growth rates unchanged but prevalence decreasing
Meta‐analysis of the procedural risks of carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting over time. BJS 2018; 105: 26-36.
Authors: K. Lokuge, D. D. de Waard, A. Halliday, A. Gray, R. Bulbulia, B. Mihaylova et al.
Notes: Endarterectomy outcomes improving