ABSTRACT NUMBER: ESOC2026A58 STENTING VS ENDARTERECTOMY IN PATIENTS WITH HIGH-RISK ASYMPTOMATIC CAROTID STENOSIS

Abstract Background and aims The management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) and the choice between carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) remain controversial. Current guidelines recommend intervention for patients presenting with silent cerebral infarction, stenosis progression, unstable plaque morphology, microembolic signals, or impaired cerebrovascular reserve. The main objective was to compare complications and outcomes between CAS and CEA. Methods Observational, retrospective, single-center study. Adult patients with CAS >70% (NASCET) (January 2022-May 2024) treated with CEA/CAS were included. Demographic, clinical, and radiological variables were collected, and periprocedural complications and hospital mortality were evaluated. At one-month and one-year follow-up, clinical events and functional prognosis were determined using the modified Rankin scale (mRS). Results Fifty-nine patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (mean age 68 ± 7.1 years; 15% women) were included: 21 underwent carotid artery stenting (CAS) and 38 carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Periprocedural complications were similar (CAS 14.3%; CEA 13.2%). CAS complications included intrastent thrombosis, inguinal hematoma, and femoral pseudoaneurysm; CEA complications included recurrent laryngeal nerve injury (n=3) and cervical hematoma requiring reintervention (n=2). No in-hospital mortality occurred. At one month, one cardiovascular event and one cerebral hemorrhage were reported in the CEA group. No further events occurred at one year. At follow-up, all patients achieved a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score ≤2. Conclusions: In our cohort, CAS and EAC showed similar rates of periprocedural complications, but EAC had more adverse events at one month. Both were safe, with no mortality and a good prognosis at one year. An individualized and multidisciplinary approach is crucial for decision-making. Conflict of interest Georgina Figueras-Aguirre: nothing to disclose

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Stroke Journal
Published
2026-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/esj/aakag023.1163
Primary Topic
Cerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

ABSTRACT NUMBER: ESOC2026A58 STENTING VS ENDARTERECTOMY IN PATIENTS WITH HIGH-RISK ASYMPTOMATIC CAROTID STENOSIS

Isabel Fernández‐Pérez, David Cánovas, Nicolás Augusto Romero Flórez, M Camats et al.
European Stroke Journal
Cerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
article

ABSTRACT NUMBER: ESOC2026A58 STENTING VS ENDARTERECTOMY IN PATIENTS WITH HIGH-RISK ASYMPTOMATIC CAROTID STENOSIS

Isabel Fernández‐Pérez, David Cánovas, Nicolás Augusto Romero Flórez, M Camats, A Martinez-Toiran, Clara Toscano, R Correa, Georgina Figueras- Aguirre
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background and aims The management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) and the choice between carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) remain controversial. Current guidelines recommend intervention for patients presenting with silent cerebral infarction, stenosis progression, unstable plaque morphology, microembolic signals, or impaired cerebrovascular reserve. The main objective was to compare complications and outcomes between CAS and CEA. Methods Observational, retrospective, single-center study. Adult patients with CAS >70% (NASCET) (January 2022-May 2024) treated with CEA/CAS were included. Demographic, clinical, and radiological variables were collected, and periprocedural complications and hospital mortality were evaluated. At one-month and one-year follow-up, clinical events and functional prognosis were determined using the modified Rankin scale (mRS). Results Fifty-nine patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (mean age 68 ± 7.1 years; 15% women) were included: 21 underwent carotid artery stenting (CAS) and 38 carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Periprocedural complications were similar (CAS 14.3%; CEA 13.2%). CAS complications included intrastent thrombosis, inguinal hematoma, and femoral pseudoaneurysm; CEA complications included recurrent laryngeal nerve injury (n=3) and cervical hematoma requiring reintervention (n=2). No in-hospital mortality occurred. At one month, one cardiovascular event and one cerebral hemorrhage were reported in the CEA group. No further events occurred at one year. At follow-up, all patients achieved a modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score ≤2. Conclusions: In our cohort, CAS and EAC showed similar rates of periprocedural complications, but EAC had more adverse events at one month. Both were safe, with no mortality and a good prognosis at one year. An individualized and multidisciplinary approach is crucial for decision-making. Conflict of interest Georgina Figueras-Aguirre: nothing to disclose

European Stroke JournalVol. 11(Supplement_1)
Hospital de Sabadell (ES), Hospital Del Mar (ES)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Cerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.