1987JAMARequires access

Endarterectomy in Carotid Artery Disease

Loren A. Rolak

Open publisher page 14 citations

Abstract

To the Editor.— The conclusions and recommendations for patient selection for carotid endarterectomy advanced by Matchar and Pauker1cannot be accepted because they ignore the most important fact: carotid endarterectomy has never been shown to be of any value for any patient under any circumstances. The authors admit that the only randomized controlled trial of endarterectomy failed to show a benefit,2yet they use this 20-year-old study to estimate the efficacy of the procedure in modern patients. There is mounting evidence, such as that from the large, prospective, randomized controlled trial of extracranial-intracranial bypass,3that surgical revascularization is of no benefit in preventing stroke. Whether carotid endarterectomy is also of no benefit is unknown, but there is no scientific evidence of its effectiveness. The relative risks of this procedure in different types of patients are irrelevant when there are no clear benefits. I appreciate the authors' attempt

About this research paper

What this paper is about

To the Editor.— The conclusions and recommendations for patient selection for carotid endarterectomy advanced by Matchar and Pauker1cannot be accepted because they ignore the most important fact: carotid endarterectomy has never been shown to be of any value for any patient under any circumstances. The authors admit that the only randomized controlled trial of endarterectomy failed to show a benefit,2yet they use this 20-year-old study to estimate the efficacy of the procedure in modern patients. There is mounting evidence, such as that from the large, prospective, randomized controlled trial of extracranial-intracranial bypass,3that surgical revascularization is of no benefit in preventing stroke. Whether carotid endarterectomy is also of no benefit is unknown, but there is no scientific evidence of its effectiveness. The relative risks of this procedure in different types of patients are irrelevant when there are no clear benefits. I appreciate the authors' attempt

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 14 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

To the Editor.— The conclusions and recommendations for patient selection for carotid endarterectomy advanced by Matchar and Pauker1cannot be accepted because they ignore the most important fact: carotid endarterectomy has never been shown to be of any value for any patient under any circumstances. The authors admit that the only randomized controlled trial of endarterectomy failed to show a benefit,2yet they use this 20-year-old study to estimate the efficacy of the procedure in modern patients. There is mounting evidence, such as that from the large, prospective, randomized controlled trial of extracranial-intracranial bypass,3that surgical revascularization is of no benefit in preventing stroke. Whether carotid endarterectomy is also of no benefit is unknown, but there is no scientific evidence of its effectiveness. The relative risks of this procedure in different types of patients are irrelevant when there are no clear benefits. I appreciate the authors' attempt

Key concepts: Medicine, Carotid endarterectomy, Endarterectomy, Randomized controlled trial, Stroke (engine), Carotid artery disease, Carotid arteries, Revascularization

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Endarterectomy in Carotid Artery Disease — Research Paper | ScholarLens