Donate Help Contact The AHA Sign In Home
American Heart Association
Stroke
Search: search_blue_button Advanced Search
Stroke. 2003;34:592
Published online before print February 13, 2003, doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000059757.63250.AC
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
34/3/592    most recent
01.STR.0000059757.63250.ACv1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fitzgerald, S.
Right arrow Articles by Phillipov, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fitzgerald, S.
Right arrow Articles by Phillipov, G.

(Stroke. 2003;34:592.)
© 2003 American Heart Association, Inc.


Letters to the Editor

Potential Pitfalls in Applying Carotid Endarterectomy Perioperative Mortality and Morbidity Rates

Stephen Fitzgerald, MB BS, FRACP George Phillipov, MSc, PhD

Department of Endocrinology, The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville, South Australia, Australia


An extract of the first 250 words of the full text is provided, because this article has no abstract.
 

To the Editor:

Recent guidelines for carotid endarterectomy (CE) recommend a requirement for very low perioperative complication rates (<=3.0%).1 For symptomatic patients, with 70% to 90% stenoses, however, a CE stroke perioperative complication rate of 6.0% is likely to show a 16.5% decrease in risk for nonfatal stroke or death at 2 years.2 The 2 major trials, the NASCET2 and ECST,3 had perioperative complication rates of 5.8 (95% CI, 3.3 to 8.3) and 9.1% (95% CI, 6.1 to 12.0), respectively. There was no significant difference between CE complication rates for the 2 trials (P=0.14), and the NASCET rate is significantly higher (P<0.01) than the present recommendation of 3.0%. The importance of the CE complication rate, with respect to any net patient benefit, has prompted calls for the routine availability of relevant data on both surgeons and hospitals. This is particularly relevant given comments that CE perioperative complication rates quoted for published studies may be atypically low due to a reporting bias, and that analysis of Medicare data finds CE 30-day complication rates that range between 5% and 11%.4

If we assume that the true underlying rate for CE perioperative complications is 6.0%, and that figure would ultimately be achieved by an institution, if it performed a large enough series of CE procedures (n=1000), the expected range of perioperative complications, in smaller random samples, can be calculated using a technique referred to as Monte Carlo sampling.5 Accordingly, when the recommended sample size of 100 is used, the results show . . . [Full Text of this Article]