"Medical high risk" designation is not associated with survival after carotid artery stenting

BACKGROUND: While medical high risk (MHR) has been proposed as an indication for carotid artery stenting (CAS), the impact of MHR on long-term survival and stroke after CAS has not been described. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of CAS procedures at our institution was performed. One hundred seventy-nine consecutive patients who underwent 196 CAS procedures were classified by MHR status based on cardiac, pulmonary, and renal criteria routinely used in high-risk clinical trials. Survival and stroke rates were compared after 90 CAS procedures in MHR patients vs 106 CAS procedures in normal risk patients. Survival results were also compared with 365 contemporaneous carotid endarterectomy (CEA) procedures in 346 patients. RESULTS: The mean age of CAS patients was 72 years, with 87% having a smoking history, 85% hypertension, 38% diabetes, 39% symptomatic, and 74% documented coronary artery disease. Mean follow-up was 23 months. Recurrent stenosis after CEA comprised 21% of all CAS procedures. During the 30-day post-procedure period, there were five minor strokes, one major stroke, and one death, for a combined stroke/death rate of 3.6%. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated mortality of 5% at 1 year and 21% at 3 years for the entire cohort. Cox regression analysis found that MHR designation was not associated with increased mortality or an increase in a composite end point of death or stroke. MHR patients had mortality of 4% at 1 year and 22% at 3 years. Normal risk patients had mortality of 6% at 1 year and 20% at 3 years. Preoperative age over 80 years old, low density lipoprotein (LDL) > or =160 mg/dL, and serum creatinine > or =1.5 mg/dL conferred statistically significant risk for death (Hazard ratios: 2.9, 4.3, and 2.4, respectively). As a point of comparison, a contemporaneous group of CEA patients were analyzed similarly. After adjusting for age over 80 years old and serum creatinine > or =1.5 mg/dL, there was no survival difference between MHR patients undergoing CAS or CEA. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of MHR did not impact long-term survival or stroke rate after CAS, and overall survival of MHR patients in our series was comparable with risk-adjusted controls undergoing CEA. These results suggest the need for more refined predictors of medical risk to optimally guide patients in selecting carotid revascularization strategies.