This is the Scientific Surgery Archive, which contains all randomized clinical trials in surgery that have been identified by searching the top 50 English language medical journal issues since January 1998. Compiled by Jonothan J. Earnshaw, former Editor-in-Chief, BJS

Impact of risk scoring on decision‐making in symptomatic moderate carotid atherosclerosis. BJS 2014; 101: 475-480.

Published: 26th February 2014

Authors: B. Dharmarajah, A. Thapar, J. Salem, T. R. A. Lane, E. L. S. Leen, A. H. Davies et al.

Background

Benefit from carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in symptomatic moderate (50–69 per cent) carotid stenosis remains marginal. The Fourth National Clinical Guideline for Stroke recommends use of the risk score from the European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST) to aid decision‐making in symptomatic carotid disease. It is not known whether clinicians are, in fact, influenced by it.

Method

Using the ECST risk prediction model, three scenarios of patients with a low (less than 10 per cent), moderate (20–25 per cent) and high (40–45 per cent) 5‐year risk of stroke were devised and validated. Invitations to complete an online survey were sent by e‐mail to vascular surgeons and stroke physicians, with responses gathered. The questionnaire was then repeated with the addition of the ECST risk score.

Results

Two hundred and one completed surveys were analysed (21·5 per cent response rate): 107 by stroke physicians and 94 by vascular surgeons. The high‐risk scenario after the introduction of the ECST risk score showed an increased use of CEA (66·7 versus 80·1 per cent; P = 0·009). The low‐risk scenario after risk score analysis demonstrated a swing towards best medical therapy (23·4 versus 57·2 per cent; P < 0·001). CEA was preferred in the moderate‐risk scenario and this was not altered significantly by introduction of the risk score (71·6 versus 75·6 per cent; P = 0·609). Vascular surgeons exhibited a preference towards CEA compared with stroke physicians in both low‐ and moderate‐risk scenarios (P < 0·001 and P = 0·003 respectively).

Conclusion

The addition of a risk score appeared to influence clinicians in their decision‐making towards CEA in high‐risk patients and towards best medical therapy in low‐risk patients.

Full text

You may also be interested in

Original article

Sex differences in repair rates and outcomes of patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. BJS 2019; 106: 1480-1487.

Authors: S. Zommorodi, M. Bottai, R. Hultgren

Original article

Observational study of the medical management of patients with peripheral artery disease.

Authors: A. Saratzis, N. E. M. Jaspers, B. Gwilym, O. Thomas, A. Tsui, R. Lefroy et al.

Original article

Predicting reamputation risk in patients undergoing lower extremity amputation due to the complications of peripheral artery disease and/or diabetes. BJS 2019; 106: 1026-1034.

Authors: J. M. Czerniecki, M. L. Thompson, A. J. Littman, E. J. Boyko, G. J. Landry, W. G. Henderson et al.

Original article

Health gains, costs and cost‐effectiveness of a population‐based screening programme for abdominal aortic aneurysms. BJS 2019; 106: 1043-1054.

Authors: N. Nair, G. Kvizhinadze, G. T. Jones, R. Rush, M. Khashram, J. Roake et al.

Original article

Development and validation of a gene expression test to identify hard‐to‐heal chronic venous leg ulcers. BJS 2019; 106: 1035-1042.

Authors: D. C. Bosanquet, A. J. Sanders, F. Ruge, J. Lane, C. A. Morris, W. G. Jiang et al.

Randomized clinical trial

Randomized clinical trial of endovenous laser ablation versus direct and indirect radiofrequency ablation for the treatment of great saphenous varicose veins. BJS 2019; 106: 998-1004.

Authors: S. A. S. Hamann, L. Timmer‐de Mik, W. M. Fritschy, G. R. R. Kuiters, T. E. C. Nijsten, R. R. Bos et al.

Systematic review

Meta‐analysis of the outcomes of treatment of internal carotid artery near occlusion. BJS 2019; 106: 665-671.

Authors: A. J. A. Meershoek, E. E. Vries, D. Veen, H. M. Ruijter, G. J. Borst, A. Garcia‐Pastor et al.

Original article

Contemporary prevalence of carotid stenosis in patients presenting with ischaemic stroke. BJS 2019; 106: 872-878.

Authors: S. F. Cheng, M. M. Brown, R. J. Simister, T. Richards

Original article

Baseline findings of the population‐based, randomized, multifaceted Danish cardiovascular screening trial (DANCAVAS) of men aged 65–74 years. BJS 2019; 106: 862-871.

Authors: J. S. Lindholt, L. M. Rasmussen, R. Søgaard, J. Lambrechtsen, F. H. Steffensen, L. Frost et al.

Randomized clinical trial

Randomized clinical trial of mechanochemical and endovenous thermal ablation of great saphenous varicose veins. BJS 2019; 106: 548-554.

Authors: S. Vähäaho, O. Mahmoud, K. Halmesmäki, A. Albäck, K. Noronen, P. Vikatmaa et al.

Systematic review

Meta‐analysis of long‐term survival after elective endovascular or open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. BJS 2019; 106: 523-533.

Authors: R. M. A. Bulder, E. Bastiaannet, J. F. Hamming, J. H. N. Lindeman

Original article

Mortality prediction following non‐traumatic amputation of the lower extremity. BJS 2019; 106: 879-888.

Authors: D. C. Norvell, M. L. Thompson, E. J. Boyko, G. Landry, A. J. Littman, W. G. Henderson et al.