Real-world experience of treatment decision-making in carotid stenosis in a neurovascular board.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 28659428.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1212/WNL.0000000000004151.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To describe our experience with consensus-based decision-making for treatment of internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis by neurologists, interventional neuroradiologists, vascular surgeons, and neurosurgeons in a multidisciplinary neurovascular board and to study adherence to treatment recommendations in the context of uncertainty with respect to the best treatment option. We established a multidisciplinary neurovascular board meeting twice a week with structured documentation of consensus decisions. Over a time period of 53 months, 614 cases with ICA stenosis were discussed, with 285 (46%) symptomatic and 279 (45%) asymptomatic cases. Recommendation for symptomatic ICA stenosis was revascularization in 76%, medical management alone in 8%, and further diagnostics in 16%. For asymptomatic ICA stenosis, recommendation was randomization in a clinical trial in 29%, revascularization in 27%, medical management alone in 23%, and further diagnostics in 22%. Treatment recommendations were followed in 94% of symptomatic ICA stenosis and 69% of asymptomatic ICA stenosis. Patients in whom carotid artery stenting was recommended for revascularization were younger and showed a higher rate of severe (≥70%) ICA stenosis. Interdisciplinary board decisions are a helpful and transparent tool to assure adherence to guideline recommendations, and to provide consensus-based individualized treatment strategies in clinical practice in the absence of unequivocal evidence.
Medical subject headings
- Carotid Artery, Internal
- Carotid Stenosis
- Clinical Decision-Making