Why Calls for More Routine Carotid Stenting Are Currently Inappropriate An International, Multispecialty, Expert Review and Position Statement

Anne L. Abbott*, Mark A. Adelman, Andrei V. Alexandrov, P. Alan Barber, Henry J. M. Barnett, Jonathan Beard, Peter Bell, Martin Bjorck, David Blacker, Leo H. Bonati, Martin M. Brown, Clifford J. Buckley, Richard P. Cambria, John E. Castaldo, Anthony J. Comerota, E. Sander Connolly, Ronald L. Dalman, Alun H. Davies, Hans-Henning Eckstein, Rishad FaruqiThomas E. Feasby, Gustav Fraedrich, Peter Gloviczki, Graeme J. Hankey, Robert E. Harbaugh, Eitan Heldenberg, Michael G. Hennerici, Michael D. Hill, Timothy J. Kleinig, Dimitri P. Mikhailidis, Wesley S. Moore, Ross Naylor, Andrew Nicolaides, Kosmas I. Paraskevas, David M. Pelz, James W. Prichard, Grant Purdie, Jean-Baptiste Ricco, Peter A. Ringleb, Thomas Riles, Peter M. Rothwell, Peter Sandercock, Henrik Sillesen, J. David Spence, Francesco Spinelli, Jonathon Sturm, Aaron Tan, Ankur Thapar, Frank J. Veith, Tissa Wijeratne, Wei Zhou

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1186-1190
Number of pages5
JournalStroke
Volume44
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Apr 2013

Keywords / Materials (for Non-textual outputs)

  • carotid endarterectomy
  • RISK
  • carotid stenosis
  • carotid angioplasty/stenting
  • REVASCULARIZATION ENDARTERECTOMY
  • COST-EFFECTIVENESS
  • STROKE
  • PROFESSIONALS
  • GUIDELINES
  • stroke prevention
  • UNITED-STATES
  • health policy
  • MEDICAID SERVICES
  • CLINICAL-TRIALS
  • ARTERY STENOSIS

Cite this