Cargando…
Neurocognitive Functioning after Carotid Revascularization: A Systematic Review
BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to review the recent literature regarding the neurocognitive consequences of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS). METHODS AND RESULTS: A PubMed and Web of Science search was conducted using the key words ‘carotid’ in combination with ‘c...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
S. Karger AG
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4105952/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25076958 http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000362921 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to review the recent literature regarding the neurocognitive consequences of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS). METHODS AND RESULTS: A PubMed and Web of Science search was conducted using the key words ‘carotid’ in combination with ‘cognitive’, ‘cognition’, ‘neurocognition’, ‘neurocognitive’, ‘neuropsychology’, and ‘neuropsychological’. Bibliographies of relevant articles were cross-referenced. We included 37 studies published since 2007 of which 18 examined CEA, 12 CAS, and 7 compared CEA to CAS. There is a wide variability in the reported neurocognitive outcome following CEA and CAS. Nonetheless, none of the included studies unveiled significant differences between CEA and CAS on postoperative neurocognitive functioning. Postoperative changes observed for CEA and CAS separately seem limited to a small percentage (around 10-15%) of patients and can either present as an improvement or impairment. KEY MESSAGES: The available data seem to suggest that no obvious cognitive differences between CAS and CEA can be observed after intervention. Both improvement and deterioration in cognitive functioning can be observed following CAS or CEA. Methodological differences such as patient heterogeneity, implementation and type of control groups, type of psychometric tests used, statistical analyses, or timing of the assessments play an important role in explaining the sometimes divergent results of the included studies. Large-scale and methodologically solid studies comparing CEA and CAS on neurocognitive outcome remain warranted. Future studies should implement adequate control groups to correct for practice effects in the target groups. |
---|