Carotid endarterectomy after @entity51 or XXXX : is it of value?

@entity1 @entity64 @entity260 @entity51 @entity204
The benefit of carotid endarterectomy (CE) in preventing recurrent @entity64 and improving survival in the @entity1 who has sustained a @entity51 ( @entity51 ) or @entity64 is still controversial. To determine the long-term benefits and value of CE in these @entity1 , a 10-year review of 253 @entity1 who suffered a @entity51 or @entity64 was conducted. All @entity1 had CT brain scans, as well as arch, extracranial, and intracranial arteriography; any @entity1 without demonstrated carotid bifurcation disease were excluded from the study. On the basis of clinical symptoms and CT scan findings, 66 @entity1 were categorized as having sustained a @entity51 and 187 a @entity64 . One hundred fifty-one @entity1 who suffered a @entity51 or @entity64 had CE, whereas 102 @entity1 with @entity51 or @entity64 did not have CE and served as a control group. All endarterectomies were performed with a temporary indwelling shunt. @entity260 included two @entity204 (1%), six @entity64 (4%), and 10 transient @entity51 (7%). In follow-up extending to 10 years the cumulative incidence of recurrent @entity64 was only 7% (11 @entity1 ) in the operated group, whereas 18% of @entity1 in the nonoperated control group (18) sustained a recurrent @entity64 (p less than 0.05). As anticipated, the leading cause of @entity204 during follow-up was cardiac related; although CE did not significantly improve long-term survival, there was more than a twofold decrease in the incidence of recurrent @entity64 as a cause of @entity204 in the group having CE.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
