This Article  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

George J. Vakkur, MD
Philadelphia

JAMA. 1970;214(2):374-375.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

I was pleased to see the letter by Thompson (213:874, 1970), in which he pointed out an obvious fallacy in the recent progress report of the Joint Study of Extracranial Arterial Occlusion by Fields et al (211:1993, 1970). I would like to add some comments.

In a previous report by Bauer et al (208:509, 1969), the results were expressed as survival rates at 42 months. This method would be expected to favor the surgical group, were many of the deaths to occur early. A more meaningful index (in the patient's standpoint at least) would have been the mean survival time in months. Unfortunately this parameter cannot be estimated from the published material for the only subgroup that is said to benefit by surgery—the 218 patients who were clinically in group A (no or mild deficit) and who radiologically had a unilateral carotid stenosis only. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?