This Article  • References  • 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?

Loren A. Rolak, MD
Baylor College of Medicine Houston

JAMA. 1987;258(24):3514.

	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.—

The conclusions and recommendations for patient selection for carotid endarterectomy advanced by Matchar and Pauker¹ cannot be accepted because they ignore the most important fact: carotid endarterectomy has never been shown to be of any value for any patient under any circumstances. The authors admit that the only randomized controlled trial of endarterectomy failed to show a benefit,² yet they use this 20-year-old study to estimate the efficacy of the procedure in modern patients. There is mounting evidence, such as that from the large, prospective, randomized controlled trial of extracranial-intracranial bypass,³ that surgical revascularization is of no benefit in preventing stroke. Whether carotid endarterectomy is also of no benefit is unknown, but there is no scientific evidence of its effectiveness. The relative risks of this procedure in different types of patients are irrelevant when there are no clear benefits.

I appreciate the authors' attempt . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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