Omran, Jad; Mahmud, Ehtisham; White, Christopher J.; Aronow, Herbert D.; Drachman, Douglas E.; Gray, William; Abdullah, Obai; Abu-Fadel, Mazen; Firwana, Belal; Mishkel, Gergory; Al-Dadah, Ashraf S.
Introduction Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is typically performed using embolic protection devices (EPDs) as a means to reduce the risk of procedure-related stroke. In this study, we compared procedural morbidity and mortality associated with distal (D-EPD) vs. proximal (P-EPD) protection. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were queried from January 1998 through May 2015. Only studies comparing (D-EPD) and (P-EPD) were included. Two independent reviewers selected and appraised studies and extracted data in duplicate. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool outcomes across studies. Heterogeneity of treatment effect among studies was assessed using the I-2 statistics. Publication bias was assessed using inspection of funnel plots. The primary endpoints included 30-day mortality and stroke. Secondary endpoints included new cerebral lesions on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) and contralateral lesions on DW-MRI. ResultsA total of 12,281 patients were included from 18 studies (13 prospective and 5 retrospective) comparing (D-EPD) and (P-EPD) in the setting of CAS. The mean patient age was 69 years and 64% of patients were male. No evidence of publication bias was detected. There was no significant difference between the two modalities in terms of the risk of stroke (risk difference [RD] 0.0, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.01 to 0.01) or mortality (RD 0.0, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01) nor was there any difference in the incidence of new cerebral lesions on DW-MRI or contralateral DW-MRI lesions. Conclusions In patients undergoing CAS, both D-EPD and P-EPD provide similar levels of protection from peri-procedural stroke and 30 days mortality. (C) 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.