Abstract
Background and Purpose— The Carotid Occlusion Surgery Study (COSS) was an improvement over the Extracranial–Intracranial Bypass Study, which did not utilize physiological selection. To assess possible reasons for early closure of the COSS trial, we reviewed COSS methods used to identify high-risk patients and compared results with separate quantitative data. Methods— Increased oxygen extraction fraction (OEF) by positron emission tomography is a gold standard for ischemia, but the specific thresholds and equivalency of the semiquantitative OEF ratio utilized in COSS and quantitative OEF are at issue. Results— The semiquantitative hemispheric OEF ratio used in COSS did not identify the same group of patients as did quantitative OEF using a threshold of 50%. Conclusions— The failure of COSS is likely caused by a failure of the semiquantitative, hemispheric OEF ratio method rather than by the selection for bypass based on hemodynamic compromise.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
