For elderly patients with carotid disease, carotid endarterectomy carries a lower risk of perioperative stroke or transient ischemic attack, the same risk of perioperative myocardial infarction (MI), and a slightly higher risk of death, compared with carotid stenting, according to a meta-analysis. However, the individual elderly patient's vascular anatomy plays a crucial role in determining perioperative risk, as does the person's overall health and clinical profile, said George A. Antoniou, MD, PhD, of the department of vascular surgery, Hellenic Red Cross Hospital, Athens, and his associates. Which treatment is the most appropriate for elderly patients is still much debated. Dr. Antoniou and his colleagues performed a comprehensive review of the medical literature since 1986 and a meta-analysis of 44 articles that directly compared outcomes in elderly patients with those of younger patients after carotid endarterectomy (39 studies) or carotid stenting (18 articles). “Elderly” was defined as older than 80 years in most of these studies. Overall, the meta-analysis included 269,596 endarterectomies in elderly patients against 243,089 in younger patients, and 38,751 carotid stenting procedures in elderly patients against 36,450 in younger patients. For endarterectomy, the rate of perioperative stroke was not significantly different between elderly (0.9%) and younger (1.2%) patients, nor was the rate of transient ischemic attack (1.9% vs. 1.8%, respectively). However, perioperative mortality was significantly higher in elderly (0.5%) than in younger (0.4%) patients. In contrast, for carotid stenting, the rate of perioperative stroke was significantly higher for elderly patients (2.4%) than for younger patients (1.7%), as was the rate of TIA (3.6% vs. 2.1%). But mortality was not significantly different between elderly patients (0.6%) and younger patients (0.7%), the researchers wrote (JAMA Surg. 2013;148[12]:1140–52). Both procedures were associated with an increased rate of perioperative MI in elderly patients, compared with younger patients. These rates were 2.2% in elderly patients, compared with 1.4% in younger patients undergoing endarterectomy; and 2.3% in elderly patients, compared with 1.5% in younger patients undergoing carotid stenting. “It seems that endarterectomy is associated with improved neurologic outcomes compared with carotid stenting in elderly patients, at the expense of increased perioperative mortality,” Dr. Antoniou and his associates said. However, the small increase in mortality seen with endarterectomy – 0.1% – may not be clinically significant. Moreover, neurologic risk is closely tied to vascular anatomy. Elderly patients tend to have more unfavorable anatomy than do younger patients. Unfavorable traits include heavily calcified and tortuous supra-aortic branches, as well as adverse morphology of the aortic arch such as elongation, distortion, and stenosis. Manipulating the stenting instruments through such features may in itself raise the risk of neurologic sequelae. It also makes the procedure more technically difficult, which increases the risk of endothelial trauma, thrombus dislodgement, and thromboembolic events. “In addition, elderly patients with significant extracranial atherosclerotic disease are likely to have a compromised cerebrovascular reserve, which makes them more susceptible to ischemic events from cerebral microembolization,” the researchers said. R. Clement Darling III, MD, said, in a published commentary, that variation in the definition of elderly among the trials is a concern: Some used 70 or even 65 years as the cutoff. “The bottom line is, carotid endarterectomy and carotid stenting seem to work equally well in younger patients, in expert hands. However, in the ‘elderly’ (at any age), endarterectomy has better outcomes with low morbidity, mortality, and stroke rate, and it remains the standard of care,” he said. Dr. Darling is a member of the Vascular Group, Albany, NY. Neither he nor any of the report's authors reported a financial conflict of interest.