TY - JOUR
T1 - Differences in complication rates among the centres in the SPACE study
AU - Fiehler, Jens
AU - Jansen, Olav
AU - Berger, Jürgen
AU - Eckstein, Hans Henning
AU - Ringleb, Peter A.
AU - Stingele, Robert
N1 - Funding Information:
Acknowledgements We thank the patients who agreed to participate in SPACE. Funding was provided from the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF: 01GI9918), German Research Foundation (DFG: HA 1394/4-2 and HA 1397/4-3), German Society of Neurology, German Society of Neuroradiology, German Radiological Society, Boston Scientific, Guidant, and Sanofi-Aventis.
PY - 2008/12
Y1 - 2008/12
N2 - Introduction: Despite the high grade of standardisation of study protocols, there is still room for variability among the centres in specific treatment aspects. We evaluated the treatment risk in stent-protected angioplasty of the carotid versus endarterectomy (SPACE) associated with the specific patient enrolment rates of the centres. Materials and methods: The analysed endpoints were ipsilateral stroke or death [primary outcome event (pOE)] and any stroke or death [secondary outcome event (sOE)] until 30 days after treatment. A binary logistic regression analysis with random effects was performed separately for each treatment arm. The centres were secondarily categorised in three classes: I) ≥25 patients enrolled, II) ten to 24 patients and III) <10 patients and a hierarchic log linear model was fitted to test the three-way interaction of treatment, number of patients per class and outcome. Results: The random effects logistic regression analysis in the carotid artery stenting (CAS) arm proved a significant increase in pOE with decreasing number of patients enrolled (-0.0190 ± 0.0085, p = 0.025, deviance 35.7 with 32 df), whereas no such effect was found in the carotid endartectomy (CEA) arm (-0.010 ± 0.008, p = 0.24, deviance 39.78 with 32 df). In the log linear model, there was a significant interaction between treatment, number of patients per centre and sOE (p = 0.023). The odds ratios for sOE in the enrolment classes (CAS vs. CEA) were 0.98 (95% CI 0.50-1.94, p = 0.95) for class I, 1.13 (95% CI 0.47-2.77, p = 0.77) for class II and 11.56 (95% CI 1.40-253.45, p = 0.01) for class III centres. Conclusion: Despite rigorous standardisation and quality requirements for operator qualification, there seemed to be a decrease in complication rate with increasing patient enrolment numbers in the CAS arm while this signal could not be detected in the CEA arm of SPACE.
AB - Introduction: Despite the high grade of standardisation of study protocols, there is still room for variability among the centres in specific treatment aspects. We evaluated the treatment risk in stent-protected angioplasty of the carotid versus endarterectomy (SPACE) associated with the specific patient enrolment rates of the centres. Materials and methods: The analysed endpoints were ipsilateral stroke or death [primary outcome event (pOE)] and any stroke or death [secondary outcome event (sOE)] until 30 days after treatment. A binary logistic regression analysis with random effects was performed separately for each treatment arm. The centres were secondarily categorised in three classes: I) ≥25 patients enrolled, II) ten to 24 patients and III) <10 patients and a hierarchic log linear model was fitted to test the three-way interaction of treatment, number of patients per class and outcome. Results: The random effects logistic regression analysis in the carotid artery stenting (CAS) arm proved a significant increase in pOE with decreasing number of patients enrolled (-0.0190 ± 0.0085, p = 0.025, deviance 35.7 with 32 df), whereas no such effect was found in the carotid endartectomy (CEA) arm (-0.010 ± 0.008, p = 0.24, deviance 39.78 with 32 df). In the log linear model, there was a significant interaction between treatment, number of patients per centre and sOE (p = 0.023). The odds ratios for sOE in the enrolment classes (CAS vs. CEA) were 0.98 (95% CI 0.50-1.94, p = 0.95) for class I, 1.13 (95% CI 0.47-2.77, p = 0.77) for class II and 11.56 (95% CI 1.40-253.45, p = 0.01) for class III centres. Conclusion: Despite rigorous standardisation and quality requirements for operator qualification, there seemed to be a decrease in complication rate with increasing patient enrolment numbers in the CAS arm while this signal could not be detected in the CEA arm of SPACE.
KW - Carotid endarterectomy
KW - Carotid stenosis
KW - Carotid stenting
KW - Learning curve
KW - Postoperative complications
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=56649085105&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00234-008-0459-6
DO - 10.1007/s00234-008-0459-6
M3 - Article
C2 - 18810400
AN - SCOPUS:56649085105
SN - 0028-3940
VL - 50
SP - 1049
EP - 1053
JO - Neuroradiology
JF - Neuroradiology
IS - 12
ER -