% 0期刊文章% Clotilde Balucani %一个凡妮莎Arnedo %迪迪埃利斯% jean - louis Mas %一个詹姆斯Grotta布朗% %妮可·冈萨雷斯%肖恩·萨维茨%一个托马斯王硕%一个史蒂文·莱文沃纳尔% % T桥项目(弥合的差距中风管理):跨大西洋的差异管理的颈动脉狭窄(P07.250) % D J神经病学2013% % P P07.250-P07.250 % V 80% N % X 7补充目的:比较之间的颈动脉狭窄的态度管理欧洲(欧盟)和北美(NA)。首页背景:最优的管理(sx)症状和无症状的颈动脉狭窄(asx)仍然是有争议的,尽管临床试验评价颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)和颈动脉支架植入(CAS)。设计/方法:3-round,德尔菲调查被派往欧洲卒中组织成员(n = 390)并选择NA中风神经学家在德克萨斯大学休斯顿中风程序(n = 289)。这些完成调查显示所有响应分解后,欧盟/ NA每个前2轮。大陆具体共识协议定义为> 80%。结果:100例(15%,73%的欧盟)完成所有3-Delphi轮,19%的欧盟vs 9% NA(χ2 = 11.62,p = 0.0007): 76%的男性;69%将在每月1 - 8新例颈动脉狭窄之间。在最后一轮中,欧盟在7/11报表达成共识,而钠在4/11。欧盟的百分之九十vs 70%的NA(χ2 = 8.09,p = 0.017)不同意,中科院和CEA是等价的sx颈动脉狭窄的治疗方法,并指出,东航优越。欧盟有一个重要区别和NA在考虑侧中风和死亡< 30天作为主要结果(χ2 = 12.18,p = 0.007)。百分之六十九的NA认为有更强的指示对CAS患者CEA < 65多年sx颈动脉狭窄而55%的欧盟(χ2 = 11.39,p = 0.023)反对这一说法。81%的欧盟和80%的NA表示,他们将“有时”推荐东航asx颈动脉狭窄。当被问及他们怎么可能会建议中科院asx颈动脉狭窄,62%的NA说“有时”vs 60%的欧盟表示“从未”(χ2 = 3.54,p = 0.06)。结论:欧盟更相信东航的优越性,而对于NA,几乎被视为等效的方法。 Areas of lack of consensus may provide direction for future clinical trials.Disclosure: Dr. Balucani has nothing to disclose. Dr. Arnedo has nothing to disclose. Dr. Leys has received research support from Ebewe and Servier. Dr. Mas has nothing to disclose. Dr. Brown has received research support from Reta Lila Weston Trust for Medical Research. Dr. Grotta has received personal compensation for activities with Lundbeck. Dr. Gonzales has nothing to disclose. Dr. Savitz has received personal compensation for activities with Celgene, Aldagen, KM Pharmaceutical, GSK 2 as a consultant. Dr. Savitz has received research support from J&J, Athersys, Celgene, Genentech (Wake up stroke study), and Aldagen. Dr. Brott has received personal compensation for activities with 3D Communications and Edwards Lifesciences, LLC. Dr. Hacke has nothing to disclose. Dr. Levine has received personal compensation in an editorical capacity for MEDLINK.Thursday, March 21 2013, 2:00 pm-7:00 pm %U