Differences in guidelines for patients with carotid artery stenosis in some countries

The correct practice is the one that is proven to be the most effective based on systematic statistical analyses of different treatment methods, and is applied according to evidence-based principles. In recent years, not only has the European Society of Vascular Surgery created a guideline about the management of supra-aortic steno-occlusive disease, but some nations' vascular surgical societies and related disciplines have also developed their own guidance. In this paper, the guidelines by the European societies on the clinical care of patients with carotid artery luminal narrowing is compared to national guidelines published in Hungarian, English, German, and Italian. Although the fundamental points of the guidelines are similar, there are some important differences among them both in presentation and in content; as a result, they sometimes appear to be contradictory. The three main sources of inconsistency are the various goals, the discrepancy in the definition of symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis, and the bias arising from the use of distinct evidence levels. A comparison of guidelines suggests that the treatment of symptomatic significant carotid artery stenosis with surgery can be considered evidence. Symptomatic carotid artery stenosis is defined as transient or definite plegia, paresis, aphasia due to cerebral ischemia, and monocular blindness caused by embolism in the central retinal artery. However, in the case of asymptomatic 70% or greater carotid artery stenosis, the guidelines are quite heterogeneous, and these patients require individual consideration and a vascular team decision is recommended.