This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Vascular Surgery  • Aging/ Geriatrics  • Alert me on articles by topic

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In reply

We thank Dr Buskens for his comments. The question of whom not to offer a surgical procedure or lifesaving medical treatment is certainly a crucial debate. The debaters include physicians, those in legal professions, ethicists, economists, actuaries, politicians, and special interest groups among others.

From a strictly medical perspective, we agree there are patient subsets for whom carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is not likely to have a meaningful positive effect on quality or duration of life. Patients of any age with significant comorbidities (smoking, coronary artery disease, severe diabetes, cancer) have shown decreased longevity at 5 years by about 50%. As LaMuraglia et al¹ recently argued, "The problem is to be able to conclusively identify which risk factors or comorbidities are of major significance in these carotid patients and how long they may survive."

Both logic and actuary tables would argue that it is far more reasonable to offer . . . [Full Text of this Article]

AUTHOR INFORMATION
Quentin Durward, MD; James Case, MD

RELATED ARTICLE

No Nonagenarians Please!
Erik Buskens
Arch Surg. 2006;141(1):104.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT