The presence of an intraluminal thrombus in acutely symptomatic carotid stenosis is thought to represent a high-risk lesion for short-term stroke reccurrence though evidence on natural history and treatment is lacking, leading to equipoise and much variation in practice. The objective of this study was to map these variations in practice (medical management and timing of revascularization), determine the considerations that influence clinician decision-making in this condition and gather opinions that inform the development and design of future trials in the area.

This was a mixed-methods study using both quantitative survey methods and qualitative interview-based methods. International perspectives were gathered by distributing a case-based survey via the “Practice Current” section of Neurology: Clinical Practice and interviewing international experts using established qualitative research methods.

The presence of an intraluminal thrombus significantly increased the likelihood of using a regimen containing anticoagulation agents (p < 0.001) in acutely symptomatic carotid stenosis in the case-based survey. Themes that emerged from qualitative interview analysis were therapeutic uncertainty regarding anticoagulation, decision to reimage, revascularization choices and future trial design and anticipated challenges.

Results of this study demonstrate a preference for anticoagulation and delayed revascularization after reimaging to examine for clot resolution, though much equipoise remains. While there is interest from international experts in future trials, further study is needed to understand the natural history of this condition in order to inform trial design.

Whereas the beneficial effect of antiplatelet therapy for recurrent stroke prevention has been well established, uncertainties remain regarding the optimal antithrombotic regimen for recently symptomatic carotid stenosis. We sought to explore the approaches of stroke physicians to antithrombotic management of patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis.

We employed a qualitative descriptive methodology to explore the decision-making approaches and opinions of physicians regarding antithrombotic regimens for symptomatic carotid stenosis. We conducted semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 22 stroke physicians (11 neurologists, 3 geriatricians, 5 interventional-neuroradiologists, and 3 neurosurgeons) from 16 centers on four continents to discuss symptomatic carotid stenosis management. We then conducted thematic analysis on the transcripts.

Important themes revealed from our analysis included limitations of existing clinical trial evidence, competing surgeon versus neurologist/internist preferences, and the choice of antiplatelet therapy while awaiting revascularization. There was a greater concern for adverse events while using multiple antiplatelet agents (e.g., dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT)) in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy compared to carotid artery stenting. Regional variations included more frequent use of single antiplatelet agents among European participants. Areas of uncertainty included antithrombotic management if already on an antiplatelet agent, implications of nonstenotic features of carotid disease, the role of newer antiplatelet agents or anticoagulants, platelet aggregation testing, and timing of DAPT.

Our qualitative findings can help physicians critically examine the rationale underlying their own antithrombotic approaches to symptomatic carotid stenosis. Future clinical trials may wish to accommodate identified variations in practice patterns and areas of uncertainty to better inform clinical practice.