Talk:ECST

Review

This is a very good start to an entry on the ESCT study. It's worth noting that the original WJC entry for this trial somewhat confused the trial's main results. The original entry suggested that surgery was superior to control in all comers; in fact, if analyzing at all comers, ECST was (unsurprisingly) a negative study. But an analysis of all comers was not the study's intent. Rather, ECST aimed to study groups by stenosis severity: a prespecified analysis of groups by stenosis severity demonstrated that CEA benefitted those whose stenosis was 80% or greater. I've amended the major points section to clarify this. --Dave Iberri (talk) 20:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)