Optimal Regulation of Private Production Contracts with Environmental Externalities

We address the problem of optimal regulation of an industry where the production of a polluting output is contracted with independent agents. The provision of inputs is divided between the principal and the agent such that the production externality results from their joint actions. The main result shows that in the three-tier hierarchy (regulator-firm-agent) involving a double-sided moral hazard, the equivalence across regulatory schemes generally obtains. The only task for the regulator is to determine the optimal total fiscal revenue in each state of nature because any sharing of the regulatory burden between the firm and the agent generates the same solution. The equivalence principle is upset only when the effects of regulation on the endogenous organizational choices are explicitly taken into account. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004regulation, pollution, principal–agent relationship, moral hazard,

Optimal Management of Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis in 2021: The Jury is Still Out. An International, Multispecialty, Expert Review and Position Statement

Objectives: The recommendations of international guidelines for the management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) often vary considerably and extend from a conservative approach with risk factor modification and best medical treatment (BMT) alone, to a more aggressive approach with a carotid intervention plus BMT. The aim of the current multispecialty position statement is to reconcile the conflicting views on the topic. Materials and methods: A literature review was performed with a focus on data from recent studies. Results: Several clinical and imaging high-risk features have been identified that are associated with an increased long-term ipsilateral ischemic stroke risk in patients with ACS. Such high-risk clinical/imaging features include intraplaque hemorrhage, impaired cerebrovascular reserve, carotid plaque echolucency/ulceration/ neovascularization, a lipid-rich necrotic core, a thin or ruptured fibrous cap, silent brain infarction, a contralateral transient ischemic attack/stroke episode, male patients < 75 years and microembolic signals on transcranial Doppler. There is growing evidence that 80-99% ACS indicate a higher stroke risk than 50-79% stenoses. Conclusions: Although aggressive risk factor control and BMT should be implemented in all ACS patients, several high-risk features that may increase the risk of a future cerebrovascular event are now documented. Consequently, some guidelines recommend a prophylactic carotid intervention in high-risk patients to prevent future cerebrovascular events. Until the results of the much-anticipated randomized controlled trials emerge, the jury is still out regarding the optimal management of ACS patients. (c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

Optimal management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis in 2021: the jury is still out. An international, multispecialty, expert review and position statement

The recommendations of international guidelines for the management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) often vary considerably and extend from a conservative approach with risk factor modification and best medical treatment (BMT) alone, to a more aggressive approach with a carotid intervention plus BMT. The aim of the current multispecialty position statement was to reconcile the conflicting views on the topic. A literature review was performed with a focus on data from recent studies. Several clinical and imaging high-risk features have been identified that are associated with an increased long-term ipsilateral ischemic stroke risk in patients with ACS. Such high-risk clinical/imaging features include intraplaque hemorrhage, impaired cerebrovascular reserve, carotid plaque echolucency/ulceration/ neovascularization, a lipid-rich necrotic core, a thin or ruptured fibrous cap, silent brain infarction, a contralateral transient ischemic attack/stroke episode, male patients <75 years and microembolic signals on transcranial Doppler. There is growing evidence that 80-99% ACS indicate a higher stroke risk than 50-79% stenoses. Although aggressive risk factor control and BMT should be implemented in all ACS patients, several high-risk features that may increase the risk of a future cerebrovascular event are now documented. Consequently, some guidelines recommend a prophylactic carotid intervention in high risk patients to prevent future cerebrovascular events. Until the results of the much-anticipated randomized controlled trials emerge, the jury is still out regarding the optimal management of ACS patients. (Cite this article as: Paraskevas KI, Mikhailidis DP, Antignani PL, Baradaran H, Bokkers RP, Cambria RP, et al. Optimal management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis in 2021: the jury is still out. An international, multispecialty, expert review and position statement. Int Angiol 2022;41:158-69. DOI: 10.23736/S03929590.21.04825-2

Optimal Management of Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis in 2021: The Jury is Still Out. An International, Multispecialty, Expert Review and Position Statement

Objectives: The recommendations of international guidelines for the management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) often vary considerably and extend from a conservative approach with risk factor modification and best medical treatment (BMT) alone, to a more aggressive approach with a carotid intervention plus BMT. The aim of the current multispecialty position statement is to reconcile the conflicting views on the topic. Materials and methods: A literature review was performed with a focus on data from recent studies. Results: Several clinical and imaging high-risk features have been identified that are associated with an increased long-term ipsilateral ischemic stroke risk in patients with ACS. Such high-risk clinical/imaging features include intraplaque hemorrhage, impaired cerebrovascular reserve, carotid plaque echolucency/ulceration/ neovascularization, a lipid-rich necrotic core, a thin or ruptured fibrous cap, silent brain infarction, a contralateral transient ischemic attack/stroke episode, male patients < 75 years and microembolic signals on transcranial Doppler. There is growing evidence that 80-99% ACS indicate a higher stroke risk than 50-79% stenoses. Conclusions: Although aggressive risk factor control and BMT should be implemented in all ACS patients, several high-risk features that may increase the risk of a future cerebrovascular event are now documented. Consequently, some guidelines recommend a prophylactic carotid intervention in high-risk patients to prevent future cerebrovascular events. Until the results of the much-anticipated randomized controlled trials emerge, the jury is still out regarding the optimal management of ACS patients. (c) 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

Comparison of Recent Practice Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis

Despite the publication of several national/international guidelines, the optimal management of patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (AsxCS) remains controversial. This article compares 3 recently released guidelines (the 2020 German-Austrian, the 2021 European Stroke Organization [ESO], and the 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery [SVS] guidelines) vs the 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) guidelines regarding the optimal management of AsxCS patients. The 2017 ESVS guidelines defined specific imaging/clinical parameters that may identify patient subgroups at high future stroke risk and recommended that carotid endarterectomy (CEA) should or carotid artery stenting (CAS) may be considered for these individuals. The 2020 German-Austrian guidelines provided similar recommendations with the 2017 ESVS Guidelines. The 2021 ESO Guidelines also recommended CEA for AsxCS patients at high risk for stroke on best medical treatment (BMT), but recommended against routine use of CAS in these patients. Finally, the SVS guidelines provided a strong recommendation for CEA+BMT vs BMT alone for low-surgical risk patients with >70% AsxCS. Thus, the ESVS, German-Austrian, and ESO guidelines concurred that all AsxCS patients should receive risk factor modification and BMT, but CEA should or CAS may also be considered for certain AsxCS patient subgroups at high risk for future ipsilateral ischemic stroke

Comparison of Recent Practice Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis

Despite the publication of several national/international guidelines, the optimal management of patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis (AsxCS) remains controversial. This article compares 3 recently released guidelines (the 2020 German-Austrian, the 2021 European Stroke Organization [ESO], and the 2021 Society for Vascular Surgery [SVS] guidelines) vs the 2017 European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) guidelines regarding the optimal management of AsxCS patients. The 2017 ESVS guidelines defined specific imaging/clinical parameters that may identify patient subgroups at high future stroke risk and recommended that carotid endarterectomy (CEA) should or carotid artery stenting (CAS) may be considered for these individuals. The 2020 German-Austrian guidelines provided similar recommendations with the 2017 ESVS Guidelines. The 2021 ESO Guidelines also recommended CEA for AsxCS patients at high risk for stroke on best medical treatment (BMT), but recommended against routine use of CAS in these patients. Finally, the SVS guidelines provided a strong recommendation for CEA+BMT vs BMT alone for low-surgical risk patients with >70% AsxCS. Thus, the ESVS, German-Austrian, and ESO guidelines concurred that all AsxCS patients should receive risk factor modification and BMT, but CEA should or CAS may also be considered for certain AsxCS patient subgroups at high risk for future ipsilateral ischemic stroke

Endovascular Versus Medical Management of Posterior Cerebral Artery Occlusion Stroke: The PLATO Study.

The optimal management of patients with isolated posterior cerebral artery occlusion is uncertain. We compared clinical outcomes for endovascular therapy (EVT) versus medical management (MM) in patients with isolated posterior cerebral artery occlusion. This multinational case-control study conducted at 27 sites in Europe and North America included consecutive patients with isolated posterior cerebral artery occlusion presenting within 24 hours of time last well from January 2015 to August 2022. Patients treated with EVT or MM were compared with multivariable logistic regression and inverse probability of treatment weighting. The coprimary outcomes were the 90-day modified Rankin Scale ordinal shift and ≥2-point decrease in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. Of 1023 patients, 589 (57.6%) were male with median (interquartile range) age of 74 (64-82) years. The median (interquartile range) National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale was 6 (3-10). The occlusion segments were P1 (41.2%), P2 (49.2%), and P3 (7.1%). Overall, intravenous thrombolysis was administered in 43% and EVT in 37%. There was no difference between the EVT and MM groups in the 90-day modified Rankin Scale shift (aOR, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.85-1.50]; P=0.41). There were higher odds of a decrease in the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale by ≥2 points with EVT (aOR, 1.84 [95% CI, 1.35-2.52]; P=0.0001). Compared with MM, EVT was associated with a higher likelihood of excellent outcome (aOR, 1.50 [95% CI, 1.07-2.09]; P=0.018), complete vision recovery, and similar rates of functional independence (modified Rankin Scale score, 0-2), despite a higher rate of SICH and mortality (symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage, 6.2% versus 1.7%; P=0.0001; mortality, 10.1% versus 5.0%; P=0.002). In patients with isolated posterior cerebral artery occlusion, EVT was associated with similar odds of disability by ordinal modified Rankin Scale, higher odds of early National Institutes of Health stroke scale improvement, and complete vision recovery compared with MM. There was a higher likelihood of excellent outcome in the EVT group despite a higher rate of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage and mortality. Continued enrollment into ongoing distal vessel occlusion randomized trials is warranted