Long-term results of carotid stenting versus endarterectomy in high-risk patients

Prognostic Factors for Neurologic Outcome in Patients with Carotid Artery Stenting

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is a valid treatment for patients with carotid artery stenosis. The long-term outcome and prognostic factors in Asian population after CAS are not clear. This study aimed to identify the prognostic factors among Asian patients who have undergone CAS.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 246 patients with CAS. Annual carotid duplex ultrasound was used to identify restenosis. Peri-procedural complications, restenosis, neurologic outcomes, and mortality were recorded. Cox regression analyses were used to identify prognostic factors.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up time was 49.2 months. Procedural success was achieved in 237 patients (98.3%), and protection devices were used in 208 patients (84.5%). Within 30 days of CAS, 13 (4.3% per procedure) peri-procedural complications occurred. During the follow-up period, 24 (9.7%) patients developed restenosis, and 37 (15.0%) developed ischemic strokes. In a multiple logistic regression analysis, head and neck radiotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) = 9.9, 95% confidence interval (CI), 3.38-29.1, p < .001], stent diameter (HR = 0.72, 95% CI, 0.58-0.89, p = .003), and predilatation (HR = 3.08 95% CI, 1.21-7.81, p = .018) were independent predictors for restenosis. In Cox regression analysis, hypercholesterolemia (HR = 0.25, 95% CI, 0.07-0.94, p = .04), head and neck radiotherapy (HR = 6.2, 95% CI, 1.8-21.3, p = .004), and restenosis (HR = 3.6, 95% CI, 1.1-11.18, p = .04) were predictors for recurrent ipsilateral ischemic stroke.

CONCLUSIONS

CAS provides reliable long-term results in Asian patients with carotid stenosis. Restenosis is associated with an increased rate of recurrent stroke and should be monitored carefully following CAS.

KEY WORDS

Carotid artery disease • Prognosis • Cerebrovascular disease.

Results of the ROADSTER multicenter trial of transcarotid stenting with dynamic flow reversal

OBJECTIVE

This report presents the 30-day results of the Safety and Efficacy Study for Reverse Flow Used During Carotid Artery Stenting Procedure (ROADSTER) multicenter trial and evaluates the safety and efficacy of ENROUTE Transcarotid NPS (Silk Road Medical Inc, Sunnyvale, Calif), a novel transcarotid neuroprotection system that provides direct surgical common carotid access and cerebral embolic protection via high-rate flow reversal during carotid artery stenting (CAS).

METHODS

A prospective, single-arm, multicenter clinical trial was performed to evaluate the use of the ENROUTE Transcarotid NPS during CAS procedures performed in patients considered to be at high risk for complications from carotid endarterectomy. Symptomatic patients with ≥50% stenosis and asymptomatic patients with ≥70% stenosis were eligible to be treated with any U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved carotid artery stent. The primary end point was the composite of all stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and death at 30 days postprocedure as defined in the Food and Drug Administration-approved study protocol. Secondary end points included cranial nerve injury; 30-day stroke, death, stroke/death, and MI; acute device, technical, and procedural success; and access site complications. All major adverse events were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee.

RESULTS

Between November 2012 and July 2014, 208 patients were enrolled at 18 sites. Sixty-seven patients were enrolled as lead-in cases, and 141 were enrolled in the pivotal phase. In the pivotal cohort, 26% were symptomatic and 75% were asymptomatic. Acute device and technical success were 99% (140 of 141). By hierarchical analysis, the all-stroke rate in the pivotal group was 1.4% (2 of 141), stroke and death was 2.8% (4 of 141), and stroke, death and MI was 3.5% (5 of 141). One patient (0.7%) experienced postoperative hoarseness from potential Xth cranial nerve injury, which completely resolved at the 6-month follow-up visit.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the ROADSTER trial demonstrate that the use of the ENROUTE Transcarotid NPS is safe and effective at preventing stroke during CAS. The overall stroke rate of 1.4% is the lowest reported to date for any prospective, multicenter clinical trial of CAS.

Modulation of stroke risk in chronic kidney disease

Stroke is the second most common cause of death and the leading cause of neurological disability worldwide, with huge economic costs and tragic human consequences. Both chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage kidney disease are associated with a significantly increased risk of stroke. However, to date this has generated far less interest compared with the better-recognized links between cardiac and renal disease. Common risk factors for stroke, such as hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia, smoking and atrial fibrillation, are shared with the general population but are more prevalent in renal patients. In addition, factors unique to these patients, such as disorders of mineral and bone metabolism, anaemia and its treatments as well as the process of dialysis itself, are all also postulated to further increase the risk of stroke. In the general population, advances in medical therapies mean that effective primary and secondary prevention therapies are available for many patients. The development of specialist stroke clinics and acute stroke units has also improved outcomes after a stroke. Emerging therapies such as thrombolysis and thrombectomy are showing increasingly beneficial results. However, patients with CKD and on dialysis have different risk profiles that must be taken into account when considering the potential benefits and risks of these treatments. Unfortunately, these patients are either not recruited or formally excluded from major clinical trials. There is still much work to be done to harness effective stroke treatments with an acceptable safety profile for patients with CKD and those on dialysis.

Efficacy and safety of stenting for elderly patients with severe and symptomatic carotid artery stenosis: a critical meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To investigate both short-term and long-term therapeutic efficacy and safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid artery endarterectomy (CEA) for elderly patients with severe and symptomatic carotid artery stenosis.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Clinical Trials Register Centers, and Google Scholar were comprehensively searched. After identifying relevant randomized controlled trials, methodological quality was assessed by using Cochrane tools of bias assessment. Meta-analysis was performed by RevMan software, and subgroup analyses according to different follow-up periods were also conducted.

RESULTS

Sixteen articles of nine randomized controlled trials containing 6,984 patients were included. Compared with CEA, CAS was associated with high risks of stroke during periprocedural 30 days (risk ratio [RR]=1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15-1.88), 48 months (RR=1.37, 95% CI: 1.11-1.70), and >48 months (RR=1.76, 95% CI: 1.34-2.31). There was no significant difference in the aspects of death, disabling stroke, or death at any time between the groups. For other periprocedural complications, CAS decreased the risk of myocardial infarction (RR=0.44, 95% CI: 0.26-0.75), cranial nerve palsy (RR=0.09, 95% CI: 0.04-0.22) and hematoma (RR=0.31, 95% CI: 0.14-0.68) compared with CEA, while it increased the risk of bradycardia or hypotension (RR=8.45, 95% CI 2.91-24.58).

CONCLUSION

Compared with CEA, CAS reduced hematoma, periprocedural myocardial infarction, and cranial nerve palsy, while it was associated with higher risks of both short-term and long-term nondisabling stroke. And they seemed to be equivalent in other outcome measures. As regards to its minimal invasion, it should be applied only in specific patients.

Perioperative and Long-term Outcomes of Carotid Endarterectomy for Japanese Asymptomatic Cervical Carotid Artery Stenosis: A Single Institution Study

As the recently developed medical treatments for asymptomatic cervical carotid artery stenosis (ACCAS) have shown excellent stroke prevention, carotid endarterectomy (CEA) should be carried out for more selected patients and with lower complication rates and better long-term outcomes. We have performed CEA for Japanese ACCAS patients with a uniform surgical technique and strict perioperative management. In this study, we retrospectively investigated the perioperative complications and long-term outcomes of our CEA series. A total of 147 CEAs were carried out in 139 Japanese ACCAS patients. All patients were routinely checked for their cardiac function and high risk coronary lesions were preferentially treated before CEA. All CEAs were performed under general anesthesia using a shunt system. The postoperative cerebral blood flow was routinely measured under continued sedation to prevent postoperative hyperperfusion. The 30-day perioperative morbidity rate was 2.04%, including a perioperative stroke rate of 0.68%. There were no perioperative deaths. With regard to the long-term outcomes of the 134 followed-up patients, 9 patients were dead and 5 patients suffered from strokes, including 2 patients with ipsilateral hemispheric ischemia. The annual rates of death, all stroke and ipsilateral ischemic stroke were 1.15%, 0.64%, and 0.25%, respectively. These results showed that the perioperative morbidity and mortality rates of our CEAs were lower than those in the previous large trials. Furthermore, the long-term outcomes of this series were favorable to those reported in the latest medical treatment trials for ACCAS patients. CEA may be useful for preventing ischemic stroke in Japanese ACCAS patients.

Predictors of restenosis after carotid artery stenting in 241 cases

Background

Variable rates of restenosis after carotid artery stenting (CAS) have been reported, and few predictors have been suggested. Because CAS is being performed with increasing frequency, more data are needed to evaluate the rate and predictors of restenosis and possibly identify new risk factors for restenosis after CAS. The aim of this study was to analyze the rate and predictors of restenosis after CAS.

Methods

241 patients with carotid artery stenosis treated with stenting were analyzed retrospectively to identify patients who had restenosis after stenting. Univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression were conducted to determine the predictors of restenosis.

Results

Mean patient age was 67.5 years. 8.3% of patients who underwent CAS had carotid restenosis of ≥50% during follow-up. 3.7% of patients required retreatment. Mean duration from CAS to retreatment was 11 months. In multivariate analysis, the predictors of restenosis included history of cardiovascular disease (OR=8.88, p<0.001) and having a cerebrovascular accident (CVA) prior to stenting (OR=1.87, p=0.034). A higher percentage of preoperative carotid stenosis was associated with higher odds of restenosis in univariate analysis (p=0.04, OR stenosis ≥80%=5.7).

Conclusions

Our results suggest that the rate of carotid restenosis after stenting is low. Patients with cardiovascular disease, patients who had a CVA prior to stenting, and patients with higher percentages of preoperative stenosis had higher odds of restenosis. Higher rates of restenosis should be kept in mind when opting for CAS in these patients.

Comparative Review of the Treatment Methodologies of Carotid Stenosis

The treatment of carotid stenosis entails three methodologies, namely, medical management, carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS), as well as carotid endarterectomy (CEA). The North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) and European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST) have shown that symptomatic carotid stenosis greater than 70% is best treated with CEA. In asymptomatic patients with carotid stenosis greater than 60%, CEA was more beneficial than treatment with aspirin alone according to the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis (ACAS) and Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis Trial (ACST) trials. When CAS is compared with CEA, the CREST resulted in similar rates of ipsilateral stroke and death rates regardless of symptoms. However, CAS not only increased adverse effects in women, it also amplified stroke rates and death in elderly patients compared with CEA. CAS can maximize its utility in treating focal restenosis after CEA and patients with overwhelming cardiac risk or prior neck irradiation. When performing CEA, using a patch was equated to a more durable result than primary closure, whereas eversion technique is a new methodology deserving a spotlight. Comparing the three major treatment strategies of carotid stenosis has intrinsic drawbacks, as most trials are outdated and they vary in their premises, definitions, and study designs. With the newly codified best medical management including antiplatelet therapies with aspirin and clopidogrel, statin, antihypertensive agents, strict diabetes control, smoking cessation, and life style change, the current trials may demonstrate that asymptomatic carotid stenosis is best treated with best medical therapy. The ongoing trials will illuminate and reshape the treatment paradigm for symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

Intravascular Near-Infrared Spectroscopy: A Possible Tool for Optimizing the Management of Carotid Artery Disease

Stroke is the second most common cause of morbidity and mortality in the Western nations. It is estimated that approximately one-fifth of all strokes or transient ischemic attacks are caused by carotid artery disease. Thus, treatment of carotid artery disease as a mean of stroke prevention is extremely important. Since the introduction of carotid endarterectomy, debate has persisted over the treatment strategy for carotid artery disease. Current recommendations have many potential flaws because they are often based on older trials performed before the introduction of modern pharmacotherapy and are mostly based on the angiographic degree of stenosis, without an emphasis on the pathophysiology of the disease. Most carotid events are caused by rupture or distal embolization of the content of an unstable atherosclerotic plaque with a large lipid pool. Thus, it is plausible that the information regarding the composition of the atherosclerotic plaque could play an important role in deciding on a treatment strategy. In this review article, we provide information about near-infrared spectroscopy, a new invasive imaging modality, which seems to be capable of providing such information.

Optimal contemporary management of symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis

This commentary addresses the issue of optimal contemporary management of symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. Based on current data, carotid endarterectomy (CEA) should be performed in the majority of patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. Carotid artery stenting (CAS) should be reserved for a minority of these symptomatic patients, in whom CEA is contraindicated. In asymptomatic patients, all should be placed on best medical treatment (BMT). With the use of one or more of the proposed stroke risk stratification models or some as yet undetermined method, the identification of those asymptomatic individuals may be possible in whom stroke risk is higher than usual with BMT. This asymptomatic subgroup, which may be small and is yet to be determined with certainty, could be offered an invasive carotid procedure (either CAS or CEA).

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Carotid Artery Stenting Versus Endarterectomy for Carotid Stenosis: A Chronological and Worldwide Study

There are disparities among the results of meta-analyses under different circumstances of carotid artery stenting (CAS) versus endarterectomy (CEA) for carotid stenosis. This study aimed to assess the efficacies of CAS and CEA for carotid stenosis at 5-year intervals and worldwide.Comparative studies simultaneously reporting CAS and CEA for carotid stenosis with at least 10 patients in each group were identified by searching PubMed and Embase in accordance with preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines, and by reviewing the reference lists of retrieved articles.The studies were stratified into different subgroups according to the publication year, location in which the study was mainly performed, and randomized and nonrandomized study designs.Thirty-five comparative studies encompassing 27,525 patients were identified. The risk ratios (RRs) of stroke/death when CAS was compared with CEA within 30 d of treatment were 1.51 (95% CI 1.32-1.74, P < 0.001) for overall, 1.50 (95% CI 1.14-1.98, P = 0.004) from 2011 to 2015, 1.61 (95% CI 1.35-1.91, P < 0.001) from 2006 to 2010, 1.59 (95% CI 1.27-1.99, P < 0.001) in North America, 1.50 (95% CI 1.24-1.81, P < 0.001) in Europe, 1.63 (95% CI 1.31-2.02, P < 0.001) for randomized, and 1.44 (95% CI 1.20-1.73, P < 0.001) for nonrandomized comparative studies. CEA decreased the risks of transient ischemic attack at 30 d (RR: 2.07, 95% CI 1.50-2.85, P < 0.001) and restenosis at 1-year (RR: 1.97, 95% CI 1.28-3.05, P = 0.002). Data from follow-up showed that the RRs of stroke/death were 0.74 (95% CI 0.55-0.99, P = 0.04) at 1 year, 1.24 (95% CI 1.04-1.46, P = 0.01) at 4 year, and 2.27 (95% CI 1.39-3.71, P = 0.001) at 10 year. This systematic review, compared with those of other meta-analyses, included all available comparative studies and analyzed them at 5-year intervals, in different continents, and under different study designs. Current evidence suggests that the efficacy of CEA is superior to CAS for freedom from stroke/death within 30 d, especially from 2006 to 2015, in North America and Europe. Meanwhile, the superiority was also observed for restenosis at 1-year, transient ischemic attack within 30 d, and stroke/death at 4- and 10-year follow-ups.

Radiation-related heart and vascular disease

Improvement in cancer therapy has led to increasing number of cancer survivors, some of whom have previously been treated with mediastinal radiation. Cardiac complication may manifest years after completion of radiation therapy. Hence long-term follow-up is essential in these patients. In this paper, we have discussed the short- and long-term cardiovascular side effects of radiation therapy.

High-Risk Factors in Symptomatic Patients Undergoing Carotid Artery Stenting With Distal Protection

BACKGROUND:

Demographics and vascular anatomy may play an important role in predicting periprocedural complications in symptomatic patients undergoing carotid artery stenting (CAS).

OBJECTIVE:

To predict factors associated with increased risk of complications in symptomatic patients undergoing CAS and to devise a CAS scoring system that predicts such complications in this patient population.

METHODS:

A retrospective study was conducted that included patients who underwent CAS for symptomatic carotid stenosis during a 3-year period. Demographics and anatomic characteristics were subsequently correlated with 30-day outcome measures.

RESULTS:

A total of 221 patients were included in the study. The cumulative rate of periprocedural complications was 7.2%, including stroke (3.2%), myocardial infarction (3.2%), and death (1.4%). Renal disease increased the risk of all complications. National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score ≥10 at presentation, difficult femoral access, and diseased calcified aortic arch increased the risk of stroke and all complications. Type III aortic arch correlated with increased risk of stroke. Pseudo-occlusion and concentric calcification of the carotid artery increased the risk of myocardial infarction, death, and all complications. Carotid tortuosity and anatomy hostile to the deployment of distal protection devices increased the risk of stroke, myocardial infarction, death, and all complications.

CONCLUSION:

Our results suggest that CAS should be avoided in patients with multiple anatomic risk factors. High presenting National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score and renal disease also increase the complication risk. The CAS scoring system devised here is simple, reproducible, and clinically valuable in predicting complications risk in symptomatic patients undergoing CAS.

[Complications after supra-aortic reconstruction]

BACKGROUND

Surgical interventions on the supra-aortic vessels are common procedures to avoid cerebral ischemia or arm pain during exercise. The safety and efficacy has been confirmed by clinical studies. Complications are rare but have serious consequences.

OBJECTIVES

What special indications and recommendations are there for the diagnostics and treatment in the perioperative phase?

METHODS

The current article is a literature-based review that considers international studies, guidelines and personal experiences.

RESULTS

There is a broad range of complications. A simple systematic physical examination is often sufficient to give indications of the problem. Confirming clinical apparative examinations are mostly intraoperative angiography or sonography, whereas postoperative procedures include color-coded duplex sonography (FKDS) and angiography computed tomography (angio-CT). Important basic principles and aspects of operative procedures are presented. Evidence-based differences between the treatment options with resulting complications are mostly unknown; therefore, clinical management mostly relies on expert recommendations.

CONCLUSION

There are several modern treatment options for invasive therapy. Despite a decrease in previous complication rates, typical perioperative complications must be considered. The diagnosis and therapy is carried out according to established strategies.

Association of thrombelastographic parameters with post-stenting ischemic events

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Thrombelastography (TEG) is widely used for the measurement of platelet function. However, few studies have investigated the TEG parameters in patients receiving extracranial or intracranial artery stenting for ischemic cerebrovascular disease. This study sought to describe the association of TEG parameters before the procedure with post-procedural ischemic events after extracranial or intracranial artery stenting.

METHODS

Patients in whom stenting was performed for extracranial or intracranial artery stenosis (70-99%) were recruited into the study. Blood samples were obtained for TEG to assess platelet function before stenting. The primary endpoint was ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack in the territory of the stented artery.

RESULTS

A total of 218 patients were included in the study. During a mean follow-up period of 132 days (range 98-226 days), 18 (8.3%) primary endpoint events were recorded. Compared with patients without ischemic events, the ADP-induced platelet-fibrin clot strength (MA_ADP) was significantly higher (41.57±15.10 vs 33.50±13.86, p=0.020) and the ADP inhibition rate (ADP%) was significantly lower in patients with ischemic events (39.54±23.15 vs 55.29±24.43, p=0.009). Multivariate analysis identified MA_ADP and ADP% as significant independent predictors of subsequent ischemic events with HRs of 1.036 and 0.965, respectively. From receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, MA_ADP >49.95 mm had the best predictive value of ischemic events.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that TEG parameters MA_ADP and ADP% are associated with subsequent ischemic events in patients with extracranial or intracranial stents.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

NCT01925872.

A Protocol-Based Decision for Choosing a Proper Surgical Treatment Option for Carotid Artery Stenosis

OBJECTIVE

There are two established surgical treatment options for carotid artery stenosis. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been accepted as a gold standard for surgical treatment while carotid artery stenting (CAS) has recently become an alternative option. Each treatment option has advantages and disadvantages for the treatment outcomes. We propose a protocol for selection of a proper surgical treatment option for carotid artery stenosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 192 published articles on management of carotid artery stenosis were reviewed. Preoperatively considerable factors which had been repeatedly noted in those articles for the risk/benefits of CEA or CAS were selected. According to those factors, a protocol with four categories was established.

RESULTS

CEA or CAS is indicated when the patient has a symptomatic stenosis ≥ 50%, or when the patient has an asymptomatic stenosis ≥ 80%. Each treatment option has absolute indications and favorable indications. Each absolute indication is scored with three points, and each favorable indication, one point. Based on the highest scores, a proper treatment option (CEA or CAS) is selected.

CONCLUSION

We have been treating patients according to this protocol and evaluating the outcomes of our protocol-based decision because this protocol might be helpful in assessment of risk/benefit for selection of a proper surgical treatment option in patients with carotid artery stenosis.

Hemodynamic changes and baroreflex sensitivity associated with carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting

Atherosclerotic carotid lesion is a major cause of stroke which accounts for up to 20% of ischemic stroke. Aggressive treatment of carotid stenosis may prevent stroke. Currently, carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) are the first-line treatments for severe carotid stenosis. CEA is superior to medical therapy in preventing stroke and cardiovascular death. CAS has emerged as an alternative to CEA in recent years due to its less invasive nature. However, both CEA and CAS may be associated with adverse hemodynamic changes as well as a variation of carotid baroreflex sensitivity. There is no consensus on which of these two methods is more advantageous concerning the procedure-related hemodynamic changes. This article reviews the hemodynamic changes and baroreflex sensitivity after CEA and CAS.

CHInese Medicine NeuroAiD Efficacy on Stroke Recovery - Extension Study (CHIMES-E): A Multicenter Study of Long-Term Efficacy

BACKGROUND

The CHInese Medicine NeuroAiD Efficacy on Stroke recovery (CHIMES) study was an international randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of MLC601 (NeuroAiD) in subjects with cerebral infarction of intermediate severity within 72 h. CHIMES-E (Extension) aimed at evaluating the effects of the initial 3-month treatment with MLC601 on long-term outcome for up to 2 years.

METHODS

All subjects randomized in CHIMES were eligible for CHIMES-E. Inclusion criteria for CHIMES were age ≥18, baseline National Institute of Health Stroke Scale of 6-14, and pre-stroke modified Rankin Scale (mRS) ≤1. Initial CHIMES treatment allocation blinding was maintained, although no further study treatment was provided in CHIMES-E. Subjects received standard care and rehabilitation as prescribed by the treating physician. mRS, Barthel Index (BI), and occurrence of medical events were ascertained at months 6, 12, 18, and 24. The primary outcome was mRS at 24 months. Secondary outcomes were mRS and BI at other time points.

RESULTS

CHIMES-E included 880 subjects (mean age 61.8 ± 11.3; 36% women). Adjusted OR for mRS ordinal analysis was 1.08 (95% CI 0.85-1.37, p = 0.543) and mRS dichotomy ≤1 was 1.29 (95% CI 0.96-1.74, p = 0.093) at 24 months. However, the treatment effect was significantly in favor of MLC601 for mRS dichotomy ≤1 at 6 months (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.11-2.01, p = 0.008), 12 months (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.05-1.90, p = 0.023), and 18 months (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.01-1.83, p = 0.045), and for BI dichotomy ≥95 at 6 months (OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.14-2.10, p = 0.005) but not at other time points. Subgroup analyses showed no treatment heterogeneity. Rates of death and occurrence of vascular and other medical events were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

While the benefits of a 3-month treatment with MLC601 did not reach statistical significance for the primary endpoint at 2 years, the odds of functional independence defined as mRS ≤1 was significantly increased at 6 months and persisted up to 18 months after a stroke.

Treatment Strategy for Bilateral Severe Carotid Artery Stenosis: One Center's Experience

OBJECTIVE

To describe 1 center's experience using carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) as a treatment strategy in patients with bilateral carotid artery stenosis.

METHODS

Patients with severe carotid artery stenosis, including bilateral carotid artery stenosis, treated by CEA or CAS during the period 2008-2013 were reviewed retrospectively. The selection of treatment depended on the individual patient's medical comorbidities, neurologic condition, and clinical and anatomic arterial factors. The main adverse events included death from any cause, major stroke within 30 days, and death between 30 days and 1 year later from the treated carotid artery or ipsilateral major stroke.

RESULTS

There were 27 patients with bilateral carotid artery stenosis treated, including 11 patients with bilateral CEA, 9 patients with CEA on one side and CAS on the other side, and 7 patients with bilateral CAS. Of patients with unilateral carotid artery stenosis, 69 were treated with CEA, and 75 were treated with CAS. The incidence of main adverse events for the bilateral patients was 7.4%, similar to the unilateral patients undergoing CEA and CAS (8.7% and 6.7%, respectively). Restenosis occurred in 4 treated carotid arteries in bilateral patients within 1 year (4 of 54 [7.4%]); this was not significantly different from unilateral patients undergoing CEA and CAS (4 of 69 [5.8%] and 6 of 75 [8.0%], respectively). Local complications were not more frequent in bilateral patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Good outcomes can be achieved in patients with bilateral carotid artery stenosis when treatment selection is based on each individual patient's clinical characteristics and with a proper combination of staged CEA and CAS.

Evidence for management of carotid artery stenosis

In this review, we presented the evidence concerning carotid artery stenosis treatment in symptomatic stenosis and asymptomatic stenosis separately, and discussed the future challenges. The validity of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) to treat moderate or greater degree of symptomatic carotid artery stenosis appears to be established. Due to the additional option of carotid artery stenting (CAS), it is necessary to comprehensively determine whether CEA or CAS is more appropriate for each individual patient. Moreover, since there are rapid advancements in devices for CAS and improvements in treatment outcomes, continual learning of the latest treatment method is essential. For asymptomatic stenosis, due to improvements in the outcomes with best medical treatment (BMT), it is essential to re-evaluate the use of invasive CEA/CAS. Continual verification of the latest randomized clinical trial that compares CEA, CAS, and BMT, and establishment of a diagnostic method that can accurately extract the group of patients who have the highest future risk of developing ischemia, are desired.

Management of extracranial carotid artery disease

Stroke is the third leading cause of death in developed nations. Up to 88% of strokes are ischemic in nature. Extracranial carotid artery atherosclerotic disease is the third leading cause of ischemic stroke in the general population and the second most common nontraumatic cause among adults younger than 45 years. This article provides comprehensive, evidence-based recommendations for the management of extracranial atherosclerotic disease, including imaging for screening and diagnosis, medical management, and interventional management.

Factors Determining Periprocedural and Long-term Complications of High Risk Carotid Artery Stenting

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has been, historically, an alternative to open endarterectomy (CEA) for stroke prevention in high risk patients with carotid atherosclerosis. We sought to determine the rates of periprocedural and long-term stroke or death and the risk factors for complications after CAS in our high risk patient population.

METHODS

Clinical and treatment variables of consecutive CAS procedures performed between 2002 and 2011 were analyzed. Using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses we examined how patient characteristics influenced outcomes and changes in modified Rankin Score (mRS).

RESULTS

In 152 patients, the composite total of periprocedural death, stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA) and myocardial infarction (MI) rate was 3.95% (6/152). Chronic kidney disease (CKD) was strongly associated with periprocedural complications (p<0.001). Coronary artery disease/peripheral vascular disease (CAD/PVD) (p=0.03), dyslipidemia (p=0.02), CKD (p=0.01), and contralateral internal carotid artery stenosis (p=0.02) were non-modifiable risk factors for mRS increase. There were 25 deaths, 8 strokes, 11 TIAs, and 1 MI (mean follow-up 38.4 months, range 0-116 months). The presence of CAD/PVD (p=0.009) and dyslipidemia (p=0.002) were significantly associated with long-term complications.

CONCLUSION

CAS was performed with low periprocedural complications in high-risk patients. Our rates compare very favorably to large-scale trials that have ideal patients. This data encourages the consideration of CAS in patients considered high risk for CEA and provides possible patient characteristics (CKD) to help with periprocedural risk stratification.

[Stenting vs. surgery for symptomatic carotid stenosis]

Stenting is associated with a higher periprocedural risk of stroke compared to surgery. This higher stroke risk mainly concerns patients older than 70 years, whereas risk seems to be similar in patients younger than 70 years. After the procedural period, both surgery and stenting seem to be as effective to prevent stroke. Surgery remains the first choice intervention in patients with severe symptomatic carotid stenosis. It is reasonable to consider stenting in patients with contraindications to surgery due to technical or anatomical aspects, or in patients at high risk of complications because of comorbidities, after a multidisciplinary discussion. Stenting could also be considered in patients who have low risk of stroke after stenting (e.g., patients younger than 70 years). When a revascularization is indicated, intervention should be done within 2 weeks of the index event after TIA or moderate stroke.

Carotid artery stenting: an update

In patients with carotid disease, the purpose of carotid artery revascularization is stroke prevention. For >50 years, carotid endarterectomy has been considered the standard treatment for severe asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid stenoses. Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has emerged in the last 15 years as minimally invasive alternative to surgery. However, the value of the endovascular approach in the management of carotid disease patients remains highly controversial. The aims of this review are to elucidate the current role of CAS, to describe the major technology advancements in the field, and to speculate about the future of this therapy.

Modification of a Braided Support Catheter into a Rapid Exchange System for Navigation of a Distal Protection Device through Significant Vascular Tortuosity

Cerebral embolic protection devices (EPD) reduce the rate of periprocedural thromboembolic complications and are currently used in all carotid artery stenting (CAS) procedures. However, tortuous vascular anatomy of the internal carotid artery (ICA) may prevent navigation of distal EPDs, thereby leading to inadequate cerebral protection. We present a case in which significant tortuosity of the ICA distal to the stenotic lesion precluded navigation of currently available distal EPDs. During a CAS procedure, significant vascular tortuosity of the distal cervical ICA was noted which prevented navigation of currently available distal EPDs due to catheter kinking. In order to overcome this anatomic barrier, a novel rapid exchange catheter system (RECS) was created using a modified DAC 038 braided catheter through which a distal EPD and microguidewire were placed. This newly devised RECS allowed navigation of the distal EPD past the tortuous ICA bend and successful completion of the CAS procedure without periprocedural complications. We demonstrate that modification of currently available devices can, in select cases, effectively address cases of significant vascular tortuosity which limit the use of conventional distal EPDs.

Safety and efficacy assessment of carotid artery stenting in a high-risk population in a single-centre registry

Introduction

Ischaemic stroke is the primary cause of long-term disability and the third most common cause of death. Internal carotid artery stenosis is an important risk factor for stroke and transient ischaemic attack (TIA). European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines allow carotid artery stenting (CAS) as an alternative to endarterectomy in centres with low rates of death or stroke.

Aim

To assess the safety and efficacy of CAS in a single-centre observation.

Material and methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients treated with CAS between March 2008 and July 2012. Clinical data and outcomes in both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients were analysed.

Results

A total of 214 consecutive patients were included in the registry. Symptomatic patients accounted for 57% of the study group and were more likely to have a history of stroke and/or TIA that occurred more than 6 months before the procedure (50% vs. 8%, p < 0.001). Asymptomatic patients were more likely to have a history of coronary artery disease (88% vs. 61%, p < 0.001), and the rates of previous acute coronary syndrome and revascularisation were also higher in this group (58% vs. 41% and 71% vs. 52%, respectively, both p < 0.05). The symptomatic group had higher incidence of stroke in periprocedural and 30-day observation (4% vs. 0%, p < 0.05). There was no difference in incidence of adverse events in long-term observation.

Conclusions

Carotid artery stenting is a safe and efficacious procedure. Every centre performing CAS should monitor the rate of periprocedural complications.

Carotid Stenting in Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis: The Calgary Experience

Background:

Although carotid endarterectomy is considered the ‘gold standard’ for standard risk symptomatic patients, the treatment of choice for asymptomatic patients remains controversial. Carotid stenting has demonstrated real-world outcomes consistent with established guidelines for carotid endarterectomy in asymptomatic high-surgical risk patients in recent prospective multicenter trials. We describe our experience with asymptomatic patients who underwent carotid stenting at our center in a routine clinical setting.

Methods:

This is a retrospective, longitudinal cohort study of patients who underwent carotid angioplasty and stenting at the Foothills Medical Center, Calgary, Canada between 1997 and 2007. The qualifying events were categorized as symptomatic and asymptomatic. The procedures were performed by four experienced neurointerventionists. The primary outcome was stroke or death at 30-day follow- up.

Results:

243 patients underwent 255 carotid stenting procedures. Their ages ranged from 50 to 83 years; the mean age was 72.0 ± 9.3 years; 67(26.3%) were women. Forty one patients (16.1%) were asymptomatic; 214 patients (83.9%) were symptomatic. The patients in the asymptomatic group were significantly younger - 66.0 ± 8.8 years compared to patients in the symptomatic group 73.2 ± 8.9 years (p<0.0001). Intraprocedurally one minor stroke (2.4%) occurred in the asymptomatic group. At 30-day follow-up, no deaths or further strokes were noted in the asymptomatic group; while eight deaths, six major and seven minor strokes occurred in the symptomatic group (p=0.22).

Conclusion:

Carotid stenting appears to be a safe procedure in asymptomatic patients with severe carotid stenosis in routine clinical settings as witnessed in this single center study.

Carotid Revascularization: An Update

Symptomatic extracranial internal carotid artery stenosis poses a high short-time risk of ischemic cerebral stroke, as high as 20% to 30% in the first three months. Timely performed carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been shown to be highly effective in reducing this risk although, in recent years, there has been great interest in replacing this procedure with less invasive carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS). In this update we review recent studies and provide recommendations regarding the indications, methods and timing of surgical intervention as well as the anaesthetic management of CEA, and we report on recently published randomized controlled trials comparing CEA to CAS. We also provide recommendations regarding the sometime neglected but important medical management of patients undergoing carotid intervention, including antithrombotic and antihypertension therapy, lipid lowering agents, assistance with smoking cessation, and diabetes control.

Carotid Endarterectomy Versus Stenting: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Background:

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to update the available evidence on the safety and efficacy of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) versus carotid artery stenting (CAS) in the treatment of carotid artery stenosis.

Methods:

A comprehensive search was performed of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, bibliographies of included articles and past systematic reviews, and abstract lists of recent scientific conferences. For each reported outcome, a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The I2 statistic was used as a measure of heterogeneity.

Results:

Twelve RCTs enrolling 6,973 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Carotid artery stenting was associated with a significantly greater odds of periprocedural stroke (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.47) and a significantly lower odds of periprocedural myocardial infarction (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.78) and cranial neuropathy (OR 0.08, 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.16). The odds of periprocedural death (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.56 to 2.18), target vessel restenosis (OR 1.95, 95% CI 0.63 to 6.06), and access-related hematoma were similar following either intervention (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.21).

Conclusions:

In comparison with CEA, CAS is associated with a greater odds of stroke and a lower odds of myocardial infarction. While the results our meta-analysis support the continued use of CEA as the standard of care in the treatment of carotid artery stenosis, CAS is a viable alternative in patients at elevated risk of cardiac complications.

Guidelines for the primary prevention of stroke: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association

The aim of this updated statement is to provide comprehensive and timely evidence-based recommendations on the prevention of stroke among individuals who have not previously experienced a stroke or transient ischemic attack. Evidence-based recommendations are included for the control of risk factors, interventional approaches to atherosclerotic disease of the cervicocephalic circulation, and antithrombotic treatments for preventing thrombotic and thromboembolic stroke. Further recommendations are provided for genetic and pharmacogenetic testing and for the prevention of stroke in a variety of other specific circumstances, including sickle cell disease and patent foramen ovale.

Carotid artery stenting

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has achieved clinical equipoise with carotid endarterectomy (CEA), as evidenced by 2 large U.S. randomized clinical trials, multiple pivotal registry trials, and 2 multispecialty guideline documents endorsed by 14 professional societies. The largest randomized trial conducted in patients at average surgical risk of CEA, CREST (Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial) found no difference between CAS and CEA for the combined endpoint of stroke, death, and myocardial infarction (MI) after 4 years of follow-up. The largest randomized trial comparing CAS and CEA in patients at increased surgical risk, SAPPHIRE (Stenting and Angioplasty with Protection in Patients at High Risk for Endarterectomy), looked at 1-year stroke, death, and MI incidence and found no difference in symptomatic patients, but a significantly better outcome in asymptomatic patients for CAS (9.9% vs. 21.5%; p = 0.02). Given that >70% of carotid revascularization procedures are performed in asymptomatic patients for primary prevention of stroke, it is incumbent upon clinicians to demonstrate that revascularization has an incremental benefit over highly effective modern medical therapy alone.

Carotid stenting with distal protection in high-surgical-risk patients: one-year results of the ASTI trial

PURPOSE

This prospective, multicenter, nonrandomized study evaluated the periprocedural and 1-year outcomes in high-surgical-risk patients with carotid artery stenosis treated with the Adapt Carotid Stent plus FilterWire EZ distal protection catheter (Boston Scientific Corporation, Natick, MA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study enrolled 100 patients (32 symptomatic, 63 asymptomatic, 5 unknown) at high risk for carotid endarterectomy due to prespecified anatomical criteria and/or medical comorbidities. Thirty-day and 1-year follow-up included clinical evaluation, carotid duplex ultrasound, and independent neurologic and NIH stroke scale assessments. One-year endpoints included the composite rate of major adverse events (MAE), defined as death, stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI) and the rates of late ipsilateral stroke (31-365 days), target lesion revascularization, and in-stent restenosis.

RESULTS

Of the 100 enrolled patients, technical success was achieved in 90.9 % (90/99). The 30-day MAE rate (5.1 %) consisted of major stroke (2.0 %) and minor stroke (3.1 %); no deaths or MIs occurred. The 1-year MAE rate (12.2 %) consisted of death, MI, and stroke rates of 4.4, 3.3, and 8.9 %, respectively. Late ipsilateral stroke (31-365 days) rate was 1.1 %. Symptomatic patients had higher rates of death (11.1 vs. 1.7 %) and MI (7.4 vs. 1.7 %), but lower rates of major (7.4 vs. 10.0 %) and minor stroke (0.0 vs. 6.7 %), compared with asymptomatic patients.

CONCLUSION

Results through 1 year postprocedure demonstrated that carotid artery stenting with Adapt Carotid Stent and FilterWire EZ is safe and effective in high-risk-surgical patients.

Effect of internal carotid artery stenting on superior thyroid artery Doppler flow

OBJECTIVES

Patients with carotid disease are frequently referred for carotid artery stenting based on the results of carotid duplex studies. During carotid artery stenting, the stent is usually extended into the common carotid artery, thereby crossing the external carotid artery. Previous studies have shown conflicting results regarding internal carotid stenting and external carotid artery flow velocities, but the effect of stenting on ipsilateral superior thyroid artery velocities has not been defined. This study examined the effect of internal carotid angioplasty and stenting on the ipsilateral superior thyroid artery Doppler-derived flow parameters.

METHODS

We prospectively studied preinterventional and postinterventional duplex scans obtained from 41 patients (mean age ± SD, 64 ± 10 years) who underwent carotid artery stenting. The Doppler-defined preprocedural peak systolic velocity (PSV) end-diastolic velocity (EDV), resistive index (RI), and pulsatility index (PI) in the ipsilateral external carotid and superior thyroid arteries were compared with postprocedural values.

RESULTS

Among patients with stenting, the preprocedural PSV, EDV, RI, and PI in the ipsilateral superior thyroid artery were 30 ± 11 cm/s, 13 ± 6 cm/s, 0.62 ± 0.11, and 1.04 ± 0.28,respectively; after stenting, they were 36 ± 8 cm/s, 14 ± 9 cm/s, 0.71 ± 0.07, and 1.11 ± 0.19. The preprocedural PSV, EDV, RI, and PI in the ipsilateral external carotid artery were 79 ± 24 cm/s, 17 ± 7 cm/s, 0.77 ± 0.26, and 1.27 ± 0.22; after stenting, they were 94 ± 31 cm/s, 20 ± 6 cm/s, 0.80 ± 0.4, and 1.25 ± 0.31. Despite a slight increase in superior thyroid and external carotid artery flow, there was no statistically significant change from before to after stenting.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed no differences in blood velocity profiles in the ipsilateral superior thyroid and external carotid arteries after stenting.

An Update on Italian Stroke Organization Guidelines on Carotid Endarterectomy and Stenting

One hundred and fifty-three authors, 45 Italian scientific societies, and two Italian patients' associations participated in drafting the Italian Stroke Organization document, which has become the national guideline for the prevention and treatment of stroke in Italy. For the surgical therapy section of the Italian Stroke Organization document, the main trials on carotid endoarterectomy and stenting were critically reviewed in order to formulate recommendations for these procedures. Recommendations are presented here for the referral of patients to either carotid endarterectomy or stenting on the basis of whether carotid stenosis is symptomatic or asymptomatic.