[Evaluation of stent-protected angioplasty for theray of symptomatic stenoses of the carotid artery. SPACE and other randomized trials]

Acute and prophylactic endovascular treatment of internal carotid artery stenosis

Stroke is the third most common cause of death in the USA. Up to 20% of all strokes are caused by internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis. This article reviews the treatment of ICA stenosis, its indication, and its relevance for stroke prevention. The article also discusses the indication of ICA stenosis treatment in an acute stroke situation and offers pathophysiological commentary.

30 day results from the SPACE trial of stent-protected angioplasty versus carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients: a randomised non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Carotid endarterectomy is effective in stroke prevention for patients with severe symptomatic carotid-artery stenosis, and carotid-artery stenting has been widely used as alternative treatment. Since equivalence or superiority has not been convincingly shown for either treatment, we aimed to compare the two.

METHODS

1200 patients with symptomatic carotid-artery stenosis were randomly assigned within 180 days of transient ischaemic attack or moderate stroke (modified Rankin scale score of < or =3) carotid-artery stenting (n=605) or carotid endarterectomy (n=595). The primary endpoint of this hospital-based study was ipsilateral ischaemic stroke or death from time of randomisation to 30 days after the procedure. The non-inferiority margin was defined as less than 2.5% on the basis of an expected event rate of 5%. Analyses were on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered at Current Controlled Trials with the international standard randomised controlled trial number ISRCTN57874028.

FINDINGS

1183 patients were included in the analysis. The rate of death or ipsilateral ischaemic stroke from randomisation to 30 days after the procedure was 6.84% with carotid-artery stenting and 6.34% with carotid endarterectomy (absolute difference 0.51%, 90% CI -1.89% to 2.91%). The one-sided p value for non-inferiority is 0.09.

INTERPRETATION

SPACE failed to prove non-inferiority of carotid-artery stenting compared with carotid endarterectomy for the periprocedural complication rate. The results of this trial do not justify the widespread use in the short-term of carotid-artery stenting for treatment of carotid-artery stenoses. Results at 6-24 months are awaited.

Treatment of asymptomatic carotid artery disease: Similar early outcomes after carotid stenting for high-risk patients and endarterectomy for standard-risk patients

BACKGROUND

The role of carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) in the treatment of asymptomatic patients with carotid disease remains controversial. The purpose of this report is to compare outcomes in asymptomatic patients treated with CAS and carotid endarterectomy (CEA). This was the initial experience performing CAS for most of the surgeons. For comparison, we also report our outcomes in standard-risk patients treated concurrently with CEA during the same period of time.

METHODS

A retrospective, nonrandomized review of asymptomatic patients undergoing CEA or CAS at Washington University Medical Center in St. Louis was done. Patients with >70% asymptomatic carotid stenosis treated between September 2003 and April 2005 were identified. CEA was the first therapeutic consideration in all patients. CAS was reserved for high-risk patients. Thirty-day outcomes of stroke or death were recorded. During this time interval, 248 patients were treated including with 93 CAS and with 145 CEA. Symptomatic or clinically detected adverse outcomes such as myocardial infarction (MI), arrhythmia, renal failure, or pulmonary complications were noted but were not the primary end points of this review. This study addresses only the periprocedural outcomes of CEA and CAS in asymptomatic patients. No data >30-day follow-up are included.

RESULTS

During this period, 93 CAS and 145 CEA procedures were done in asymptomatic patients. Patient characteristics in both groups were similar. Carotid protection devices were used in 91.4% of CAS patients. The results in the CAS group showed one death (1.1%) and one stroke (1.1%). In the CEA group, three strokes occurred (2.1%, P = 0.9999), one associated with death (0.7%, P = 0.9999). The CAS group had 1.34 +/- 0.83 risk factors vs 0.39 +/- 0.58 in the CEA group (P < .0001). Median CAS and CEA length of stay was 1 day.

CONCLUSIONS

CAS for asymptomatic carotid stenosis demonstrated equivalent outcomes compared with CEA, despite CAS being reserved for use in a disadvantaged subset of high-risk patients owing to anatomic risk factors or medical comorbidities. These results suggest CAS should be considered a reasonable treatment option in the high-risk but asymptomatic patient. Enthusiasm for CAS should be tempered by the recognition that long-term outcomes in CAS-treated asymptomatic patients remain unknown.

Assessment of short-term outcomes for protected carotid angioplasty with stents using recent evidence

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery stenosis is an important risk factor and etiology of stroke. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is the gold standard for the treatment of carotid artery stenosis; however, there are potential benefits to adopting the use of carotid artery stenting (CAS) with protection devices. A number of large protected CAS (PCAS) trials are underway, but final results are still several years away. In the interim, numerous PCAS studies have recently been published, and the aim of this study was to combine the published results and examine the outcomes and safety of PCAS.

METHODS

Electronic, manual, and bibliographic searches of PubMed and PreMedline were conducted. Proportion differences were calculated for the periprocedural (30-day) outcomes of any stroke and any stroke or death.

RESULTS

More than 400 articles were identified. Only 26 studies met the inclusion criteria, resulting in the inclusion of 2,992 patients treated with PCAS. Within this patient group, the pooled perioperative PCAS rate of any type of stroke was 2.4% +/- 0.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]). The 30-day minor stroke rate was 1.1% +/- 0.2% (95% CI), and the 30-day major stroke rate was 0.6% +/- 0.2% (95% CI). The 30-day mortality rate was 0.9% +/- 0.4% (95% CI).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates relatively low rates of reported perioperative adverse events in PCAS. Selective use of PCAS to treat carotid artery stenosis in those at highest risk for surgical complications is appropriate until the randomized trials of CEA vs PCAS provide concurrent short- and long-term outcome data.

The Role of Carotid Endarterectomy in the Endovascular Era

OBJECTIVE

Carotid artery angioplasty and stenting (CAS) has been proposed as an alternative to surgery for patients with high-grade symptomatic carotid disease. The purpose of this study was to determine the proportion of patients that were suitable for each type of intervention and to analyse the reasons that precluded stenting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a prospective observational study. All patients considered for intervention for carotid artery disease during an 18-month period were analysed. The management decision was recorded, as were the reasons for unsuitability for stenting.

RESULTS

Two hundred and sixty-eight patients' data were analysed, 224 had complete records. Forty-seven patients did not require intervention and received best medical treatment alone. One hundred and seventy-seven patients required intervention, 113 were suitable for stenting and 64 were not. In 51 patients stenting was preferred. Sixty-two patients were suitable for either stent or surgery. Sixty-four patients were unsuitable for stenting. Carotid tortuosity and proximal disease accounted for 70% of this group.

CONCLUSIONS

Current enthusiasm for carotid stenting might well be supported by the results of ongoing randomised-controlled clinical trials. However, this study highlights a significant proportion (64/177; 36%) of our patients is presently unsuitable for stenting. The common technical difficulties and limitations of stenting encountered in our unit are related predominantly to carotid anatomy.

Technical challenges in a program of carotid artery stenting

OBJECTIVES

Successful carotid artery stenting (CAS) involves gaining access to the common carotid artery, characterizing and crossing the lesion, deploying an anti-embolic device and stent, and retrieving the anti-embolic device. These steps are critical determinants of the complexity of the procedure. The frequency with which technical challenges are encountered during CAS is ill-defined. The purpose of this investigation was to review the incidence and types of technical challenges encountered during CAS and determine their effect on outcome.

METHODS

Data were prospectively collected for 194 consecutive CAS procedures (177 patients) and separated into group 1, standard CAS technique, and group 2, procedures with technical challenges requiring modifications to the technique. Technical challenges were defined as difficult femoral arterial access (aortoiliac occlusive disease), complex aortic arch anatomy (elongated or bovine arch, deep takeoff of the innominate artery, tandem stenoses (CCA, innominate artery), difficult internal carotid artery anatomy (tortuosity, high-grade stenosis), and circumferential internal carotid artery calcification. The incidence of technical challenges, types of technical modifications required, and effect on outcomes were determined.

RESULTS

Fifty technically challenging situations (26%) were encountered in 194 CAS procedures (group 2), which required advanced technical skills. Standard methods were used in the other 144 procedures (group 1, 74%). No significant differences in 30-day stroke and death rates were noted between the groups (group 1, 3.1%; group 2, 2.0%; P = .564).

CONCLUSIONS

Twenty-six percent of the procedures required a modification in the standard technique for successful CAS. Circumferential calcification and severe tortuosity continue to be relative contraindications to CAS. Recognition of these technical challenges and increasing facility with the methods to manage them will enable expanded use of CAS without increased morbidity and mortality.

Behandlung der arteriosklerotischen Karotisstenose: ein �berblick

Endarterectomy for extracranial carotid stenosis has proven to be the method of choice for symptomatic patients suffering from ischemia (NASCET, ECST). The effectivity of the operation for asymptomatic stenosis seems to be likely since the publication of the first results of the ACST trial. The safety and efficiency of carotid stenting has not been proven so far and has to be evaluated in randomized trials comparing surgery and endovascular treatment. We provide an overview of the current trials and try to define the role of carotid stenting.