Restenosis after Carotid Interventions and Its Relationship with Recurrent Ipsilateral Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Editor's Choice - Development of a Risk Prediction Nomogram for Carotid Re-Stenosis in the One Year RECAST Registry

OBJECTIVE

The long term benefit of carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) can be reduced by recurrent stroke related to in stent re-stenosis (ISR). An individualised predictive tool is needed to identify ISR events. A nomogram for individual risk assessment of ISR ≥ 70% after CAS is proposed.

METHODS

A national observational, prospective, multicentre registry was conducted between January 2015 and December 2020. Cohorts of patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic severe carotid stenosis who underwent CAS with a follow up of at least one year after CAS were included. Duplex ultrasound was used to assess in stent re-stenosis. Pre-operative factors were compared between the non-ISR and ISR groups. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression were used for variable selection. The nomogram was formulated and validated by concordance indices and calibration curves. An in stent re-stenosis risk table was generated for risk stratification.

RESULTS

A total of 354 patients were included in the analysis. The ISR rate of ≥ 70% was 7.6% (n = 27). Peripheral arterial disease (hazard ratio [HR] 3.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23 - 8.24, p = .017), anterior communicating artery absence (HR 3.38, 95% CI 1.27 - 8.94, p = .016), diabetes mellitus (HR 3.34, 95% CI 1.21 - 9.26, p = .020), female sex (HR 2.99, 95% CI 1.04 - 8.60, p = .041), and pre-procedure pathological ultrasound vasoreactivity (HR 3.87, 95% CI 1.43 -10.50, p = .008), as independent risk factors for ISR of ≥ 70%, were included in the nomogram. The concordance index at 12 and 24 months was 0.83. In low risk groups, ISR of ≥ 70% occurred in 4.8% of patients during follow up compared with 56.2% of patients in the high risk groups (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

The nomogram and risk evaluation score have good predictive ability for ISR. They can be used as practical clinical tools for individualised risk assessment.

Brazilian Angiology and Vascular Surgery Society Guidelines for the treatment of extracranial cerebrovascular disease

Extracranial cerebrovascular disease has been the subject of intense research throughout the world, and is of paramount importance for vascular surgeons. This guideline, written by the Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery (SBACV), supersedes the 2015 guideline. Non-atherosclerotic carotid artery diseases were not included in this document. The purpose of this guideline is to bring together the most robust evidence in this area in order to help specialists in the treatment decision-making process. The AGREE II methodology and the European Society of Cardiology system were used for recommendations and levels of evidence. The recommendations were graded from I to III, and levels of evidence were classified as A, B, or C. This guideline is divided into 11 chapters dealing with the various aspects of extracranial cerebrovascular disease: diagnosis, treatments and complications, based on up-to-date knowledge and the recommendations proposed by SBACV.

Assessment of Plaque Characteristics by Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasound and Stent Restenosis following Carotid Artery Stenting: A Retrospective Study

Background and objective: carotid artery stenosis contributes significantly to ischemic strokes, with management options including carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) ischemic stroke risk can be reduced. Controversies persist regarding their efficacy and factors influencing complications, and understanding the relationship between atherosclerotic plaque characteristics and stent restenosis after CAS is crucial. Methods: we conducted a retrospective study involving 221 patients who underwent CAS for symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. Comprehensive assessments of plaque morphology were performed using contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) before CAS. Patient demographics, including smoking status and diabetes, were also recorded. Stent restenosis was diagnosed using various imaging modalities, including ultrasound, angiography, and digital subtraction angiography (DSA). Results: plaque analysis using CEUS revealed a significant association between plaque grade and restenosis incidence (p < 0.001), particularly with grade 0 (11.1%) and grade 2 plaques (66.7%). Smoking was notably associated with plaque vascularization and restenosis (p < 0.001), while diabetes did not significantly impact plaque characteristics or restenosis risk (p > 0.05). The mean duration of restenosis was 17.67 months. Stenting was the most frequent treatment modality for restenosis (70.6%). However, no significant relationship was found between restenosis type and plaque morphology (p = 0.268). Furthermore, while no clear relationship was observed between plaque morphology and the type of restenosis, our findings underscored the importance of plaque characterization in predicting post-CAS outcomes. Conclusions: this study highlights the utility of CEUS in predicting stent restenosis following CAS. There was a significant association between stent restenosis within 12-24 months after the carotid stenting procedure and an elevated grade of plaque vascularization. Moreover, one of the main factors possibly determining the grade of plaque vascularization was smoking. Further research is warranted to elucidate the underlying mechanisms and refine risk stratification in this patient population.

Vascular stent with immobilized anti-inflammatory chemerin 15 peptides mitigates neointimal hyperplasia and accelerates vascular healing

Endovascular stenting is a safer alternative to open surgery for use in treating cerebral arterial stenosis and significantly reduces the recurrence of ischemic stroke, but the widely used bare-metal stents (BMSs) often result in in-stent restenosis (ISR). Although evidence suggests that drug-eluting stents are superior to BMSs in the short term, their long-term performances remain unknown. Herein, we propose a potential vascular stent modified by immobilizing clickable chemerin 15 (C15) peptides on the stent surface to suppress coagulation and restenosis. Various characterization techniques and an animal model were used to evaluate the surface properties of the modified stents and their effects on endothelial injury, platelet adhesion, and inflammation. The C15-immobilized stent could prevent restenosis by minimizing endothelial injury, promoting physiological healing, restraining the platelet-leukocyte-related inflammatory response, and inhibiting vascular smooth muscle cell proliferation and migration. Furthermore, in vivo studies demonstrated that the C15-immobilized stent mitigated inflammation, suppressed neointimal hyperplasia, and accelerated endothelial restoration. The use of surface-modified, anti-inflammatory, endothelium-friendly stents may be of benefit to patients with arterial stenosis. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Endovascular stenting is increasingly used for cerebral arterial stenosis treatment, aiming to prevent and treat ischemic stroke. But an important accompanying complication is in-stent restenosis (ISR). Persistent inflammation has been established as a hallmark of ISR and anti-inflammation strategies in stent modification proved effective. Chemerin 15, an inflammatory resolution mediator with 15-aa peptide, was active at picomolar through cell surface receptor, no need to permeate cell membrane and involved in resolution of inflammation by inhibiting inflammatory cells adhesion, modulating macrophage polarization into protective phenotype, and reducing inflammatory factors release. The implications of this study are that C15 immobilized stent favors inflammation resolution and rapid re-endothelialization, and exhibits an inhibitory role of restenosis. As such, it helps the decreased incidence of ISR.

Incidence and predictors of restenosis following successful recanalization of non-acute internal carotid artery occlusion in 252 cases

BACKGROUND

Data concerning restenosis following successful recanalization of non-acute internal carotid artery occlusion (ICAO) are scarce. This study was conducted to identify the incidence and predictors of restenosis following successful recanalization of non-acute ICAO.

METHODS

We reviewed the incidence of restenosis (defined as >70% restenosis or reocclusion) among 252 consecutive patients with successful recanalization of non-acute ICAO. Baseline, imaging, and surgery-related characteristics were analyzed to assess their association with restenosis. A scoring system was developed to identify high-risk patients for restenosis.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 12.6 months, restenosis occurred in 56 patients (22.2%), including 39 with reocclusion and 17 with >70% restenosis. The cumulative restenosis rate was 18.0% at 12 months and 24.1% at 24 months. The incidence of stroke was higher in patients with restenosis (25.0% vs 1.5%, P<0.01). Multivariate analysis showed occlusion length (5-10 cm vs <5 cm (hazard ratio (HR) 3.15, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.07 to 9.29); ≥ 10 cm vs <5 cm (HR 5.01, 95% CI 1.73 to 14.49)), residual stenosis ≥30% (HR 3.08, 95% CI 1.79 to 5.30), and internal carotid artery (ICA) wall collapse (HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.44) as independent predictors of restenosis. Point scores proportional to model coefficients were assigned, with scores ranging from 0 to 6. Patients scoring 3-6 had a 4.00 times higher chance of developing restenosis (95% CI 2.35 to 6.79) compared with those scoring 0-2.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly one in five patients experienced restenosis following successful recanalization of non-acute ICAO. Occlusion length, residual stenosis ≥30%, and ICA wall collapse were independently associated with restenosis.

An international, multispecialty, expert-based Delphi Consensus document on controversial issues in the management of patients with asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid stenosis

OBJECTIVE

Despite the publication of various national/international guidelines, several questions concerning the management of patients with asymptomatic (AsxCS) and symptomatic (SxCS) carotid stenosis remain unanswered. The aim of this international, multi-specialty, expert-based Delphi Consensus document was to address these issues to help clinicians make decisions when guidelines are unclear.

METHODS

Fourteen controversial topics were identified. A three-round Delphi Consensus process was performed including 61 experts. The aim of Round 1 was to investigate the differing views and opinions regarding these unresolved topics. In Round 2, clarifications were asked from each participant. In Round 3, the questionnaire was resent to all participants for their final vote. Consensus was reached when ≥75% of experts agreed on a specific response.

RESULTS

Most experts agreed that: (1) the current periprocedural/in-hospital stroke/death thresholds for performing a carotid intervention should be lowered from 6% to 4% in patients with SxCS and from 3% to 2% in patients with AsxCS; (2) the time threshold for a patient being considered "recently symptomatic" should be reduced from the current definition of "6 months" to 3 months or less; (3) 80% to 99% AsxCS carries a higher risk of stroke compared with 60% to 79% AsxCS; (4) factors beyond the grade of stenosis and symptoms should be added to the indications for revascularization in AsxCS patients (eg, plaque features of vulnerability and silent infarctions on brain computed tomography scans); and (5) shunting should be used selectively, rather than always or never. Consensus could not be reached on the remaining topics due to conflicting, inadequate, or controversial evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

The present international, multi-specialty expert-based Delphi Consensus document attempted to provide responses to several unanswered/unresolved issues. However, consensus could not be achieved on some topics, highlighting areas requiring future research.

Prevention of in-stent restenosis with drug-eluting balloons in patients with postirradiated carotid stenosis accepting percutaneous angioplasty and stenting

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the technical safety and outcome of in-stent restenosis (ISR) prevention with drug-eluting balloon (DEB) in patients with postirradiated carotid stenosis (PIRCS) undergoing percutaneous angioplasty and stenting (PTAS).

METHODS

Between 2017 and 2021, we prospectively recruited patients with severe PIRCS for PTAS. They were randomly separated into two groups based on endovascular techniques performed with and without DEB. Preprocedural and early postprocedural (within 24 hours) MRI, short-term ultrasonography (6 months after PTAS), and long-term CT angiography (CTA)/MR angiography (MRA), 12 months after PTAS, were performed. Technical safety was evaluated based on periprocedural neurological complications and the number of recent embolic ischemic lesions (REIL) in the treated brain territory on diffusion-weighted imaging of early postprocedural MRI.

RESULTS

Sixty-six (30 with and 36 without DEB) subjects were enrolled, with one failure in techniques. For 65 patients in the DEB versus conventional groups, technical neurological symptoms within 1 month (1/29 (3.4%) vs 0/36; P=0.197) and REIL numbers within 24 hours (1.0±2.1 vs 1.3±1.5; P=0.592) after PTAS showed no differences. Peak systolic velocity (PSVs) on short-term ultrasonography was significantly higher in the conventional group (104.13±42.76 vs .81.95±31.35; P=0.023). The degree of in-stent stenosis (45.93±20.86 vs 26.58±8.75; P<0.001) was higher, and there were more subjects (n=8, 38.9% vs 1, 3.4%; P=0.029) with significant ISR (≥ 50%) in the conventional group than in the DEB group on long-term CTA/MRA.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed similar technical safety of carotid PTAS with and without DEBs. The number of cases of significant ISR were fewer and the degree of stenosis of ISR was less in primary DEB-PTAS of PIRCS than for conventional PTAS in the 12-month follow-up.

Role of carotid duplex in the assessment of carotid artery restenosis after endarterectomy or stenting

Introduction

Redo carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) are often performed when there is evidence of post-procedural restenosis. The incidence of restenosis after carotid reconstruction is not negligible, ranging from 5 to 33%. The diagnosis of significant internal carotid artery (ICA) restenosis is usually based on duplex ultrasound (US) criteria, mostly on peak-systolic flow velocity (PSV). However, there have been no generally accepted duplex US criteria for carotid restenosis after CAS or CEA.

Methods

In this systematic review, the PubMed/ Medline and Scopus databases were screened to find trials that reported duplex US criteria for significant restenosis after CEA and/or CAS. Only those reports were analyzed in which the restenoses were also assessed by CT/MR or digital subtraction angiography as comparators for duplex US.

Results

Fourteen studies met the predetermined search criteria and were included in this review. In most studies, PSV thresholds for significant in-stent ICA restenosis after CAS were higher than those for significant stenosis in non-procedurally treated (native) ICA. Many fewer studies investigated the US criteria for ICA restenosis after CEA. Despite the heterogeneous data, there is a consensus to use higher flow velocity thresholds for assessment of stenosis in stented ICA than in native ICA; however, there have been insufficient data about the flow velocity criteria for significant restenosis after CEA. Although the flow velocity thresholds for restenosis after CAS and CEA seem to be different, the large studies used the same duplex criteria to define restenosis after the two procedures. Moreover, different studies used different flow velocity thresholds to define ICA restenosis, leading to variable restenosis rates.

Discussion

We conclude that (1) further examinations are warranted to determine appropriate duplex US criteria for restenosis after CAS and CEA, (2) single duplex US parameter cannot be used to reliably determine the degree of ICA restenosis, (3) inappropriate US criteria used in large studies may have led to false restenosis rates, and (4) studies are required to determine if there is a benefit from redo carotid artery procedure, such as redo-CEA or redo-CAS, starting with prospective risk stratification studies using current best practice non-invasive care alone.

Comparison of carotid endarterectomy and repeated carotid angioplasty and stenting for in-stent restenosis (CERCAS trial): a randomised study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

In-stent restenosis (ISR) belongs to an infrequent but potentially serious complication after carotid angioplasty and stenting in patients with severe carotid stenosis. Some of these patients might be contraindicated to repeat percutaneous transluminal angioplasty with or without stenting (rePTA/S). The purpose of the study is to compare the safety and effectiveness of carotid endarterectomy with stent removal (CEASR) and rePTA/S in patients with carotid ISR.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with carotid ISR (≥80%) were randomly allocated to the CEASR or rePTA/S group. The incidence of restenosis after intervention, stroke, transient ischaemic attack myocardial infarction and death 30 days and 1 year after intervention and restenosis 1 year after intervention between patients in CEASR and rePTA/S groups were statistically evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 31 patients were included in the study; 14 patients (9 males; mean age 66.3±6.6 years) were allocated to CEASR and 17 patients (10 males; mean age 68.8±5.6 years) to the rePTA/S group. The implanted stent in carotid restenosis was successfully removed in all patients in the CEASR group. No clinical vascular event was recorded periproceduraly, 30 days and 1 year after intervention in both groups. Only one patient in the CEASR group had asymptomatic occlusion of the intervened carotid artery within 30 days and one patient died in the rePTA/S group within 1 year after intervention. Restenosis after intervention was significantly greater in the rePTA/S group (mean 20.9%) than in the CEASR group (mean 0%, p=0.04), but all stenoses were <50%. Incidence of 1-year restenosis that was ≥70% did not differ between the rePTA/S and CEASR groups (4 vs 1 patient; p=0.233).

CONCLUSION

CEASR seems to be effective and save procedures for patients with carotid ISR and might be considered as a treatment option.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05390983.

Society for Vascular Surgery duplex ultrasound surveillance guidelines are safe and cost effective for transcarotid artery revascularization

BACKGROUND

Carotid duplex ultrasound (CDUS) examination is used in the long-term surveillance after transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR). The objective of this study was to evaluate the usefulness and cost effectiveness of post-TCAR CDUS surveillance regimens in monitoring for in-stent restenosis (ISR) and associated stroke risk at a single-center community institution.

METHODS

CDUS data were collected retrospectively from patients who had undergone TCAR between January 2017 and January 2023. ISR >50% was defined as a peak systolic velocity (PSV) of >220 cm/s and an internal carotid artery (ICA) to common carotid velocity ratio of >2.7. ISR >80% was defined as a PSV of >340 cm/s and an ICA/common carotid artery ratio of >4.15. Study outcomes included incidences of ISR, reintervention, transient ischemic attacks (TIAs), strokes, and mortality. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was done to calculate the rates of freedom from ISR.

RESULTS

During the study period, 108 TCAR stents were deployed in 104 patients. Eight patients were excluded in analysis or lost to follow-up. Preoperatively, 62% of patients had >80% stenosis, and 39% were symptomatic. No intraprocedural complications were noted. One patient suffered an immediate postoperative dissection. Eight stents (8%) experienced ISR progression from <50% to >50%. Three of the eight had further ISR progression to >80%. One patient had high-grade ISR and a contralateral ICA occlusion that warranted reintervention. There were no occurrences of postoperative TIAs, strokes, or TCAR-related deaths. Rates of freedom from ISR progression from <50% to >50% were 97.4%, 95.9%, 90.9%, 88.2%, and 88.2% at 6, 12, 24, 36, and 42 months, respectively. Rates of freedom from ISR >80% were 100%, 100%, 98.5%, 95.5%, and 95.5% at the same time points. Patients with >50% ISR tended to be females with hyperlipidemia. In addition, they had higher average lesion lengths and lower rates of postdilation balloon angioplasty. The 5-year estimated surveillance cost in this cohort using the Society for Vascular Surgery 2022, and 2018 guidelines, as well as our current protocol would be $113,853, $221,382, and $193,207, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed a low incidence of ISR progression, as well as no TIA, stroke, or TCAR-related deaths, highlighting the safety and efficacy of TCAR. Post-TCAR CDUS examination using the updated Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines are safe and cost effective. Patients with contralateral occlusion or stenosis, or who have significant risk factors, should have more frequent surveillance regimens.

Safety Evaluation of Primary Carotid Stenting: Transcranial Doppler and MRI

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Cerebral emboli are generated by every step of standard carotid angioplasty and stenting. Primary carotid stenting (PCS) is a technique in which the use of balloon angioplasty (BA) is minimized to decrease the embolic load. The primary aim of this study is to establish the number of emboli generated by each step of primary stenting and determine the relationship to new diffusion (DWI) lesions on subsequent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).

METHODS

Eighty-five patients with severe, symptomatic carotid stenosis were prospectively recruited and underwent carotid stenting. Intraoperative transcranial Doppler was performed in 77 patients. The number and size of microemboli for each of seven procedural steps were recorded. Correlation was made with the number and location of new DWI lesions.

RESULTS

PCS was performed in 73 patients. BA was required in 12 patients. The mean number of microemboli was 114, and most microemboli were generated by stent deployment, followed by BA. Balloon techniques generated significantly more emboli than primary stenting (p = 0.017). There was a significant relationship between total microemboli and new DWI lesions (p = 0.009), and between new DWI lesions in multiple territories and the severity of pretreatment stenosis (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

During PCS, more emboli are generated by stent deployment than during any other stage of the procedure. When BA is necessary, more malignant emboli are generated but total emboli are unchanged and there is no difference in new diffusion lesions on MRI. PCS is safe and is not inferior to historical controls for the generation of new DWI lesions.

The clinical significance of serum HMGB1 in patients with lower extremity arteriosclerosis obliterans after interventional vascular restenosis

Objective

This study explored the correlation between serum HMGB1 levels and postoperative vascular restenosis in patients with lower extremity arteriosclerosis obliterans (LEASO).

Methods

A total of 362 patients LEASO who received vascular intervention were recruited in this study. Serum HMGB1 levels were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify the influencing factors associated with vascular restenosis. The R procedure was used to create nomogram model. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to determine the predictive value of serum HMGB1 and nomogram model for vascular restenosis.

Results

Of the 362 LEASO patients included, 103 (28.45%) developed restenosis within 6 months of postoperative follow-up. Postoperative HMGB1 levels were significantly higher in patients with restenosis compared to those with non-restenosis. Postoperative HMGB1 levels were significantly and positively correlated with the severity of postoperative restenosis (r = 0.819). The AUC of postoperative HMGB1 for the diagnosis of postoperative restenosis was 0.758 (95% CI: 0.703-0.812), with a sensitivity and specificity of 56.31% and 82.24%, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that diabetes, smoking, regular postoperative medication, increased fibrinogen, decreased red blood cells, increased hs-CRP, and increased postoperative HMGB1 were independently associated with postoperative restenosis in patients with LEASO. The C-index of the nomogram prediction model constructed based on the seven influencing factors mentioned above was 0.918. The nomogram model was significantly more predictive of postoperative restenosis in LEASO patients compared with a single postoperative HMGB1 (AUC: 0.918, 95% CI: 0.757-0.934).

Conclusion

Postoperative serum HMGB1 is an independent risk factor associated with postoperative vascular restenosis in patients with LEASO, and a novel nomogram model based on postoperative serum HMGB1 combined with clinical characteristics may help to accurately predict the risk of postoperative restenosis in patients with LEASO.

In-Stent Stenosis After Pipeline Embolization Device in Intracranial Aneurysms: Incidence, Predictors, and Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

In-stent stenosis (ISS) is a delayed complication that can occur after pipeline embolization device use when treating intracranial aneurysms (IAs).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of ISS.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, multicenter, observational study. All patient data were collected from a PLUS registry study. We collected data from patients with IA who completed digital subtraction angiography at follow-up and divided patients into "non-ISS," "mild ISS," or "severe ISS" groups. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted to determine predictors of ISS.

RESULTS

A total of 1171 consecutive patients with 1322 IAs participated in this study. Angiographic follow-up was available for 662 patients with 728 IAs, and the mean follow-up time was 9 months. ISS was detected in 73 cases (10.03%), including 61 mild ISS cases and 12 severe ISS cases. Univariate and multivariable analysis demonstrated that current smoking history (mild ISS: OR 2.15, 95% CI 1.122-4.118, P = .021; severe ISS: OR 5.858, 95% CI 1.186-28.93, P = .030) and cerebral atherosclerosis (mild ISS: OR 5.694, 95% CI 3.193-10.15, P = .001; severe ISS: OR 6.103, 95% CI 1.384-26.91, P = .017) were independent predictors of ISS. Compared with the other groups, the severe ISS group had higher rate of ischemic stroke (33.3%).

CONCLUSION

ISS occurs in approximately 10.03% of cases at a mean follow-up of 9 months. Statistically, current smoking history and cerebral atherosclerosis are the main predictors of ISS. Severe ISS may be associated with higher risk of neurological ischemic events in patients with IA after pipeline embolization device implantation.

Guideline on carotid surgery for stroke prevention: updates from the Italian Society of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery. A trend towards personalized medicine

BACKGROUND

This guideline (GL) on carotid surgery as updating of "Stroke: Italian guidelines for Prevention and Treatment" of the ISO-SPREAD Italian Stroke Organization-Group, has recently been published in the National Guideline System and shared with the Italian Society of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery (SICVE) and other Scientific Societies and Patient's Association.

METHODS

GRADE-SIGN version, AGREE quality of reporting checklist. Clinical questions formulated according to the PICO model. Recommendations developed based on clinical questions by a multidisciplinary experts' panel and patients' representatives. Systematic reviews performed for each PICO question. Considered judgements filled by assessing the evidence level, direction, and strength of the recommendations.

RESULTS

The panel provided indications and recommendations for appropriate, comprehensive, and individualized management of patients with carotid stenosis. Diagnostic and therapeutic processes of the best medical therapy, carotid endarterectomy (CEA), carotid stenting (CAS) according to the evidences and the judged opinions were included. Symptomatic carotid stenosis in elective and emergency, asymptomatic carotid stenosis, association with ischemic heart disease, preoperative diagnostics, types of anesthesia, monitoring in case of CEA, CEA techniques, comparison between CEA and CAS, post-surgical carotid restenosis, and medical therapy are the main topics, even with analysis of uncertainty areas for risk-benefit assessments in the individual patient (personalized medicine [PM]).

CONCLUSIONS

This GL updates on the main recommendations for the most appropriate diagnostic and medical-surgical management of patients with atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis to prevent ischemic stroke. This GL also provides useful elements for the application of PM in good clinical practice.

Rates of Progression of Carotid In-Stent Stenosis and Clinical Outcome

BACKGROUND

We previously reported the incidence of ≥50% and ≥80% carotid in-stent stenosis. This study will analyze the rates of progression of in-stent stenosis and clinical outcome at later follow-up.

PATIENT POPULATION AND METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of 450 transfemoral carotid artery stentings (TfCAS) at a later follow-up (a mean of 70 months). Progression of in-stent stenosis was defined as advancing to a higher severity of disease, i.e. <50% to ≥50% or ≥50% to ≥80%. A Kaplan Meier Analysis was used to estimate the rate of progression from <50% to ≥50%, ≥50% to ≥80%, overall rates of ≥50% and ≥80% in-stent stenosis, and survival at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years.

RESULTS

At a mean follow-up of 70.3 months (range: 1-222 months), 121/446 (27%) had ≥50% and 39 (8.7%) had ≥80% in-stent stenosis. Of those patients whose first duplex was normal or <50% (406), 82 progressed from normal/<50% to ≥50% in-stent stenosis. 82/406 (20.2%) of those that were normal or <50% in-stent stenosis progressed to ≥50% in-stent stenosis at a mean of 51.7 months (range: 1-213) and 14/121 (11.6%) of those with ≥50% stenosis progressed to ≥80% at a mean of 33.6 months (range: 6-89 months). Ten out of 82 (12%) of those who progressed from <50 to ≥50% had a neuro event (8 TIAs and 2 strokes). Two out of 14 (14.3%) of those that progressed from ≥50% to ≥80% had transient ischemic attacks (TIA), while the remaining patients were asymptomatic. Nine out of 39 patients (23%) with ≥80% in-stent stenosis had neurological events (eight TIAs and one contralateral stroke). Overall 13/121 patients with late ≥50% restenosis had a neurologic event (10.7%) (ten ipsilateral TIA, two ipsilateral stroke, and one contralateral stroke), i.e. 12 patients developed ipsilateral TIA/stroke out of 446 (2.7%) at a mean follow up of 70 months. Rates of freedom from <50% to ≥50% in-stent stenosis progression were 93%, 85%, 78%, and 66% at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years; and for progression from ≥50% to ≥80% in-stent stenosis were 89%, 81%, and 77% at 1, 3, and 5 years, respectively. The overall rates of freedom for ≥50% in-stent stenosis were 86%, 77%, 71%, and 59%; and for ≥80% in-stent stenosis were 96%, 93%, 91%, and 84%; and the stroke survival rates were 95%, 80%, 63%, and 31% at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The rates of progression of carotid in-stent stenosis were modest, but had a low incidence of stroke events. Therefore, the utility of post-carotid artery stenting duplex surveillance should be selective and perhaps re-evaluated.

Carotid Endarterectomy for the Treatment of Carotid Near-Occlusion With Recurrent Symptoms

Objective

Report our preliminary experience of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for the treatment of carotid near-occlusion (CNO) with recurrent symptoms.

Materials and Methods

Retrospectively analyze the demographics, treatment detail, and outcomes data of 122 patients with CNO from 2014 to 2020. According to whether distal full collapse exists, patients were classified into the full collapse group and the non-full collapse group. The incidence of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and other variables were compared between the two groups.

Results

A total of 122 patients with CNO and recurrent symptoms were enrolled. The demographics were comparable between the two groups. Thirty-day incidence of primary endpoints was 1.85% in the full collapse group and 4.41% in the non-full collapse group. Twelve-month incidence of primary endpoints was 7.41% in the full collapse group and 4.41% in the non-full collapse group. One re-stenosis occurred in the non-full collapse group 8 months after CEA.

Conclusion

For patients with CNO with recurrent symptoms, CEA is not worse than the results described in historical control groups, despite whether distal full collapse exists. The shunt is important to avoid intraoperative hypoperfusion and postoperative hyperperfusion. The long-term results should be further evaluated.

Restenosis rates in patients with ipsilateral carotid endarterectomy and contralateral carotid artery stenting

Purpose

We aimed to evaluate the long-term outcome of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) in patients who underwent both procedures on different sides.

Methods

In this single-center retrospective study (2001–2019), 117 patients (men, N = 78; median age at CEA, 64.4 [interquartile range {IQR}, 57.8–72.2] years; median age at CAS, 68.8 [IQR, 61.0–76.0] years) with ≥50% internal carotid artery stenosis who had CEA on one side and CAS on the other side were included. The risk of restenosis was estimated by treatment adjusted for patient and lesion characteristics.

Results

Neurological symptoms were significantly more common (41.9% vs 16.2%, P<0.001) and patients had a significantly shorter mean duration of smoking (30.2 [standard deviation {SD}, 22.2] years vs 31.8 [SD, 23.4] years, P<0.001), hypertension (10.1 [SD, 9.8] years vs 13.4 [SD, 9.1] years, P<0.001), hyperlipidemia (3.6 [SD, 6.6] years vs 5.0 [SD, 7.3] years, P = 0.001), and diabetes mellitus (3.9 [SD, 6.9] years vs 5.7 [SD, 8.9] years, P<0.001) before CEA compared to those before CAS. While the prevalence of heavily calcified stenoses on the operated side (25.6% vs 6.8%, P<0.001), the incidence of predominantly echogenic/echogenic plaques (53.0% vs 70.1%, P = 0.011) and suprabulbar lesions (1.7% vs 22.2%, P<0.001) on the stented side was significantly higher. Restenosis rates were 10.4% at 1 year, 22.3% at 5 years, and 33.7% at the end of the follow-up (at 11 years) for CEA, while these were 11.4%, 14.7%, and 17.2%, respectively, for CAS. Cox regression analysis revealed a significantly higher risk of restenosis (hazard ratio [HR], 1.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05–3.10; P = 0.030) for CEA compared to that for CAS. After adjusting for relevant confounding factors (smoking, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, calcification severity, plaque echogenicity, and lesion location), the estimate effect size materially did not change, although it did not remain statistically significant (HR, 1.85; 95% CI, 0.95–3.60; P = 0.070).

Conclusion

Intra-patient comparison of CEA and CAS in terms of restenosis tilts the balance toward CAS.

Long Term Restenosis Rate After Carotid Endarterectomy: Comparison of Three Surgical Techniques and Intra-Operative Shunt Use

OBJECTIVE

Closure of the artery during carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can be done with or without a patch, or performed with the eversion technique, while the use of intra-operative shunts is optional. The influence of these techniques on subsequent restenosis is uncertain. Long term carotid restenosis rates and risk of future ipsilateral stroke with these techniques were compared.

METHODS

Patients who underwent CEA in the International Carotid Stenting Study were divided into patch angioplasty, primary closure, or eversion endarterectomy. Intra-operative shunt use was reported. Carotid duplex ultrasound was performed at each follow up. Primary outcomes were restenosis of ≥ 50% and ≥ 70%, and ipsilateral stroke after the procedure to the end of follow up.

RESULTS

In total, 790 CEA patients had restenosis data at one and five years. Altogether, 511 (64.7%) had patch angioplasty, 232 (29.4%) primary closure, and 47 (5.9%) eversion endarterectomy. The cumulative incidence of ≥ 50% restenosis at one year was 18.9%, 26.1%, and 17.7%, respectively, and at five years it was 25.9%, 37.2%, and 30.0%, respectively. There was no difference in risk between the eversion and patch angioplasty group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45 - 1.81; p = .77). Primary closure had a higher risk of restenosis than patch angioplasty (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.06 - 1.98; p = .019). The cumulative incidence of ≥ 70% restenosis did not differ between primary closure and patch angioplasty (12.1% vs. 7.1%, HR 1.59, 95% CI 0.88 - 2.89; p = .12) or between patch angioplasty and eversion endarterectomy (4.7%, HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.06 - 3.35; p = .44). There was no effect of shunt use on the cumulative incidence of restenosis. Post-procedural ipsilateral stroke was not more common in either of the surgical techniques or shunt use.

CONCLUSION

Restenosis was more common after primary closure than conventionally with a patch closure. Shunt use had no effect on restenosis. Patch closure is the treatment of choice to avoid restenosis.

Outcomes of transfemoral carotid artery stenting and transcarotid artery revascularization for restenosis after prior ipsilateral carotid endarterectomy

OBJECTIVE

Restenosis after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) poses unique therapeutic challenges, with no specific guidelines available on the operative approach. Traditionally, transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TfCAS) has been regarded as the preferred approach to treating restenosis after CEA. Recently, transcarotid artery revascularization with a flow-reversal neuroprotection system (TCAR) has gained popularity as an effective alternative treatment modality for de novo carotid artery stenosis. The aim of the present study was to compare the contemporary perioperative outcomes of TfCAS and TCAR in patients with prior ipsilateral CEA.

METHODS

The Vascular Quality Initiative database was reviewed for patients who had undergone TfCAS and TCAR for restenosis after prior ipsilateral CEA between January 2016 and August 2020. The primary outcome was the 30-day composite outcome of stroke and death. The secondary outcomes included 30-day stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), myocardial infarction (MI), death, and composite 30-day outcomes of stroke, death, and TIA, stroke and TIA, and stroke, death, and MI. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate the outcomes of interest after adjustment for potential confounders and baseline differences between cohorts.

RESULTS

Of 3508 patients, 1834 and 1674 had undergone TfCAS and TCAR, respectively. The TCAR cohort was older (mean age, 71.6 years vs 70.2 years; P < .001) and less likely to be symptomatic (27% vs 46%; P < .001), with a greater proportion taking aspirin (92% vs 88%; P = .001), a P2Y12 inhibitor (89% vs 80%; P < .001), and a statin (91% vs 87%; P = .002) compared with the TfCAS cohort. Perioperatively, the TCAR cohort had had lower 30-day composite outcomes of stroke/death (1.6% vs 2.7%; P = .025), stroke/death/TIA (1.8% vs 3.3%; P = .004), and stroke/death/MI (2.1% vs 3.2%; P = .048), primarily driven by lower rates of stroke (1.3% vs 2.3%; P = .031) and TIA (0.2% vs 0.7%; P = .031). Among asymptomatic patients, the incidence of stroke (0.6% vs 1.4%; P = .042) and the composite of stroke/TIA (0.8% vs 1.8%; P = .036) was significantly lower after TCAR than TfCAS, and TCAR was associated with a lower incidence of TIA (0% vs 1%; P = .038) among symptomatic patients. On adjusted analysis, the TCAR cohort had lower odds of TIA (adjusted odds ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.74; P = .019).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing carotid revascularization for restenosis after prior ipsilateral CEA, TCAR was associated with decreased odds of 30-day TIA compared with TfCAS. However, the two treatment approaches were similarly safe in terms of the remaining perioperative outcomes, including stroke and death and stroke, death, and MI. Our results support the safety and efficacy of TCAR in this subset of patients deemed at high risk of reintervention.

[Redo surgery of carotid arteries in patients with contraindications to carotid angioplasty and stenting]

AIM

The study was aimed at analysing the in-hospital results of carotid re-endarterectomy and plasty of the zone of reconstruction with a biological patch in patients with haemodynamically significant restenosis and contraindications to carotid angioplasty with stenting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

During the period from 2008 to 2019, we operated on a total of 22 patients presenting with carotid restenosis and found to have contraindications to carotid angioplasty with stenting (an extended lesion, unstable neointima, calcification, pronounced tortuosity). Carotid re-endarterectomy was performed according to the classical technique. The time period after the first intervention to regression of pathology amounted to 48.5±21.3 months. All patients with clinical manifestations of angina pectoris were at the preoperative stage subjected to coronarography, as a result of which in one case a hybrid intervention was performed in the scope of percutaneous coronary intervention and carotid endarterectomy. The endpoints included death, myocardial infarction, acute impairment of cerebral circulation, and lesions of craniocerebral nerves.

RESULTS

Carotid re-endarterectomy was most often carried out according to the classical technique with plasty of the zone of reconstruction using a xenopericardial patch. Only in 1 case it was required to perform eversion carotid re-endarterectomy due to tortuosity of the internal carotid artery. During the in-hospital postoperative period no lethal outcomes, myocardial infarctions, nor haemorrhagic complications were registered. One patient was found to develop acute impairment of cerebral circulation. The most frequent complication was unilateral laryngeal paresis caused by lesions of craniocerebral nerves (n=3; 13.6%), with reversible neurological deficit. No cases of either thrombosis/restenosis or elevated pressure gradient in the area of implantation of the xenopericardial patch were revealed. The composite endpoint amounted to 18.2% (n=4).

CONCLUSION

The classical carotid re-endarterectomy was not accompanied by cases of thrombosis and restenosis during either the in-hospital or remote period of follow up, however turned out to be associated with a high frequency of the development of complications such as acute impairment of cerebral circulation and lesions of craniocerebral nerves.

[Transposition of internal carotid artery over hypoglossal nerve in eversion carotid endarterectomy]

OBJECTIVE

To analyze in-hospital and long-term results of eversion carotid endarterectomy (CEE) with transposition of internal carotid artery (ICA) over hypoglossal nerve.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A cohort prospective open-label study included 919 patients with severe ICA stenosis for the period from January 2017 to April 2020. The 1st group (n=172) included patients who underwent eversion CEE with ICA transposition over hypoglossal nerve; the 2nd group (n=747) - who underwent conventional eversion CEE. ICA transposition technique included standard mobilization of the carotid arteries, cross-clamping, arterial wall incision, removal of atherosclerotic plaque and ICA translocation above the hypoglossal nerve for subsequent anastomosis. All patients were examined every 6 months. Mean follow-up period was 17.5±6.9 months.

RESULTS

There were no significant between-group differences in cardiovascular morbidity. However, all complications occurred in the 2nd group (traditional eversion CEE). Nevertheless, incidence of adverse events was minimal and combined endpoint did not exceed 0.6% (n=5). Both groups were also comparable by overall incidence of cardiovascular events in long-term period. All ICA restenoses (over 70%) were symptomatic with similar incidence (4 (2.3%) vs. 18 (2.4%), respectively, p=0.83; OR 0.96; 95% CI 0.32-2.88). Mean restenosis-free period was 7.2±2.6 months. In case of significant restenosis, redo CEE with patch repair was performed. There were no cardiovascular complications. All cases of hypoglossal nerve injury occurred in the 2nd group (0 vs. 18 (100%), respectively; p=0.0001; OR 0.003; 95% CI=5.21-0.17) without ICA transposition over the hypoglossal nerve.

CONCLUSION

Eversion CEE with ICA transposition over the hypoglossal nerve ensures optimal conditions for successful redo CEE in case of restenosis. This technique facilitates ICA mobilization without hypoglossal nerve injury. This aspect is valuable for successful postoperative outcome and adequate quality of life. ICA transposition is not difficult and does not require additional experience. Transposition per se is not a risk factor of ICA restenosis. Thus, ICA transposition may be routinely recommended in patients eligible for eversion CEE.

Early and Long-Term Outcomes of Carotid Stenting and Carotid Endarterectomy in Women

Background: The role of carotid revascularization in women remains intensely debated because of the lower benefit and higher perioperative risks concerning the male counterpart. Carotid artery endarterectomy (CEA) and stenting (CAS) represent the two most valuable stroke prevention techniques due to large vessel disease. This study investigates the early and late outcomes in female sex in a real-world everyday clinical practice. Methods: Data were retrospectively analyzed from a single-center database prospectively compiled. A total of 234 procedures, both symptomatic and asymptomatic, were identified (98 CEAs and 136 CASs). Perioperative risks of death, cerebral ischemic events, and local complications were analyzed and compared between the two groups. Long-term outcomes were evaluated in overall survival, freedom from ipsilateral stroke/transient ischemic attack, and freedom from restenosis (>50%) and reintervention. Results: Women who underwent CAS and CEA did not differ in perioperative ischemic cerebral events (2.2 vs. 0%, p = 0.26) and death (0.8 vs. 0%, p = 1). Other perioperative and 30-day outcomes were similarly distributed within the two groups. Kaplan-Meier curves between CAS and CEA groups highlighted no statistical differences at 6 years in overall survival (77.4 vs. 77.1%, p = 0.47) of ipsilateral stroke/transient ischemic attack (94.1 vs. 92.9%, p = 0.9). Conversely, significant differences were showed in 6 years freedom from restenosis (93.1 vs. 83.3%, p = 0.03) and reinterventions (97.7 vs. 87.8%, p = 0.015). Conclusion: Our results revealed that both CEA and CAS have acceptable perioperative risk in women. Long-term outcomes highlighted favorable indications for both procedures, especially for CAS, which seemed to be an excellent alternative to CEA in female patients when performed by well-trained operators.

Treatment and Predictors of Recurrent Internal Carotid Artery In-Stent Restenosis

PURPOSE

We aimed to examine the effectiveness of different therapeutic options for and to identify the possible risk factors of recurrent internal carotid artery (ICA) in-stent restenosis (ISR).

METHODS

Forty-six ICA ISRs, which were reintervened at least once, were retrospectively analyzed regarding clinical and imaging characteristics, as well as invasive treatment type (percutaneous transluminal angioplasty [PTA] with a plain balloon, PTA with a drug-eluting balloon [DEB], re-stenting) used.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 29.5 months (IQR, 8.5-52.8 months) in patients who underwent reintervention for ICA ISR. Stent occlusion occurred in 3 patients (6.5%). One ISR recurrence was noted in 10 patients (21.7%); reintervention was carried out in 7 cases (7/10 [70%]; PTA, N = 5; PTA with a DEB, N = 1; re-stenting, N = 1), while 3 patients (3/10; 30%) received best medical treatment. Two ISR recurrences were observed in 3 patients (6.5%); all of them underwent reintervention (PTA, N = 1; PTA with a DEB, N = 2). Three ISR recurrences were seen in 1 patient (2.2%), who was treated with PTA. No recurrence was observed in those patients, who had DEB treatment. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed statin therapy to be a protective factor against recurrent ISR (OR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.03-0.84; P = .029).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that PTA with a DEB is the most effective for the treatment of recurrent ISR, and confirms the importance of statin use in patients who have had a carotid reintervention.

Duplex ultrasound findings and clinical outcomes of carotid restenosis after carotid endarterectomy

This study aimed to describe the duplex ultrasound (DUS) findings associated with carotid restenosis after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and to determine whether carotid restenosis is associated with the clinical outcomes of CEA. Between January 2007 and December 2016, a total of 660 consecutive patients who underwent 717 CEAs were followed up at our hospital with DUS surveillance for at least 3 years after CEA. These patients were analyzed retrospectively for this study. Following CEA, restenosis was defined as the development of ≥50% stenosis, diagnosed on the basis of DUS findings of the luminal narrowing and velocity criteria. The study outcomes were defined as restenosis of the ipsilateral carotid artery after CEA and late (>30days) fatal or nonfatal stroke ipsilateral to the carotid restenosis. During the median follow-up period of 74 months, the restenosis incidence was 2.8% (20/717), and there were 2 strokes (2/20, 10%) ipsilateral to the restenosis after CEA; reintervention was performed for 11 patients with carotid restenosis (55%). Within 2 years after CEA, restenosis was identified in 9 cases (45%, 9/20), and 8 reinterventions (72.7%, 8/11) were performed. According to DUS findings, the morphologic characteristics of carotid restenosis were different from the preoperative plaque morphology. Among the 20 carotid restenosis cases, we observed the following DUS patterns: homogenous isoechoic restenosis (n = 14, 70%), homogenous hypoechoic (n = 2, 10%), isoechoic with hypoechoic surface (n = 3, 15%), and hypoechoic with isoechoic surface (n = 1, 5%). Although 9 carotid restenosis patients received prophylactic reintervention to mitigate the progression of restenosis, the 2 symptomatic restenosis patients had isoechoic lesions with hypoechoic surfaces on DUS. On Kaplan-Meier survival analyses, in terms of stroke-free survival rates, there was a higher risk of stroke among patients with carotid restenosis compared with patients without restenosis, with a non-significant trend (P = 0.051). In conclusion, most carotid restenoses were identified within 2 years after CEA, and there was a non-significant trend toward a higher risk of stroke among patients with carotid restenosis.

Follow-up after carotid endarterectomy and stenting: What to look for and why

Duplex ultrasound testing after open or endovascular extracranial carotid artery interventions is a clinical practice guideline with a strong recommendation from the Society for Vascular Surgery. Neurologic outcomes are improved by the recognition of repair site stenosis or atherosclerotic disease progression in the unoperated carotid artery. The benefit of surveillance outweighs its risk because duplex testing is free of complications and accurate in the detection of internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis or occlusion. Surveillance for >70% ICA stenosis is recommended within 30 days of the procedure, then every 6 months for 2 years, and annually thereafter. Repair site and contralateral ICA stenosis classification should be based on angle-corrected pulsed Doppler measurements of peak systolic velocity (PSV), end-diastolic velocity (EDV), and the ratio of PSV at the stenosis to a proximal, nondiseased common carotid artery (CCA) segment (ICA/CCA ratio). Interpretation criteria of PSV >300 cm/s, EDV >125 cm/s, and ICA/CCA ratio >4 predicts >70% repair site stenosis. Endovascular intervention is recommended for a carotid repair site stenosis based on the occurrence of an ipsilateral neurologic event and appropriate anatomy for angioplasty. For asymptomatic restenosis, intervention is based on stenosis progression to elevated PSV and EDV >70% stenosis threshold values and the patient is deemed high risk for stroke due to contralateral ICA occlusion or incomplete functional patency of the circle of Willis.

Meta-analysis of redo stenting versus endarterectomy for in-stent stenosis after carotid artery stenting

OBJECTIVE

The development of in-stent restenosis (ISR) hinders the long-term patency of carotid artery stenting (CAS), yet no optimal treatment has been established. In the present study, we compared the outcomes of redo CAS (rCAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for ISR.

METHODS

A systematic search using the terms "in-stent restenosis," "carotid endarterectomy," and "carotid artery stenting" was conducted in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Studies reporting perioperative stroke, death, and other important complications of rCAS or CEA for ISR after previous CAS with four or more patients were included. Pooled and sensitivity analyses were conducted to synthesize and compare estimates of the outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies with 1057 patients who had undergone rCAS (n = 894) or CEA (n = 163) met the inclusion criteria. The CEA group had a significantly greater proportion of symptomatic patients (rCAS vs CEA, 30.4% vs 42.1%; P < .01). The duration from primary CAS to reintervention was relatively longer in the CEA group (rCAS vs CEA, median, 8.8 months [range, 3-26 months] vs 19.9 months [range, 0-54 months]). In the rCAS group, a greater proportion of patients had hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, and coronary artery disease and had received antiplatelet therapy before reintervention. Because of insufficient data or a low incidence, the only complications feasible for further analysis were restenosis, myocardial infarction, cranial nerve injury, and neck hematoma. No significant differences were found in the primary end point of mortality/stroke event-free rate (rCAS vs CEA, 99% vs 98%; P > .05) or other secondary end points (event-free restenosis, 100% vs 100%; event-free myocardial infarction, 100% vs 98%; event-free cranial nerve injury, 100% vs 98%; event-free neck hematoma, 100% vs 100% for rCAS vs CEA; P > .05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

rCAS is commonly used to treat patients with severe and/or symptomatic ISR after primary CAS. Although the endovascular approach is less invasive, both rCAS and CEA can be performed safely with similar short- and midterm outcomes of stroke, death, and surgery-related complications.

Family history and polygenic risk of cardiovascular disease: Independent factors associated with secondary cardiovascular events in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Family history (FHx) of cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a risk factor for CVD and a proxy for cardiovascular heritability. Polygenic risk scores (PRS) summarizing >1 million variants for coronary artery disease (CAD) are associated with incident and recurrent CAD events. However, little is known about the influence of FHx or PRS on secondary cardiovascular events (sCVE) in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA).

METHODS

We included 1788 CEA patients from the Athero-Express Biobank. A weighted PRS for CAD including 1.7 million variants was calculated (MetaGRS). The composite endpoint of sCVE during three years of follow-up included coronary, cerebrovascular and peripheral events and cardiovascular death. We assessed the impact of FHx and MetaGRS on sCVE and carotid plaque composition.

RESULTS

Positive FHx was associated with a higher 3-year risk of sCVE independent of cardiovascular risk factors and MetaGRS (adjusted HR 1.40, 95%CI 1.07-1.82, p = 0.013). Patients in the highest MetaGRS quintile had a higher 3-year risk of sCVE compared to the rest of the cohort independent of cardiovascular risk factors including FHx (adjusted HR 1.35, 95%CI 1.01-1.79, p = 0.043), and their atherosclerotic plaques contained more fat (adjusted OR 1.59, 95%CI, 1.11-2.29, p = 0.013) and more macrophages (OR 1.49, 95%CI 1.12-1.99, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

In CEA patients, both positive FHx and higher MetaGRS were independently associated with increased risk of sCVE. Moreover, higher MetaGRS was associated with vulnerable plaque characteristics. Future studies should unravel underlying mechanisms and focus on the added value of PRS and FHx in individual risk prediction for sCVE.

Intracranial Atherosclerotic Stenoses: Pathophysiology, Epidemiology, Risk Factors and Current Therapy Options

Intracranial atherosclerotic stenoses (ICAS) are one of the most common causes of first and recurrent cerebrovascular ischaemic events worldwide, with highest prevalence in Asian, Hispanic and African populations. Clinical trials have improved the understanding of epidemiology, risk factors and imaging characteristics of patients with ICAS. Current therapeutic approaches concerning these patients include management of risk factors, best medical therapy, potentially endovascular and rarely surgical therapy. In our review, we elucidate the current epidemiology and evidence in evaluation of risk factors and therapeutic options for providing favourable outcome for patients with ICAS.

Short- and Long-Term Outcomes Following Biological Pericardium Patches Versus Prosthetic Patches for Carotid Endarterectomy: A Retrospective Bicentric Study

BACKGROUND

Currently, there are various types of patches available on the market for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) with enlargement angioplasty, prosthetic, and biological patches including bovine pericardial patches. Despite the increasing use of these biological patches, there are little data in the literature comparing the results of these 2 types of patch. The purpose of this study is to compare the short- and long-term results of bovine pericardium patches (BPPs) with prosthetic patches (PPs) in carotid thromboendarterectomy.

METHODS

This study presents a retrospective analysis of all CEAs performed at Montpellier and Nîmes University Hospitals (France) in 2014 and 2015. Patients who underwent eversion were excluded. Preoperative, peroperative, and postoperative clinical and Doppler ultrasound results were collected and analyzed. The primary end point was the comparison of the restenosis rate between the BPP and the PP group. Secondary end points were the analysis of restenosis risk factors (type of patch, gender, renal failure, smoking, diabetes, arterial hypertension, dyslipidemia, and redo surgery were analyzed); the comparison of morbidity-mortality and infection between the BPP and the PP group and the comparison of morbidity-mortality between symptomatic and asymptomatic stenosis.

RESULTS

In total, 342 CEAs were performed: 168 (49%) with BPP and 174 (51%) with PP. Median follow-up was 30 months (interquartile range = 24). The stroke rate at day 30 was 3.22% and mortality at day 30 was 1.86%. There was no significant difference between groups concerning anyone of the variables of interest. At the end of follow-up, the restenosis rate >50% was 7.31% (6.45% for the BPP group vs. 8.22% for the PP group, P = 0.55). The severe restenosis rate (>70%) was 4.65% (5.16% for the BPP group vs. 4.11% for the PP group, P = 0.79). The univariate analysis identified renal failure (odds ratio = 2.69) as the main risk factor. The postoperative infection rate was 1.17% (0.59% for the BPP group vs. 1.75% for the PP group, P = 0.62).

CONCLUSIONS

The rates of stroke and postoperative death, bleeding, infection, and restenosis are comparable between BPPs and PPs in our study. The use of prosthetic or biological patches seems to deliver comparable outcomes. Further studies on larger samples are required.

Long-term Outcomes of Carotid Artery Stenting: A Single-center Experience

The long-term prophylactic effect of carotid artery stenting (CAS) remains incompletely elucidated. We evaluated outcomes of CAS at our institution to determine the safety and efficacy of CAS in real-world settings. We retrospectively analyzed 73 patients who underwent CAS from 2006 to 2013. Periprocedural results were compared between asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid stenosis groups. The primary endpoint was a composite of ipsilateral stroke, death, and carotid artery restenosis beyond 30 days and within 5 years after the first procedure. The average age was 72.2 years with a majority of male subjects (84.9%). Twenty-seven patients (37%) were asymptomatic. Incidence of periprocedural adverse events and mRS ≤2 at 30 days after CAS were not significantly different between groups (P = 0.14 and 0.07, respectively). CAS was unsuccessful in three patients and one post-procedural minor stroke occurred. Therefore, 69 patients were included in the long-term study. The rate of occurrence of the primary endpoint was 21.7%. Ipsilateral ischemic stroke occurred in one patient, which was due to cardiogenic embolus. Nine patients died, and cancer was the most frequent cause. Five in-stent restenoses were observed. All patients with restenosis underwent additional CAS without any occurrence of stroke. This study revealed the safety and long-term efficacy of CAS in a real-world setting. Routine follow-up is also important for detecting carotid artery restenosis.

Inhibitory Effect of Curcumin on Artery Restenosis Following Carotid Endarterectomy and Its Associated Mechanism in vitro and in vivo

Objective

The present study aimed to assess the effect of curcumin (Cur) on carotid artery restenosis following carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and its associated mechanism in vivo and in vitro.

Methods

Ang II was used to induce excessive proliferation of rabbit aortic smooth muscle cells (CCC-SMC-1) in order to establish a hemadostenosis cell model. Similarly, the animal model of carotid artery restenosis was established by carotid artery gas drying injury combined with high-fat feed prior to CEA. CCC-SMC-1 cells and animals were treated by Cur and its effects on neointimal hyperplasia, inflammation and oxidative stress were detected and observed. The proteins that were associated with the Raf/MEK/ERK pathway were detected in cells and rabbit carotid artery tissues.

Results

Cur inhibited the proliferation of smooth muscle cells and neointimal formation and reduced the inflammation and oxidative stress indices. Concomitantly, Cur reduced the phosphorylation of the Raf/MEK/ERK pathway proteins.

Conclusion

Cur could inhibit carotid restenosis following CEA by inhibiting the activation of the Raf/MEK/ERK pathway.

Carotid artery stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment of carotid artery stenosis

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery stenting is an alternative to carotid endarterectomy for the treatment of atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis. This review updates a previous version first published in 1997 and subsequently updated in 2004, 2007, and 2012.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the benefits and risks of stenting compared with endarterectomy in people with symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register (last searched August 2018) and the following databases: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Science Citation Index to August 2018. We also searched ongoing trials registers (August 2018) and reference lists, and contacted researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing stenting with endarterectomy for symptomatic or asymptomatic atherosclerotic carotid stenosis. In addition, we included RCTs comparing carotid artery stenting with medical therapy alone.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

One review author selected trials for inclusion, assessed trial quality and risk of bias, and extracted data. A second review author independently validated trial selection and a third review author independently validated data extraction. We calculated treatment effects as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), with endarterectomy as the reference group. We quantified heterogeneity using the I² statistic and used GRADE to assess the overall certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 22 trials involving 9753 participants. In participants with symptomatic carotid stenosis, compared with endarterectomy stenting was associated with a higher risk of periprocedural death or stroke (the primary safety outcome; OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.19; P < 0.0001, I² = 5%; 10 trials, 5396 participants; high-certainty evidence); and periprocedural death, stroke, or myocardial infarction (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.14 to 1.80; P = 0.002, I² = 0%; 6 trials, 4861 participants; high-certainty evidence). The OR for the primary safety outcome was 1.11 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.64) in participants under 70 years old and 2.23 (95% CI 1.61 to 3.08) in participants 70 years old or more (interaction P = 0.007). There was a non-significant increase in periprocedural death or major or disabling stroke with stenting (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.91; P = 0.08, I² = 0%; 7 trials, 4983 participants; high-certainty evidence). Compared with endarterectomy, stenting was associated with lower risks of myocardial infarction (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.94; P = 0.03, I² = 0%), cranial nerve palsy (OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.16; P < 0.00001, I² = 0%), and access site haematoma (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.68; P = 0.003, I² = 27%). The combination of periprocedural death or stroke or ipsilateral stroke during follow-up (the primary combined safety and efficacy outcome) favoured endarterectomy (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.85; P < 0.0001, I² = 0%; 8 trials, 5080 participants; high-certainty evidence). The rate of ipsilateral stroke after the periprocedural period did not differ between treatments (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.47; P = 0.77, I² = 0%). In participants with asymptomatic carotid stenosis, there was a non-significant increase in periprocedural death or stroke with stenting compared with endarterectomy (OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.97; P = 0.05, I² = 0%; 7 trials, 3378 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The risk of periprocedural death or stroke or ipsilateral stroke during follow-up did not differ significantly between treatments (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.84; P = 0.22, I² = 0%; 6 trials, 3315 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Moderate or higher carotid artery restenosis (50% or greater) or occlusion during follow-up was more common after stenting (OR 2.00, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.60; P = 0.02, I² = 44%), but the difference in risk of severe restenosis was not significant (70% or greater; OR 1.26, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.00; P = 0.33, I² = 58%; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Stenting for symptomatic carotid stenosis is associated with a higher risk of periprocedural stroke or death than endarterectomy. This extra risk is mostly attributed to an increase in minor, non-disabling strokes occurring in people older than 70 years. Beyond the periprocedural period, carotid stenting is as effective in preventing recurrent stroke as endarterectomy. However, combining procedural safety and long-term efficacy in preventing recurrent stroke still favours endarterectomy. In people with asymptomatic carotid stenosis, there may be a small increase in the risk of periprocedural stroke or death with stenting compared with endarterectomy. However, CIs of treatment effects were wide and further data from randomised trials in people with asymptomatic stenosis are needed.

Predictors of midterm high-grade restenosis after carotid revascularization in a multicenter national database

BACKGROUND

Restenosis after carotid revascularization is clinically challenging. Several studies have looked into the management of recurrent restenosis; however, studies looking into factors associated with restenosis are limited. This study evaluated the predictors of restenosis after carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) using a large national database.

METHODS

Patients undergoing CEA or CAS in the Vascular Quality Initiative data set (2003-2016) were analyzed. Patients with no follow-up (33%) and those who had prior ipsilateral CEA or CAS were excluded. Significant restenosis was defined as ≥70% diameter-reducing stenosis, target artery occlusion or peak systolic velocity ≥300 cm/s, or repeated revascularization. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and bootstrapped Cox regression models with stepwise forward and backward selection were used.

RESULTS

A total of 35,720 procedures were included (CEA, 31,329; CAS, 4391). No significant difference in restenosis rates was seen between CEA and CAS at 2 years (7.7% vs 9.4% [P = .09]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-1.25; P = .97). However, after adjustment for age, sex, and symptomatic status at the time of the index operation, CAS patients who had postoperative restenosis were more likely to have a symptomatic presentation (odds ratio, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.2-4.0; P = .01) and to undergo repeated revascularization at 2 years (HR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.3-2.4; P < .001) compared with patients who had restenosis after CEA. Predictors of restenosis after CAS included a common carotid artery lesion (HR, 1.65; 95% CI,1.06-2.57; P = .03), whereas age (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.84-0.99; P = .03) and dilation after stent placement (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.39-0.72; P < .001) were associated with decreased restenosis at 2 years. Predictors of restenosis after CEA included female sex (HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.38-1.74; P < .001), prior neck irradiation (HR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.66-3.30; P < .001), and prior bypass surgery (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.01-1.65; P = .04). On the other hand, factors associated with decreased restenosis after CEA included age (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.92-0.98; P < .001), black race (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.37-0.89; P = .01), patching (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47-0.79; P < .001), and completion imaging (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.52-0.95; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show no significant difference in restenosis rates at 2 years between CEA and CAS. Restenosis after CAS is more likely to be manifested with symptoms and to undergo repeated revascularization compared with that after CEA. Poststent ballooning after CAS and completion imaging and patching after CEA are associated with decreased hazard of restenosis; however, further research is needed to assess longer term outcomes and to balance the risks vs benefits of certain practices, such as poststent ballooning.

Treatment of Carotid Restenoses after Endarterectomy: A Retrospective Monocentric Study

BACKGROUND

To compare the different techniques for the treatment of carotid restenosis after carotid artery endarterectomy (CAE).

METHODS

Among 1,218 carotid surgeries carried out in our center between January 2010 and November 2017, 45 procedures were performed for carotid restenosis after CAE, including 11 by iterative conventional surgery and 34 with endovascular techniques (7 transluminal angioplasties alone [TLA], 9 carotid artery stenting [CAS], and 18 angioplasties with active balloons [drug-coated balloon {DCB}]). Perioperative data (cumulated rate of morbimortality [CRMM], duration of hospitalization) and postoperative results (survival, symptomatic restenoses > 50% or asymptomatic stenoses > 70% on ultrasound, reinterventions) were collected retrospectively and analyzed with Fisher's exact test. The long-term results were estimated according to the Kaplan-Meier estimator and were compared with the log rank test (P < 0.05 was regarded as significant).

RESULTS

There was one secondary death due to a massive postoperative stroke in the endovascular (ENDO) group. No significant difference regarding CRMM (2.9%, P = 0.756) between the iterative conventional surgery (open surgery; OS) and the ENDO groups of was observed. Three hematomas were found in the OS group versus one in the ENDO group (P = 0.04). The length of hospital stay was shorter in the ENDO group (P < 0.001). No difference was found between the ENDO group and the OS group regarding the two-year survival or the survival without recurrent restenosis (86 vs. 100%, log rank = 0.804, and log rank = 0.114). There were 5 restenoses >70% and two reinterventions in the ENDO group (P > 0.05). The comparison of the different endovascular techniques did not show significant differences regarding the CRMM, the one-year overall survival, the survival without recurrent restenosis, or the survival without reintervention (89% in the DCB and CAS groups vs. 100% in the percutaneous transluminal angioplasty [PTA] group, log rank = 0.286; 87% in the DCB group vs. 100% in the PTA and CAS groups, log rank = 0.137; and 94% in the DCB group vs. 100% in the PTA and CAS groups, log rank = 0.585, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, endovascular procedures are equivalent to iterative conventional surgery for the treatment of carotid restenoses in terms of major complications, news restenoses, or survival with less hematoma and a shorter duration of hospitalization. We however could not identify the best endovascular strategy in this indication, and a controlled study comparing the various endovascular strategies is proposed.

Follow-up of patients after revascularisation for peripheral arterial diseases: a consensus document from the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Aorta and Peripheral Vascular Diseases and the European Society for Vascular Surgery

Peripheral arterial diseases comprise different clinical presentations, from cerebrovascular disease down to lower extremity artery disease, from subclinical to disabling symptoms and events. According to clinical presentation, the patient's general condition, anatomical location and extension of lesions, revascularisation may be needed in addition to best medical treatment. The 2017 European Society of Cardiology guidelines in collaboration with the European Society for Vascular Surgery have addressed the indications for revascularisation. While most cases are amenable to either endovascular or surgical revascularisation, maintaining long-term patency is often challenging. Early and late procedural complications, but also local and remote recurrences frequently lead to revascularisation failure. The rationale for surveillance is to propose the accurate implementation of preventive strategies to avoid other cardiovascular events and disease progression and avoid recurrence of symptoms and the need for redo revascularisation. Combined with vascular history and physical examination, duplex ultrasound scanning is the pivotal imaging technique for identifying revascularisation failures. Other non-invasive examinations (ankle and toe brachial index, computed tomography scan, magnetic resonance imaging) at regular intervals can optimise surveillance in specific settings. Currently, optimal revascularisation surveillance programmes are not well defined and systematic reviews addressing long-term results after revascularisation are lacking. We have systematically reviewed the literature addressing follow-up after revascularisation and we propose this consensus document as a complement to the recent guidelines for optimal surveillance of revascularised patients beyond the perioperative period.

Cardiovascular surgery experience does not significantly improve patients' response to stroke

OBJECTIVES

Patients with a history of cardiovascular surgery are at risk of stroke, and immediately calling emergency medical services (EMS) after stroke onset is crucial to receiving effective reperfusion therapy. We aimed to determine the effect of a history of cardiovascular surgery on patients' ability to recognize stroke and intent to call EMS.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional community-based study from January 2017 to May 2017. A total population of 186,167 individuals, recruited from 69 administrative areas across China, was analyzed. Different multivariable logistic regression models were performed to identify the associations between cardiovascular surgical history and stroke recognition or intent to call EMS, respectively.

RESULTS

0.1% of the total population had a history of cardiovascular surgery. In the surgery group, the estimated stroke recognition rate (SRR) and correct action rate (CAR) were 84.9% and 74.7%, respectively. The prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors was significantly higher in the surgery group. Cardiovascular surgical history was not associated with recognition of stroke across different models. The surgery group was more likely to call EMS, but the difference was not significant after full adjustment (OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 0.99-1.98, p = .0572).

CONCLUSIONS

Cardiovascular surgical history does not influence patients' likelihood of calling EMS more often at stroke onset. Patients receiving cardiovascular surgeries should be counseled regarding stroke recognition, proper response to stroke, and the importance of controlling risk factors.

Editor's Choice - Overview of Primary and Secondary Analyses From 20 Randomised Controlled Trials Comparing Carotid Artery Stenting With Carotid Endarterectomy

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to carry out primary and secondary analyses of 20 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) with carotid artery stenting (CAS).

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of data from 20 RCTs (126 publications) was carried out.

RESULTS

Compared with CEA, the 30 day death/stroke rate was significantly higher after CAS in seven RCTs involving 3467 asymptomatic patients (odds ratio [OR] 1.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-2.64) and in 10 RCTs involving 5797 symptomatic patients (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.38-2.11). Excluding procedural risks, late ipsilateral stroke was about 4% at 9 years for both CEA and CAS, i.e., CAS was durable. Reducing procedural death/stroke after CAS may be achieved through better case selection, e.g., performing CEA in (i) symptomatic patients aged > 70 years; (ii) interventions within 14 days of symptom onset; and (iii) situations where stroke risk after CAS is predicted to be higher (segmental/remote plaques, plaque length > 13 mm, heavy burden of white matter lesions [WMLs], where two or more stents might be needed). New WMLs were significantly more common after CAS (52% vs. 17%) and were associated with higher rates of late stroke/transient ischaemic attack (23% vs. 9%), but there was no evidence that new WMLs predisposed towards late cognitive impairment. Restenoses were more common after CAS (10%) but did not increase late ipsilateral stroke. Restenoses (70%-99%) after CEA were associated with a small but significant increase in late ipsilateral stroke (OR 3.87, 95% CI 1.96-7.67; p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

CAS confers higher rates of 30 day death/stroke than CEA. After 30 days, ipsilateral stroke is virtually identical for CEA and CAS. Key issues to be resolved include the following: (i) Will newer stent technologies and improved cerebral protection allow CAS to be performed < 14 days after symptom onset with risks similar to CEA? (ii) What is the optimal volume of CAS procedures to maintain competency? (iii) How to deliver better risk factor control and best medical treatment? (iv) Is there a role for CEA/CAS in preventing/reversing cognitive impairment?