Peri-procedural brain lesions prevention in CAS (3PCAS): Randomized trial comparing CGuard™ stent vs. Wallstent™

Carotid Artery Stenting With Double-Layer Stent: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) in the treatment of significant stenosis is a cause of stroke due to both plaque prolapse and cerebral embolization. New types of stents with a double-layer structure have been designed to minimize plaque prolapse and embolization; these double-layer stents (DLSs) should be able to reduce the stroke risk; however, definite data on their performance are scarce in the literature.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed through PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Library, according to PRISMA guidelines; all studies on CAS with DLS (Roadsaver/Casper or CGuard) up to January 1, 2022, with a cohort of at least 20 patients were considered eligible. The present meta-analysis was approved and registered on PROSPERO register (CRD42022297512). Patients with tandem lesions or complete carotid occlusion were excluded from the study. The 30-day stroke rate after CAS was analyzed evaluating the preoperative symptomatic status and DLS occlusion. The estimated pooled rate of events was calculated by random effect model and moderators were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis for a total of 1955 patients. The estimated overall (95% confidence interval [CI]) stroke rate was 1.4% (0.9%-2.2%, I2 = 0%), which was not influenced by the type of DLS used: CGuard 0.8% (0.4%-1.8%, I2 = 0%) versus Roadsaver/Casper 1.5% (0.7%-3.2%, I2 = 0%), p=0.30. The 30-day estimated stroke rate was 1.5% (0.8%-2.9%, I2 = 0%) in asymptomatic and 1.9% (1.0%-3.6%, I2 = 0%) in symptomatic patients, with no influence by moderators. The 30-day DLS occlusion rate was 0.8% (0.4%-1.8%, I2 = 0%). The publication bias assessment identified asymmetry in the asymptomatic populations.

CONCLUSION

The overall 30-day stroke rate in CAS with DLS is low (1.4%), with similar results in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Acute occlusion of DLS is rare (0.8%). Further studies are necessary to reduce the publication bias for asymptomatic patients.

CLINICAL IMPACT

CAS with DLS is associated to a low rate of 30-day stroke in both symptomatic (1.9%) and asymptomatic (1.5%) patients. The type of DLS (CGuard or Roadsaver/Casper) did not affect the 30-day stroke rate.

Dual-layered micromesh stent technology for embolic prevention in carotid revascularization: technical experience and clinical outcomes from a high-volume interventional radiology center

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has become a cornerstone of carotid revascularization for stroke prevention. Despite the advantages of CAS, large-scale randomized trials involving prior (single-layer) first generation stents (FGS) demonstrated a higher risk of periprocedural cerebrovascular events compared to surgery. Dual-layer mesh-covered stents (DLSs) showed promising results in terms of 30-day embolic events in initial studies; larger-scale evidence is accumulating. This study aims to evaluate 30-day clinical efficacy of DLS against a closed-cell stent, based on large-volume data.

METHODS

The study center is part of the Italian National Outcomes Evaluation Program (PNE). CAS procedures performed between November 2017 and September 2023 were eneterd into a prospectively collected database. Our The primary endpoint was survival free of death, stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI) at 30 days. In addition, technical success and periprocedural major adverse clinical event rate (with a focus on stroke) were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Over a total of 1101 CAS procedures (745 males; mean age 79±7.8 years), 48.6% were symptomatic. Majority (80.2%) were treated with DLSs. Technical success was achieved in 98.9%. The FGSs group showed a significantly higher peri-procedural stroke rate when compared with CGuard and Roadsaver DLS: 4.59% vs. 1.18% vs. 2.63% (P=0.008); minor stroke rates were 4.13% vs. 0.83% and 0% P=0.01). The cumulative stroke, MI and death - free survival at 30 days was 97.46%. A statistically significant higher cumulative 30-day death/stroke/MI rate occurred in FGSs-treated patients compared to the CGuard and Roadsaver DLS-treated (6.42% vs. 1.42% and 2.63%, P=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of DLS in patients undergoing CAS in our large-volume center showed a high technical success rate and minimal cerebral embolic complications by 30 days. High volumes and an experienced interventional team may contribute to these favorable outcomes.

Changes in Cognitive Functions after Carotid Endarterectomy and Carotid Stenting: A Decade-Apart Comparison

BACKGROUND

This study investigates changes in cognitive function in patients with severe carotid stenosis who underwent carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) over two decades.

METHODS

We compared cognitive function within 30 days after the procedure in 267 patients (first 100 each for CEA and CAS in two periods: 2008-2012 and 2018-2022) in a single institution. Assessments used Adenbrooke's Cognitive Examination-Revised (ACE-R), the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Speech Fluency Test (SFT), and Clock Drawing Test (CDT), conducted before and 30 ± 2 days after surgery.

RESULTS

Patients (mean age 67.2 years, 70%+ carotid stenosis) exhibited different cognitive changes over periods. In 2008-2012, significant declines in MMSE (CEA, p = 0.049) and CDT (CAS, p = 0.015) were observed among asymptomatic patients. On the contrary, in 2018-2022, improvements were observed in ACE-R and MMSE for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients undergoing CEA and CAS.

CONCLUSION

Over a decade, advances in interventional techniques and patient management have reduced risks of cognitive decline in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis and also have improved cognitive functions in both symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals.

Prospective evaluation of acute cerebral injury by DW-MRI following transcarotid artery revascularization using a double-layer micromesh stent

BACKGROUND

Transcervical carotid artery revascularization (TCAR) has demonstrated a low overall stroke rate in carotid artery stenting (CAS). Furthermore, the use of a double-layer micromesh stent is expected to reduce embolization and plaque prolapse. The combination of TCAR and the double layer stent may lead to improved results compared to previously reported outcomes. The objective of this study is to present the findings of a prospective study including patients treated with the Roadsaver stent and TCAR.

METHODS

Between January 2017 and May 2022, 85 patients were enrolled. Every patient underwent TCAR with the Roadsaver stent. As per our protocol, a neurological examination and an ultrasound were performed within 24 hours before and after the procedure, and again 30 days after. A diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) was conducted 24 hours before the procedure and 48-72 hours after the procedure. The primary endpoint was the detection of new ischemic lesions on postoperative DW-MRI. The secondary endpoint was a composite of all strokes, death, and myocardial infarction within 30 days.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients (75.29%) were symptomatic, out of which 25 were treated within 14 days of the onset of the symptoms. Pre and postprocedural DW-MRI were performed in 83 patients. Postprocedural lesions were found in nine patients (10.84%). There were no strokes or death within 30 days, but two patients experienced a myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that the use of TCAR and the Roadsaver stent could be a safe alternative to carotid endarterectomy because it entails a low incidence of cerebral embolization, even in recently symptomatic and elderly patients.

Procedural embolic protection strategies for carotid artery stenting: current status and future prospects

INTRODUCTION

Carotid artery angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is an established procedure to treat carotid artery stenosis for either primary or secondary prevention of stroke. Randomized clinical trials have shown an increased risk of periprocedural cerebrovascular events with CAS compared with carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Several strategies have been proposed to mitigate this risk, including alternative vascular access site, proximal/distal embolic protection devices, and dual-layer stents, among others.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides a general overview of current embolic protection strategies for CAS. The phases of the procedure which can affect the early risk of stroke and how to reduce it with novel techniques and devices have been discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Innovations in device technologies have dramatically improved the safety and efficacy of CAS. To minimize the gap with surgery, a thorough, patient-oriented approach should be pursued. Endovascular technologies and techniques should be selected on an individual basis to address unique lesion characteristics and vascular anatomies. Meticulous pre-procedural planning, both clinical and anatomical, is needed to assess the embolic risk of each procedure. Only by having an in-depth understanding of the wide range of available endovascular devices and techniques, the operator will choose the most appropriate strategy to optimize CAS results.

Safety and Efficacy of Carotid Artery Stenting with the CGuard Double-layer Stent in Acute Ischemic Stroke

BACKGROUND

Double-layer stents show promising results in preventing periinterventional and postinterventional embolic events in elective settings of carotid artery stenting (CAS). We report a single-center experience with the CGuard stent in the treatment of acute ischemic stroke (AIS) due to symptomatic internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis or occlusion with or without intracranial occlusion.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all patients who received a CGuard stent in the setting of AIS at our institution. Neuroimaging and clinical data were analyzed with the following primary endpoints: technical feasibility, acute and delayed stent occlusion or thrombosis, distal embolism, symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) and functional outcome at 3 months.

RESULTS

In 33 patients, stenting with the CGuard was performed. Stent deployment was successful in all patients (28 with tandem occlusions, 5 with isolated ICA occlusion). Transient acute in-stent thrombus formation occurred in three patients (9%) without early stent occlusion. Delayed, asymptomatic stent occlusion was seen in 1 patient (3%) after 49 days. Asymptomatic periinterventional distal emboli occurred in 2 patients (6%), 1 patient experienced a transient ischemic attack 79 days after the procedure and 1 patient (3%) developed sICH. Favorable clinical outcome (mRS 0-2) at 3 months was achieved in 12 patients (36%) and the mortality rate was 24%.

CONCLUSION

The CGuard use in emergencies was technically feasible, the safety has to be confirmed by further multicentric studies.

Clinical Outcomes of Second- versus First-Generation Carotid Stents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Single-cohort studies suggest that second-generation stents (SGS; “mesh stents”) may improve carotid artery stenting (CAS) outcomes by limiting peri- and postprocedural cerebral embolism. SGS differ in the stent frame construction, mesh material, and design, as well as in mesh-to-frame position (inside/outside). Objectives: To compare clinical outcomes of SGS in relation to first-generation stents (FGSs; single-layer) in CAS. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies with FGSs and SGS (PRISMA methodology, 3302 records). Endpoints were 30-day death, stroke, myocardial infarction (DSM), and 12-month ipsilateral stroke (IS) and restenosis (ISR). A random-effect model was applied. Results: Data of 68,422 patients from 112 eligible studies (68.2% men, 44.9% symptomatic) were meta-analyzed. Thirty-day DSM was 1.30% vs. 4.11% (p < 0.01, data for SGS vs. FGS). Among SGS, both Casper/Roadsaver and CGuard reduced 30-day DSM (by 2.78 and 3.03 absolute percent, p = 0.02 and p < 0.001), whereas the Gore stent was neutral. SGSs significantly improved outcomes compared with closed-cell FGS (30-day stroke 0.6% vs. 2.32%, p = 0.014; DSM 1.3% vs. 3.15%, p < 0.01). At 12 months, in relation to FGS, Casper/Roadsaver reduced IS (−3.25%, p < 0.05) but increased ISR (+3.19%, p = 0.04), CGuard showed a reduction in both IS and ISR (−3.13%, −3.63%; p = 0.01, p < 0.01), whereas the Gore stent was neutral. Conclusions: Pooled SGS use was associated with improved short- and long-term clinical results of CAS. Individual SGS types, however, differed significantly in their outcomes, indicating a lack of a “mesh stent” class effect. Findings from this meta-analysis may provide clinically relevant information in anticipation of large-scale randomized trials.

Comparison of Restenosis Risk in Single-Layer versus Dual-Layer Carotid Stents: A Duplex Ultrasound Evaluation

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to report intermediate-term results of duplex ultrasound follow-up of carotid artery stenting performed with the dual-layer stent as compared to concurrent patients treated with other commercially available single-layer carotid stents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A single centre, retrospective, nonrandomized study including 162 non-consecutive patients with 199 implanted carotid stents treated over a 7-year period was conducted. Patients with at least one ultrasound examination after treatment were included. Procedural and follow-up data for patients treated with the dual-layer stent implantation (83 stents) vs first-generation carotid stents implantations (116 stents) were compared.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 24.0 months (IQR 10-32 months) for dual-layer stents and 27.5 months (IQR 10.3-59 months) for single-layer stents. The rate of severe restenosis was significantly higher in the dual-layer stent group than in the single-layer group (13.3% [11/83] vs 3.4% [4/116], p = 0.01). Seven reinterventions were performed in 5 patients with dual-layer stents. The rate of reintervention was significantly higher compared to no reinterventions in single-layer stents (6% [5/83] vs 0% [0/116], p = 0.012). Patients with restenosis had significantly higher presence of dyslipidaemia (100% [12/12] vs 63.3% [95/150], p = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world cohort of patients undergoing carotid artery stenting, the patients treated with low-profile dual-layer micromesh stent showed higher rates of restenosis and reinterventions compared to first-generation single-layer stents.

Association between carotid revascularization for asymptomatic stenosis and cognitive functions

Summary: Asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) can cause cognitive dysfunction, related to cerebral hypoperfusion and microemboli. These mechanisms could be treated by carotid revascularization, but the impact of carotid angioplasty stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) on cognitive functions remains unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to realize a report on the actual state of results about asymptomatic carotid stenosis revascularization and cognitive function. We performed a systematic literature review to analyze all studies assessing the impact of asymptomatic carotid stenosis revascularizations on cognitive functions. We reviewed all publications published in Medline database and Cochrane between January 2010 and January 2020 including subjects with a cognitive evaluation and receiving carotid revascularization for asymptomatic stenosis. We identified 567 records for review, and finally we included in the systematic review 20 studies about ACS revascularization and cognitive functions. Only observational studies analyzed the impact of CEA and CAS on cognitive functions. Thus, too heterogeneous data associated to the lack of randomized controlled trials with an evaluation of optimal medical treatment did not enable to affirm the interest of the revascularization management of ACS in cognitive domain. There was a lack of standardization and finally studies were too heterogeneous to conclude on the impact of carotid revascularization on cognitive functions. There is an urgent need to harmonize research in this domain in order to prevent and treat cognitive dysfunction related to ACS, especially in our society with an aging population.

Randomized Controlled Trial of Conventional Versus MicroNet-Covered Stent in Carotid Artery Revascularization

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare procedure-related ipsilateral cerebral embolism with a conventional (Acculink, Abbott Vascular) versus a MicroNet-covered (CGuard, InspireMD) stent in carotid artery stenting (CAS).

BACKGROUND

The MicroNet-covered stent may reduce periprocedural cerebral embolism in CAS, but level 1 evidence is lacking.

METHODS

A total of 100 consecutive patients were randomized 1:1 to filter-protected CAS using the Acculink or the CGuard device. The study was powered for its primary endpoint of at least 50% reduction in ipsilateral diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging lesion average volume 48 hours postprocedure (blinded external core laboratory analysis).

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics of the study groups were similar. Eighty-two (total volume = 18,212 mm³) diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging postprocedural cerebral lesions occurred in 26 Acculink-treated patients and 45 lesions (total volume = 3,930 mm³; 78.4% reduction) in 25 CGuard-treated patients. New cerebral lesion average volume was 171 mm³ vs 73 mm³ (P = 0.017) per affected patient and 222 mm³ vs 84 mm³ (P = 0.038) per lesion (Acculink vs CGuard). In lesion-affected patients, the average sum of lesion volumes was 701 mm³ vs 157 mm³ (P = 0.007). The Acculink significantly increased the risk for multiple (≥5) cerebral lesions (relative risk: 7.8; 95% CI: 1.3-14.9; P = 0.021). At 30 days, new permanent (fluid-attenuated inversion recovery) lesion prevalence was 3:1 (P < 0.001), with total permanent lesion volume 7,474 mm³ vs 574 mm³ (92.3% reduction with the CGuard). There were 6 vs 0 new ipsilateral lesions (P = 0.030) and 2 versus 0 strokes.

CONCLUSIONS

The MicroNet-covered stent significantly reduced periprocedural and abolished postprocedural cerebral embolism in relation to a conventional carotid stent. This is consistent with the MicroNet-covered stent's sustained embolism prevention, translating into cerebral protection not only during but also after CAS. The present findings may influence decision making in carotid revascularization. (The SIBERIA Trial [Acculink™ Versus CGuard™]; NCT03488199).

1-Year Results From a Prospective Experience on CAS Using the CGuard Stent System: The IRONGUARD 2 Study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the 1-year safety and efficacy of a dual-layered stent (DLS) for carotid artery stenting (CAS) in a multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND

DLS have been proved to be safe and efficient during short-term follow-up. Recent data have raised the concern that the benefit of CAS performed with using a DLS may be hampered by a higher restenosis rate at 1 year.

METHODS

From January 2017 to June 2019, a physician-initiated, prospective, multispecialty registry enrolled 733 consecutive patients undergoing CAS using the CGuard embolic prevention system at 20 centers. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of death and stroke at 1 year. Secondary endpoints were 1-year rates of transient ischemic attack, acute myocardial infarction, internal carotid artery (ICA) restenosis, in-stent thrombosis, and external carotid artery occlusion.

RESULTS

At 1 year, follow-up was available in 726 patients (99.04%). Beyond 30 days postprocedure, 1 minor stroke (0.13%), four transient ischemic attacks (0.55%), 2 fatal acute myocardial infarctions (0.27%), and 6 noncardiac deaths (1.10%) occurred. On duplex ultrasound examination, ICA restenosis was found in 6 patients (0.82%): 2 total occlusions and 4 in-stent restenoses. No predictors of target ICA restenosis and/or occlusion could be detected, and dual-antiplatelet therapy duration (90 days vs 30 days) was not found to be related to major adverse cardiovascular event or restenosis occurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world registry suggests that DLS use in clinical practice is safe and associated with minimal occurrence of adverse neurologic events up to 12-month follow-up.

Contemporary Results of Carotid Artery Stenting Using Low-Profile Dual-Metal Layer Nitinol Micromesh Stents in Relation to Single-Layer Carotid Stents

PURPOSE

To evaluate patients characteristics, procedural details, perioperative outcomes, and midterm results of carotid artery stenting (CAS) performed with the Roadsaver/Casper stent (Terumo Corp, Tokyo, Japan) as compared to concurrent patients treated with other commercially available carotid stents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a single-center, retrospective, nonrandomized study including 200 consecutive patients who underwent a total of 205 elective CAS procedures due to severe internal carotid artery stenosis between April 2015 and December 2018. Procedural data and outcomes for patients treated with the Roadsaver/Casper stent implantation (100 procedures, in 97 patients) vs first-generation carotid stents implantations (90 procedures, in 88 patients) were compared. Fifteen patients were treated with CGuard carotid stent (InspireMD, Tel Aviv, Israel), and outcomes were reported separately. Primary endpoints were the occurrence of major adverse cerebrovascular events (MACE), including death, ipsilateral stroke, and transitory ischemic attack (TIA). Secondary endpoints were the rate of intrastent stenosis, the need for reintervention, and the occurrence of adverse cardiovascular events, including myocardial infarction, arrhythmias, and need for inotropic support.

RESULTS

No difference in demographics and preoperative risk factors were observed between patients treated with and without the Roadsaver/Casper stent. The mean procedure time was shorter in the Roadsaver/Casper group (40.7±16.9 vs 49.4±27.3 minutes; p=0.008), while radial percutaneous access was more frequent (24% vs 5%; p<0.001). The rate of stroke/TIA/death at 30 days was 3% in the Roadsaver group vs 1% in the first-generation stent group (p=0.623). The primary patencyrate was 100% and 93.4% at 1- and 3-year of follow-up in the Roadsaver/Casper groupand 99% and 94.3% in the other stent group, respectively (p=0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world cohort of patients undergoing CAS, the Roadsaver/Casper stent was used to treat more symptomatic and vulnerable carotid plaques as compared to other carotid stents. Nevertheless, patients treated with this low-profile dual-layer micromesh stent showed low events rates at both 30 days and follow-up, similar to that observed for other stents.

Is it possible to prevent cerebral embolization by improving the design and technology of carotid stent implantation?

INTRODUCTION

The prevention of atherosclerotic plaque fragmentation during carotid artery stenting is a fundamental problem in decreasing the risk of disability of patients. The goal of this review is to clarify whether the stent design can have a decisive impact on the rate of intraoperative and postoperative complications.

AREAS COVERED

Different designs of the carotid stents are briefed and the advantages and disadvantages of different stent designs are discussed as well as the results of their clinical use. Various solutions are presented to reduce cerebral embolism during carotid artery stenting.

EXPERT OPINION

There is no conclusive evidence for the benefits of closed cell and hybrid stents. The stent design cannot completely resolve the problem of cerebral embolism. Most of the events of cerebral microembolism occur at the stages of stent delivery rather than protrusion of an atherosclerotic plaque in the long-term follow-up. Most likely, minimization of the risks for periprocedural and postprocedural strokes requires not only the new solutions in stent design as well as the corresponding delivery systems and brain embolic protection systems, but also the new strategies of preprocedural drug stabilization of the atherosclerotic plaque in the carotid artery. Abbreviations: CAS, carotid artery stenting; CE, carotid endarterectomy; DW-MRI, diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging; ECA, external carotid artery; ICA, internal carotid artery; IVUS, intravascular ultrasound examination; OCT, optical coherence tomography.

Comparative analysis of CGUARD embolic prevention stent with Casper-RX and Wallstent for the treatment of carotid artery stenosis

Stent protected Angioplasty of extracranial carotid artery stenosis using the dual-layered CGUARD stent is a novel treatment option. In this study we evaluate the feasibility and the safety of the CGUARD in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients in comparison to Casper-RX and Wallstent. This is a multi-center study of consecutive patients treated with the CGUARD, Casper-RX and Wallstent at two German high volume neurovascular centers between April 2017 and May 2018. Patient characteristics, neuroimaging data and angiographic outcome were retrospectively analyzed. The primary end points of the study were acute occlusion of the carotid stent and symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage (sICH). Carotid artery stenting was performed in 76 patients; of those 26 (34%) were treated with the CGUARD, 25 (33%) with Casper-RX, and 25 (33%) with Wallstent. In 58/76 (76%) cases carotid artery stenosis was symptomatic with a median baseline National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale of 4. Angioplasty and stenting as part of a mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischemic stroke was performed in 25/76 (33%) patients. Baseline patient characteristics were similar between the treatment groups, except for a higher portion of scheduled cases in the Casper-RX group. There were no significant differences in the rate of acute in stent occlusions (CGUARD, 2/26 (8%); Casper-RX, 1/25(4%); Wallstent, 1/25 (4%)) and postinterventional sICH (1/26 (4%), 0/25(0%), 0/25 (0%)). Clinical outcome at discharge did not differ between groups. Treatment of carotid artery stenosis using CGUARD is feasible with a good safety profile comparable to that of Casper-RX and Wallstent.

Carotid Artery Stenting Using a Closed-Cell Stent-in-Stent Technique for Unstable Plaque

Purpose: To examine whether carotid artery stenting (CAS) of stenoses with unstable plaque using a closed-cell stent-in-stent technique prevents plaque protrusion. Materials and Methods: Between December 2014 and August 2018, 35 consecutive patients (mean age 75.8 years; 29 men) with carotid artery stenosis (20 symptomatic) and unstable plaque diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging were prospectively analyzed. Mean diameter stenosis was 83.5%. All CAS procedures were performed with stent-in-stent placement of Carotid Wallstents using an embolic protection device and conservative postdilation. The technical success rate, incidence of plaque protrusion, ischemic stroke rate within 30 days, and new ipsilateral ischemic lesions on diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) within 48 hours after CAS were prospectively assessed. Follow-up outcomes included the incidences of ipsilateral stroke and restenosis. Results: The technical success rate was 100%. No plaque protrusion or stroke occurred in any patient. New ischemic lesions were observed on DWI in 10 (29%) patients. During the mean 11.6-month follow-up, no ipsilateral strokes occurred. Two (6%) patients developed asymptomatic restenosis recorded as 53% lumen narrowing and occlusion, respectively. Conclusion: CAS using a closed-cell stent-in-stent technique for unstable plaque may be useful for preventing plaque protrusion and ischemic complications.