A randomized trial of carotid artery stenting with and without cerebral protection

New Ischemic Cerebral Lesions in Postprocedural Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Carotid Artery Stenting Versus Carotid Endarterectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Recent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated similar outcomes in terms of ischemic stroke incidence after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) in asymptomatic carotid disease, while CEA seems to be the first option for symptomatic carotid disease. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the incidence of silent cerebral microembolization detected by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) following these procedures.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases, including comparative studies involving symptomatic or asymptomatic patients undergoing either CEA or CAS and reporting on new cerebral ischemic lesions in postoperative MRI. The primary outcome was the newly detected cerebral ischemic lesions. Pooled effect estimates for all outcomes were calculated using the random-effects model. Prespecified random effects metaregression and subgroup analysis were conducted to examine the impact of moderator variables on the presence of new cerebral ischemic lesions.

RESULTS

25 studies reporting on a total of 1827 CEA and 1500 CAS interventions fulfilled the eligibility criteria. The incidence of new cerebral ischemic lesions was significantly lower after CEA compared to CAS, regardless of the time of MRI assessment (first 24 hours; OR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.17-0.64, P < 0.001), (the first 72 hours, OR: 0.25, 95% CI 0.18-0.36, P < 0.001), (generally within a week after the operation; OR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.17-0.34, P < 0.001). Also, the rate of stroke (OR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.23-0.63, P < 0.001) and the presence of contralateral new cerebral ischemic lesions (OR: 0.16, 95% CI 0.08-0.32, P < 0.001) were less frequent after CEA. Subgroup analysis based on the study design and the use of embolic protection device during CAS showed consistently lower rates of new lesions after CEA.

CONCLUSIONS

CEA demonstrates significant lower rates of new silent cerebral microembolization, as detected by MRI in postoperative period compared with CAS.

Use of an embolic protection device during carotid artery stenting is associated with lower periprocedural risk

OBJECTIVE

To investigate associations between individual embolic protection device (EPD) use and respective center policy with periprocedural outcomes after carotid artery stenting (CAS).

METHODS

This analysis is based on the nationwide German statutory quality assurance database and was funded by Germany's Federal Joint Committee Innovation Fund (G-BA Innovationsfonds, 01VSF19016 ISAR-IQ). According to their policy towards EPD use, hospitals were categorized as routine EPD (>90%), selective EPD (10-90%), or sporadic EPD (<10%) centers. Primary study outcome was in-hospital stroke or death. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 19 302 patients who had undergone CAS between 2013 and 2016 were included. The highest in-hospital stroke or death rate was found in sporadic EPD centers, followed by selective and routine EPD centers (3.1% vs 2.9% vs 1.8%; P<0.001). Across the whole cohort, EPD use was associated with a lower in-hospital stroke or death rate (OR=0.60; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.72). In the multivariate regression analysis, EPD use was independently associated with a lower in-hospital stroke rate (aOR=0.66; 95% CI 0.46 to 0.94). Regarding center policy, routine EPD centers showed a significantly lower in-hospital mortality compared with sporadic EPD centers (aOR=0.44; 95% CI 0.22 to 0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

In a contemporary real-world cohort with low risk of selection bias, EPD use was associated with a lower in-hospital risk of stroke. A center policy of routine EPD use was associated with lower mortality. These data support routine use of EPD during CAS to enhance patient safety.

Carotid artery stenting without embolic protection: A randomized multicenter trial (the CASWEP trial)

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) with a carotid protection device (CPD) has become the standard practice in patients with severe carotid stenosis and high surgical risk. However, the clinical efficacy and safety of CPDs are still controversial issues. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of the CAS without CPD with CAS combined with CPD.

METHODS

This is a multicenter randomized prospective study registered with http://clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02781181). After the exclusion, 279 patients were enrolled (139 patients in the CAS with CPD group and 140 patients in the CAS without CPD group). The primary outcome was a combination of peri-procedural in-hospital transient ischemic attack (TIA), ipsilateral stroke, or death. The secondary outcome was new ischemic brain lesions on post-procedural diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI).

RESULTS

Two patients died in CAS without CPD group, one patient died in CAS with CPD group. TIA was only seen in patients who underwent CAS under protection (n = 5). The combined primary outcome of TIA, ipsilateral stroke, and death rate was not different between groups (5.7% vs. 2.8%; p = 0.254). New defects were noted on the post-procedural DW-MRI in 28% of patients in the CPD group and 27% of patients in the no CPD group (p = 0.881).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that CAS without CPD is not associated with higher rates of peri-procedural TIA, stroke, and death or new ischemic brain lesions on post-procedural DW-MRI compared to CAS with CPD in selected symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with significant carotid artery stenosis provided that there is no visible thrombus.

Evaluation of the association between silent ischemic lesions and stent design in carotid stenting applications

OBJECTIVE

Minor ischemic events and silent ischemic lesions are more common in carotid stenting than in endarterectomy. These silent ischemic lesions are also associated with stroke risk and cognitive impairment, so it is important to understand the factors that increase the risk and develop strategies to reduce the risk. We aimed to evaluate the association between carotid stent design and silent ischemic lesion development.

METHODS

The files of the patients who underwent carotid stenting between January 2020 and April 2022 were scanned. Patients with diffusion MR images taken within the postoperative 24 h were included in the study, while those undergoing acute stent placement were excluded. The patients were divided into two groups: those with open-cell stents and those with closed-cell stents.

RESULTS

A total of 65 patients, including 39 patients undergoing open-cell stenting and 26 patients undergoing closed-cell stenting, were included in the study. There was no significant difference in demographic data and vascular risk factors between the groups. New ischemic lesions were detected in 29 (74.4%) patients in the open-cell stent group and 10 (38.4%) patients in the closed-cell stent group and were significantly higher in the open-cell group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of major and minor ischemic events and stent restenosis at the 3-month follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The rate of new ischemic lesion development was found to be significantly higher in carotid stent procedures performed with an open-cell Protégé stent than in those performed with a closed-cell Wallstent stent.

Distal embolic protection use during transfemoral carotid artery stenting is associated with improved in-hospital outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Despite current guidelines recommending the use of distal embolic protection during transfemoral carotid artery stenting (tfCAS) to prevent periprocedural stroke, there remains significant variation in the routine use of distal filters. We sought to assess in-hospital outcomes in patients undergoing tfCAS with and without embolic protection using a distal filter.

METHODS

We identified all patients undergoing tfCAS in the Vascular Quality Initiative from March 2005 to December 2021 and excluded those who received proximal embolic balloon protection. We created propensity score-matched cohorts of patients who underwent tfCAS with and without attempted placement of a distal filter. Subgroup analyses of patients with failed vs successful filter placement and failed vs no attempt at filter placement were performed. In-hospital outcomes were assessed using log binomial regression, adjusted for protamine use. Outcomes of interest were composite stroke/death, stroke, death, myocardial infarction (MI), transient ischemic attack (TIA), and hyperperfusion syndrome.

RESULTS

Among 29,853 patients who underwent tfCAS, 28,213 (95%) had a filter attempted for distal embolic protection and 1640 (5%) did not. After matching, 6859 patients were identified. No attempted filter was associated with significantly higher risk of in-hospital stroke/death (6.4% vs 3.8%; adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.32-2.23; P < .001), stroke (3.7% vs 2.5%; aRR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.06-2.08; P = .022), and mortality (3.5% vs 1.7%; aRR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.42-3.020; P < .001). In a secondary analysis of patients who had failed attempt at filter placement vs successful filter placement, failed filter placement was associated with worse outcomes (stroke/death: 5.8% vs 2.7%; aRR, 2.10; 95% CI, 1.38-3.21; P = .001 and stroke: 5.3% vs 1.8%; aRR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.78-4.61; P < .001). However, there were no differences in outcomes in patients with failed vs no attempted filter placement (stroke/death: 5.4% vs 6.2%; aRR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.61-1.63; P = .99; stroke: 4.7% vs 3.7%; aRR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.79-2.48; P = .20; death: 0.9% vs 3.4%; aRR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.12-1.01; P = .052).

CONCLUSIONS

tfCAS performed without attempted distal embolic protection was associated with a significantly higher risk of in-hospital stroke and death. Patients undergoing tfCAS after failed attempt at filter placement have equivalent stroke/death to patients in whom no filter was attempted, but more than a two-fold higher risk of stroke/death compared with those with successfully placed filters. These findings support current Society for Vascular Surgery guidelines recommending routine use of distal embolic protection during tfCAS. If a filter cannot be placed safely, an alternative approach to carotid revascularization should be considered.

ASNM and ASN joint guidelines for transcranial Doppler ultrasonic monitoring: An update

Today, it seems prudent to reconsider how ultrasound technology can be used for providing intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring that will result in better patient outcomes and decreased length and cost of hospitalization. An extensive and rapidly growing literature suggests that the essential hemodynamic information provided by transcranial Doppler (TCD) ultrasonography neuromonitoring (TCDNM) would provide effective monitoring modality for improving outcomes after different types of vascular, neurosurgical, orthopedic, cardiovascular, and cardiothoracic surgeries and some endovascular interventional or diagnostic procedures, like cardiac catheterization or cerebral angiography. Understanding, avoiding, and preventing peri- or postoperative complications, including neurological deficits following abovementioned surgeries, endovascular intervention, or diagnostic procedures, represents an area of great public and economic benefit for society, especially considering the aging population. The American Society of Neurophysiologic Monitoring and American Society of Neuroimaging Guidelines Committees formed a joint task force and developed updated guidelines to assist in the use of TCDNM in the surgical and intensive care settings. Specifically, these guidelines define (1) the objectives of TCD monitoring; (2) the responsibilities and behaviors of the neurosonographer during monitoring; (3) instrumentation and acquisition parameters; (4) safety considerations; (5) contemporary rationale for TCDNM; (6) TCDNM perspectives; and (7) major recommendations.

Carotid artery stenosis – Current evidence and treatment recommendations

Background:

Carotid artery stenosis is an important cause for stroke. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) reduces the risk of stroke in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis and to some extent in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. More than 20 years ago, carotid artery stenting (CAS) emerged as an endovascular treatment alternative to CEA.

Objective and Methods:

This review summarises the available evidence from randomised clinical trials in patients with symptomatic as well as in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis.

Results:

CAS is associated with a higher risk of death or any stroke between randomisation and 30 days after treatment than CEA (odds ratio (OR) = 1.74, 95% CI 1.3 to 2.33, p < 0.0001). In a pre-defined subgroup analysis, the OR for stroke or death within 30 days after treatment was 1.11 (95% CI 0.74 to 1.64) in patients <70 years old and 2.23 (95% CI 1.61 to 3.08) in patients ≥70 years old, resulting in a significant interaction between patient age and treatment modality (interaction p = 0.007). The combination of death or any stroke up to 30 days after treatment or ipsilateral stroke during follow-up also favoured CEA (OR = 1.51, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.85, p < 0.0001). In asymptomatic patients, there is a non-significant increase in death or stroke occurring within 30 days of treatment with CAS compared to CEA (OR = 1.72, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.97, p = 0.05). The risk of peri-procedural 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).

Discussion and Conclusion:

In symptomatic patients, randomised evidence has consistently shown CAS to be associated with a higher risk of stroke or death within 30 days of treatment than CEA. This extra risk is mostly attributed to an increase in strokes occurring on the day of the procedure in patients ≥70 years. In asymptomatic patients, there may be a small increase in the risk of stroke or death within 30 days of treatment with CAS compared to CEA, but the currently available evidence is insufficient and further data from ongoing randomised trials are needed.

Carotid Stenting without Embolic Protection Increases Major Adverse Events: Analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Published data regarding embolic protection device efficacy is mixed, and its use during carotid artery stent placement remains variable. We, therefore, examined the frequency of embolic protection device use and its association with outcomes after carotid artery stent placement using a national quality improvement data base.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients undergoing carotid artery stent placement with or without embolic protection devices were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data base. The primary outcome was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (defined as death, stroke, or myocardial infarction/arrhythmia) within 30 days. Propensity scoring was used to create 2 matching cohorts of patients using demographic and baseline variables.

RESULTS

Between 2011 and 2018, among 1200 adult patients undergoing carotid artery stent placement, 23.8% did not have embolic protection devices. There was no trend toward increased embolic protection device use with time. Patients without embolic protection device use received preoperative antiplatelets less frequently (90.6% versus 94.6%, P = .02), underwent more emergent carotid artery stent placement (7.2% versus 3.6%, P = .01), and had a higher incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (OR = 1.81; 95% CI, 1.11-2.94) and stroke (OR = 3.31; 95% CI, 1.71-6.39). After compensating for baseline imbalances using propensity-matched cohorts (n = 261 for both), carotid artery stent placement without an embolic protection device remained associated with increased major adverse cardiovascular events (9.2% versus 4.2%; OR = 2.30; 95% CI, 1.10-4.80) and stroke (6.5% versus 1.5%; OR = 4.48; 95% CI, 1.49-13.49).

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of embolic protection device use during carotid artery stent placement is associated with a 4-fold increase in the likelihood of perioperative stroke. Nevertheless, nearly one-quarter of patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program underwent unprotected carotid artery stent placement. Efforts targeting improved embolic protection device use during carotid artery stent placement are warranted.

Long-term cognitive and multimodal imaging outcomes after carotid artery stenting vs intensive medication alone for severe asymptomatic carotid stenosis

BACKGROUND

Severe carotid stenosis is associated with cognitive impairment, which may be attributed to asymptomatic microembolism and/or chronic hypoperfusion. We aim to evaluate the long-term cognitive and brain connectivity outcomes of carotid artery stenting (CAS) for asymptomatic ≥70% stenosis of the extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA).

METHODS

We conducted a non-randomized controlled study to compare intensive medical therapy alone (Med) or in combination with carotid artery stenting for the composite vascular events, neuropsychological, and multimodal magnetic resonance perfusion imaging and diffusion tensor imaging outcomes.

RESULTS

Sixty-nine patients were followed for a mean of 2.3 years (31 Med, 38 CAS) and 11 patients had composite vascular events of all-cause death, ischemic stroke, or myocardial infarction (6 Med vs 5 CAS). Forty-six asymptomatic subjects completed neuropsychological and multimodality imaging follow-ups (23 Med, 23 CAS). Compared to the Med group, the CAS group had a modest improvement of 12-item delayed verbal memory (8.9 ± 2.4 to 9.8 ± 2.7 vs 9.0 ± 2.1 to 8.9 ± 2.3, p = 0.04), but not in global cognition, attention or executive function, which was associated with increased structural connectivity of fractional anisotropy at the ipsilateral deep white matter. Importantly, the memory improvement was correlated with the perfusion increment at the ipsilateral middle cerebral artery territory.

CONCLUSION

For asymptomatic extracranial carotid steno-occlusion, successful carotid revascularization in addition to intensive medical treatment may potentially benefit cognitive reserve and connectivity strength which are partly attributed to restoration of non-critical hypoperfusion.

Clinical situations requiring radial or brachial access during carotid artery stenting

Introduction

Radial or brachial access may be preferred in the case of severe peripheral artery disease (PAD) or difficult aortic arch anatomy during carotid artery stenting (CAS).

Aim

To evaluate the clinical conditions indicating potential benefit from non-femoral access as well as feasibility and safety of transradial/transbrachial access (TRA/TBA) as an alternative approach for CAS.

Material and methods

Since 2013, 67 patients (mean age: 70 years old, 44 men, 42% symptomatic) were selected for CAS with the TRA/TBA approach. The composite endpoint was stroke/death/myocardial infarction within 30 days of the procedure and compared to the propensity score matched transfemoral approach (TFA) group. Clinical (including neurological) examination and Doppler ultrasonography were performed before the procedure, at discharge and at 30 days.

Results

CAS with TRA/TBA was successful in 63/67 patients. Transfemoral access was not feasible due to PAD in 35 (52.2%) patients, bovine arch in 10 (14.9%), obesity (BMI > 35 kg/m²) in 9 (13.4%), severe degenerative disease of the spine in 7 (10.5%), arch type III in 5 (7.5%) and excessive subclavian stent protrusion in 1 (1.5%) patient. Mean NASCET carotid artery stenosis was reduced from 81% to 9% (p < 0.001). The composite endpoint occurred in 3 (4.8%) cases and it was not statistically significantly different from the matched TFA group (6.3%; p = 0.697). No access site complications requiring surgical intervention or blood transfusion developed.

Conclusions

Transradial and transbrachial CAS may be an effective and safe procedure, and it may constitute a viable alternative to the femoral approach in patients with severe PAD, difficult aortic arch anatomy or obesity.

Achievable aspiration flow rates with large balloon guide catheters during carotid artery stenting

Background

Emergency carotid artery stenting (CAS) is a frequent endovascular procedure, especially in combination with intracranial thrombectomy. Balloon guide catheters are frequently used in these procedures. Our aim was to determine if mechanical aspiration through the working lumen of a balloon occlusion catheter during the steps of a carotid stenting procedure achieve flow rates that may lead to internal carotid artery (ICA) flow reversal which consecutively may prevent distal embolism.

Methods

Aspiration experiments were conducted using a commercially available aspiration pump. Aspiration flow rates/min with 6 different types of carotid stents inserted into a balloon guide catheter were measured. Measurements were repeated three times with increasing pressure in the phantom. To determine if the achieved aspiration flow rates were similar to physiologic values, flow rates in the ICA and external carotid artery (ECA) in 10 healthy volunteers were measured using 4D-flow MRI.

Results

Aspiration flow rates ranged from 25 to 82 mL/min depending on the stent model. The pressure in the phantom had a significant influence on the aspiration volume. Mean blood flow volumes in volunteers were 210 mL/min in the ICA and 101 mL/min in the ECA.

Conclusions

Based on the results of this study, flow reversal in the ICA during common carotid artery occlusion is most likely achieved with the smallest diameter stent sheath and the stent model with the shortest outer stent sheath maximum diameter. This implies that embolic protection during emergency CAS through aspiration is most effective with these models.

Transradial Approach as the Primary Vascular Access with a 6-Fr Simmons Guiding Sheath for Anterior Circulation Interventions: A Single-Center Case Series of 130 Consecutive Patients

OBJECTIVE

In coronary intervention, the transradial approach (TRA) is increasingly used as the primary vascular access because of its numerous advantages over the transfemoral approach. However, in neurointerventions, conventional TRA with a straight-shaped guiding system is used as an alternative vascular access because transradial carotid cannulation can be technically challenging for right common carotid artery (CCA) lesions with steep angulation to the right subclavian artery or left CCA lesions with a nonbovine origin. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of TRA as the primary vascular access with a pre-shaped Simmons guiding sheath for anterior circulation interventions.

METHODS

Between June 2018 and September 2019, 130 consecutive patients (75 carotid artery stenting and 55 cerebral aneurysm coiling cases) who underwent TRA as the primary vascular access were included in this study. A 6-Fr Simmons guiding sheath was introduced into the target CCA by selecting a cannulation technique based on preprocedural image assessment. We retrospectively analyzed the carotid cannulation success, procedural success, and periprocedural or vascular access site complications.

RESULTS

Carotid cannulation (69 right CCA, 6 left CCA with a bovine origin, and 55 left CCA with a nonbovine origin) and the subsequent procedure were successfully performed for all 130 patients without periprocedural or vascular access site complications.

CONCLUSIONS

TRA with a 6-Fr Simmons guiding sheath for anterior circulation interventions is highly successful and safe for all target CCAs and aortic arch types. This method can be utilized as the primary vascular access for anterior circulation interventions.

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.

Immediate and Delayed Procedural Stroke or Death in Stenting Versus Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis

Background and Purpose- Stenting for symptomatic carotid stenosis (carotid artery stenting [CAS]) carries a higher risk of procedural stroke or death than carotid endarterectomy (CEA). It is unclear whether this extra risk is present both on the day of procedure and within 1 to 30 days thereafter and whether clinical risk factors differ between these periods. Methods- We analyzed the risk of stroke or death occurring on the day of procedure (immediate procedural events) and within 1 to 30 days thereafter (delayed procedural events) in 4597 individual patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis who underwent CAS (n=2326) or CEA (n=2271) in 4 randomized trials. Results- Compared with CEA, patients treated with CAS were at greater risk for immediate procedural events (110 versus 42; 4.7% versus 1.9%; odds ratio, 2.6; 95% CI, 1.9-3.8) but not for delayed procedural events (59 versus 46; 2.5% versus 2.0%; odds ratio, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.9-1.9; interaction P=0.006). In patients treated with CAS, age increased the risk for both immediate and delayed events while qualifying event severity only increased the risk of delayed events. In patients treated with CEA, we found no risk factors for immediate events while a higher level of disability at baseline and known history of hypertension were associated with delayed procedural events. Conclusions- The increased procedural stroke or death risk associated with CAS compared with CEA was caused by an excess of events occurring on the day of procedure. This finding demonstrates the need to enhance the procedural safety of CAS by technical improvements of the procedure and increased operator skill. Higher age increased the risk for both immediate and delayed procedural events in CAS, mechanisms of which remain to be elucidated. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00190398. URL: http://www.isrctn.com . Unique identifier: ISRCTN57874028. URL: http://www.isrctn.com . Unique identifier: ISRCTN25337470. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00004732.

Carotid artery stenting: Current state of evidence and future directions

Both carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) are common treatments for carotid artery stenosis. Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have compared CEA to CAS in the treatment of carotid artery stenosis. These studies have suggested that CAS is more strongly associated with periprocedural stroke; however, CEA is more strongly associated with myocardial infarction. Published long-term outcomes report that CAS and CEA are similar. A reduction in complications associated with CAS has also been demonstrated over time. The symptomatic status of the patient and history of previous CEA or cervical radiotherapy are significant factors when deciding between CEA or CAS. Numerous carotid artery stents are available, varying in material, shape and design but with minimal evidence comparing stent types. The role of cerebral protection devices is unclear. Dual antiplatelet therapy is typically prescribed to prevent in-stent thrombosis, and however, evidence comparing periprocedural and postprocedural antiplatelet therapy is scarce, resulting in inconsistent guidelines. Several RCTs are underway that will aim to clarify some of these uncertainties. In this review, we summarize the development of varying techniques of CAS and studies comparing CAS to CEA as treatment options for carotid artery stenosis.

Silent brain infarcts on diffusion-weighted imaging after carotid revascularisation: A surrogate outcome measure for procedural stroke? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim

To investigate whether lesions on diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI+) after carotid artery stenting (CAS) or endarterectomy (CEA) might provide a surrogate outcome measure for procedural stroke.

Materials and Methods

Systematic MedLine® database search with selection of all studies published up to the end of 2016 in which DWI scans were obtained before and within seven days after CAS or CEA. The correlation between the underlying log odds of stroke and of DWI+ across all treatment groups (i.e. CAS or CEA groups) from included studies was estimated using a bivariate random effects logistic regression model. Relative risks of DWI+ and stroke in studies comparing CAS vs. CEA were estimated using fixed-effect Mantel-Haenszel models.

Results

We included data of 4871 CAS and 2099 CEA procedures (85 studies). Across all treatment groups (CAS and CEA), the log odds for DWI+ was significantly associated with the log odds for clinically manifest stroke (correlation coefficient 0.61 (95% CI 0.27 to 0.87), p = 0.0012). Across all carotid artery stenting groups, the correlation coefficient was 0.19 (p = 0.074). There were too few CEA groups to reliably estimate a correlation coefficient in this subset alone. In 19 studies comparing CAS vs. CEA, the relative risks (95% confidence intervals) of DWI+ and stroke were 3.83 (3.17-4.63, p < 0.00001) and 2.38 (1.44-3.94, p = 0.0007), respectively.

Discussion

This systematic meta-analysis demonstrates a correlation between the occurrence of silent brain infarcts on diffusion-weighted imaging and the risk of clinically manifest stroke in carotid revascularisation procedures.

Conclusion

Our findings strengthen the evidence base for the use of DWI as a surrogate outcome measure for procedural stroke in carotid revascularisation procedures. Further randomised studies comparing treatment effects on DWI lesions and clinical stroke are needed to fully establish surrogacy.

Carotid Revascularization with and without the Use of an Embolic Protection Device: A Single-Center Experience from Pakistan

Background

To assess the safety and clinical efficacy of carotid artery stenting with and without an embolic protection device (EPD) in both symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid disease cases.

Methods

Retrospective data of 55 symptomatic (≥50% occlusion by digital subtraction angiography [DSA], ≥70% by ultrasound, computed tomography angiography [CTA], and magnetic resonance angiography [MRA]) and asymptomatic (≥60% by DSA, ≥70% by ultrasound, ≥80% by CTA and MRA) carotid disease cases undergoing carotid stenting/angioplasty revascularization from February 2014 to October 2017 was reviewed. All symptomatic patients either experienced recurrent transient ischemic attacks or one or more stroke attacks. An EPD protocol was designed for its selective use based on plaque morphologies and working diameters. The primary end points at 30 days of follow-up were a periprocedural incidence of any stroke, myocardial infarction or death, and ipsilateral stroke during the follow-up period.

Results

Of the 55 cases, 39 were males and 16 females; mean age was 64.8 years. Fifty-one patients (92.7%) were symptomatic, with a mean stenosis of 80.1%. EPD was used in only 11 cases (20%). Minor stroke rate during the first 30 postoperative days was 1.8% (1 case) with EPD; no myocardial infarction or mortality. No stroke occurred during the median 1.5 years' follow-up.

Conclusion

Based on our single-center experience and findings of a relatively small sample size, carotid revascularization with stenting and angioplasty without EPD in experienced hands was found to be safe and efficacious. In addition, it proves cost-effective for patients by limiting the use of unnecessary disposables. These results are comparable to those reported in major trials and are well within the complication thresholds suggested in current guidelines. These results also show promise and illustrate the need for a larger, randomized controlled trial in order to thoroughly address this aspect of carotid revascularization.

Staged carotid artery stenting in patients with severe carotid stenosis: Multicenter experience

Cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome (CHS) is serious complication after carotid artery stenting (CAS) caused by decreased cerebral vasoreactivity (CVR) due to long standing hypoperfusion of the brain. We hypothesized that partial dilatation of carotid stenosis would allow the recovery of CVR, and prevent CHS when definitive angioplasty with stent is performed afterward. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of staged CAS in patients with severe carotid artery stenosis with evident hemodynamic compromise in regard to preventing hyperperfusion syndrome. From January 2005 to February 2016, 53 patients with 55 severe carotid artery stenosis lesions showing decreased CVR and/or cerebral basal flow at the perfusion studies underwent staged CAS in three institutes. The procedure consisted of initial partial balloon angioplasty (BA), recovery period, and delayed definitive stenting (DS). We analyzed immediate results, complications, recoil and CHS related to staged CAS. We experienced no symptomatic manifestation of CHS except self-limited headache after the procedures. The median of intervals between BA and DS stages were 10 days. There was no case of severe recoil during the interval between BA and DS stage. Where perfusion imaging data was available, hyperperfusion was present in three and one patients after BA and DS stage, respectively, with no clinical symptom of CHS. In conclusion, staged CAS was feasible in patients with severe carotid artery stenosis and hemodynamic compromise, without inducing severe complication of CHS such as intracranial hemorrhage.

Protected versus Unprotected Carotid Artery Stenting : Meta-Analysis of the Current Literature

Objective

To compare peri-operative any symptomatic stroke after carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS), based on the application or absence of a cerebral protection device.

Methods

A systematic literature review using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central was done across an online data base from January 1995 to October 2016. Procedures which were performed due to carotid dissection or aneurysm, procedures using covered stents or conducted in an emergency, were excluded. The primary endpoint was perioperative any symptomatic stroke within 30 days after the procedure. A fixed effect model was used in cases of heterogeneity less than 50%.

Results

In the 25 articles included in this study, the number of stroke events was 326 (2.0%) in protected CAS and 142 (3.4%) in unprotected CAS. The use of cerebral protection device significantly decreased stroke after CAS (odds ratio [OR] 0.633, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.479–0.837, p=0.001). In the publication bias analysis, Egger’s regression test disclosed that the intercept was -0.317 (95% CI -1.015–0.382, p=0.358). Regarding symptomatic patients (four studies, 539 CAS procedures), the number of stroke was six (1.7%) in protected CAS and 11 (5.7%) in unprotected CAS. The protective effect against stroke events by cerebral protection device did not have a statistical significance (OR 0.455, 95% CI 0.151–1.366, p=0.160).

Conclusion

The use of protection device significantly decreased stroke after CAS. However, its efficacy was not demonstrated in symptomatic patients. Routine use of protection device during CAS should be critically assessed before mandatory use.

The Use of Embolic Protection Devices Is Associated With a Lower Stroke and Death Rate After Carotid Stenting

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to analyze the association between intraprocedural and periprocedural variables and in-hospital stroke or death rate after carotid artery stenting.

BACKGROUND

In Germany, all open surgical and endovascular procedures on the extracranial carotid artery must be documented in a statutory nationwide quality assurance database.

METHODS

A total of 13,086 carotid artery stenting procedures for asymptomatic (63.9%) or symptomatic carotid stenosis (mean age 69.7 years, 69.7% men) between 2009 and 2014 were recorded. The following variables were analyzed: stent design, stent material, neurophysiological monitoring, periprocedural antiplatelet medication, and use of an embolic protection device. The primary outcome was in-hospital stroke or death. Major stroke or death, any stroke, and death, all until discharge, were secondary outcomes. Adjusted relative risks (RRs) were assessed using multilevel multivariable regression analyses.

RESULTS

The primary outcome occurred in 2.4% of the population (1.7% in asymptomatic and 3.7% in symptomatic patients). The multivariable analysis showed an independent association between the use of an embolic protection device and lower in-hospital rates of stroke or death (adjusted RR: 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50 to 0.85), major stroke or death (adjusted RR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.84), and stroke (adjusted RR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.43 to 0.77). Regarding the occurrence of in-hospital death, there was no significant association (adjusted RR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.46 to 1.35). None of the outcomes was associated with stent design, stent material, neurophysiological monitoring, or antiplatelet medication.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of an embolic protection device was independently associated with lower in-hospital risk for stroke or death, major stroke or death, and stroke.

Predictors of Perioperative Stroke/Death after Carotid Artery Stenting: A Review Article

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has been recommended as an alternative treatment to carotid endarterectomy for patients with significant carotid stenosis. Only a few studies have analyzed clinical/anatomical and technical variables that affect perioperative outcomes of CAS. Following a comprehensive Medline search, it was reported that clinical factors, including age of >80 years, chronic renal failure, diabetes mellitus, symptomatic indications, and procedures performed within 2 weeks of transient ischemic attack symptoms, are associated with high perioperative stroke and death rates. They also highlighted that angiographic variables, e.g., ulcerated and calcified plaques, left carotid intervention, >90% stenosis, >10-mm target lesion length, ostial involvement, type III aortic arch, and >60°-angulated internal carotid and common carotid arteries, are predictors of increased stroke rates. Technical factors associated with increased perioperative risk of stroke include percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) without embolic protection devices, PTA before stent placement, and the use of multiple stents. This review describes the most widely quoted data in defining various predictors of perioperative stroke and death after CAS. (This is a review article based on the invited lecture of the 45th Annual Meeting of Japanese Society for Vascular Surgery.)

Radiographic and symptomatic brain ischemia in CEA and CAS: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

In a systematic review, we compared ratio of new periprocedural radiographic brain ischemia (RBI) to the number of strokes and TIAs among patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS).

METHODS

We searched 5 databases for entries related to brain ischemia in CEA or CAS from inception through September 2015. We included articles with CEA or CAS and systematic performance of preprocedural and postprocedural brain MRI and reporting of RBI and stroke incidence. We calculated a symptomatic risk ratio of number of strokes and TIAs to RBI. Random effects models were used.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine studies (5,431 participants) met the inclusion criteria. There were 22 cohorts in CEA, 34 in CAS with distal protection, 8 in CAS with proximal protection, 9 in CAS without protection, and 9 in CAS with unspecified devices. Overall, 30.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 26.6%-34.7%) had RBI, while 3.2% (95% CI 2.6%-3.8%) had clinical strokes or TIAs, with a stroke and TIA to RBI weighted ratio of 0.18 (95% CI 0.15-0.22). CEA had lower incidence of RBI compared to CAS (13.0% vs 37.4%) and also lower number of strokes and TIAs (1.8% vs 4.1%). The stroke and TIA to RBI ratio did not differ across 5 different types of carotid interventions (p = 0.58).

CONCLUSIONS

One in 5 persons with periprocedural radiographic brain ischemia during CEA and CAS had strokes and TIAs. The stable ratio of stroke and TIA to radiographic ischemia suggests that MRI ischemia could serve as a surrogate measure of periprocedural risk.

A novel guidewire-integrated embolic protection filter device with a handy-folding system: In vitro and in vivo performance assessment

OBJECTIVES

We developed a novel guidewire-integrated filter device with a handy-folding system (IFD: Inoue filter device). In vitro and in vivo studies were conducted to evaluate the feasibilityof the IFD.

BACKGROUND

Although distal atheromatous and thrombotic embolizations remain unresolved critical issues during catheter interventions, distal protection devices are infrequently used partly because of reduced lower maneuverability.

METHODS

In the in vitro experiment, we created an experimental circulation model composed of silicone latex tubes, a reservoir, and a roller pump. After the filter device was deployed in the tube, polystyrene fluorescent microspheres were injected and the capture rate was calculated. Ten trials were performed using the IFD and Spider FX. In the in vivo study, five independent operators deployed, and they retrieved the IFD in swine common iliac and internal carotid arteries. The procedural success rate as well as the delivery and retrieval time was evaluated.

RESULTS

In the in vitro study, the mean capture rate was 94% and 35% in the IFD and Spider groups, respectively. In the in vivo study, all procedures were successful, with no complications. The mean delivery time was 281 ± 87 s and 194 ± 67 s and the mean retrieval time was 24 ± 9 and 13 ±1 s in the left internal carotid and the left common iliac arteries, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Although further studies and improvements are required, the study results indicate that the IFD is feasible.

The Role of White Matter Damage in the Risk of Periprocedural Diffusion-Weighted Lesions after Carotid Artery Stenting

Background

White matter hyperintensities (WMH) are a common finding in aged individuals affected by carotid artery disease and are a risk factor for first-ever and recurrent stroke. We investigated if white matter damage increases the risk of brain microembolism during carotid artery stenting (CAS), as evaluated by the appearance of new areas of restricted diffusion on diffusion-weighted images (DWI).

Methods

We evaluated 47 patients with severe internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis undergoing CAS, comparing preprocedural clinical, ultrasound and radiological characteristics. WMH volume was computed on FLAIR images before CAS. After CAS, the DWI scan was looked over for areas of restricted diffusion (DWI lesions). A first univariate analysis was adopted to compare groups according to the occurrence of DWI lesions. Then, the variable DWI lesion was modelled by means of a logistic regression model.

Results

Seventeen patients developed at least 1 DWI lesion after CAS. Compared with non-DWI, DWI patients were more commonly treated in the left ICA (p = 0.007) and had a more severe WMH damage (p = 0.027). Indeed, the risk of a DWI lesion was higher in left versus right stenosis (OR = 9.0, 95% CI 1.9-42.7, p = 0.005) and increased for each log-unit of WMH lesion load (OR = 7.05, 95% CI 1.07-46.49, p = 0.042). A WMH lesion load of at least 5.25 cm³ had a 50% probability of occurrence of a new DWI lesion.

Conclusions

Treated side and preexisting white matter damage are risk conditions for brain microembolism during CAS. This should be taken into account to optimize severe carotid artery disease management.

Carotid Artery Angioplasty and Stenting Without Distal Embolic Protection Devices

BACKGROUND

Embolic protection devices are used during carotid artery stenting procedures to reduce risk of distal embolization. Although this is a standard procedural recommendation, no studies have shown superiority of these devices over unprotected stenting procedures.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the periprocedural outcome and durability of carotid artery stenting without embolic protection devices and poststent angioplasty.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review of 174 carotid angioplasty stent procedures performed at our institution. One hundred sixty-six patients underwent angioplasty and stenting without distal protection devices or poststent angioplasty. Complications related to stenting, including procedural complications, postoperative stroke and/or myocardial infarction, and stent restenosis were analyzed.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-five stents (78%) were performed in symptomatic patients, whereas 22% of stents were placed for asymptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis. The degree of stenosis was 80% or greater in 75% of patients and 90% or greater in 55% of patients. Following the stenting procedure, the 24-hour and 30-day rate of transient ischemic attack, intracranial hemorrhage, or ischemic stroke was 0. Three (2%) patients had a perioperative, non-ST elevation myocardial infarction. Five patients (2.8%) required treatment for restenosis (>50% stenosis from baseline), 1 of which was symptomatic.

CONCLUSION

Our data show that carotid artery stenting without the use of embolic protection devices and without postangioplasty stenting, in experienced hands, can be performed safely. Furthermore, this technique does not result in a higher degree of in-stent restenosis than series in which poststenting angioplasty is performed.

Recent advances in carotid angioplasty and stenting

Atherosclerotic carotid stenosis accounts for about 15% of ischemic strokes. Carotid endarterectomy reduces the risk of stroke in patients with severe carotid stenosis. Carotid artery stenting has emerged as a potentially less invasive alternative to carotid endarterectomy. However, randomized clinical trials in patients with symptomatic stenosis have shown that carotid artery stenting is associated with a higher risk of peri-procedural stroke compared with carotid endarterectomy. Carotid artery stenting is associated with a lower risk of peri-procedural myocardial infarction and local complications (cranial nerve palsies, access site hematoma) and appears to be as durable as carotid endarterectomy in terms of long-term protection against ipsilateral stroke and risk of restenosis. The main risk factors for peri-procedural stroke in patients treated with carotid artery stenting are age >70 years and high burden of white-matter lesions on brain imaging. Patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis receiving modern medical treatment have a low risk (<1%/year) of ipsilateral stroke and it is uncertain whether the benefit of revascularization still justifies the procedural risk of stroke or death. In particular, the small excess of procedural risk of stroke associated with carotid artery stenting (compared with carotid endarterectomy) may offset the small benefit (if any) of carotid endarterectomy versus medical therapy in unselected patients. Randomized clinical trials are ongoing to solve this issue.

Subclinical ischemic events in patients undergoing carotid artery stent placement: comparison of proximal and distal protection techniques

OBJECTIVE

To determine the relative effectiveness of proximal and distal protection in prevention of cerebral ischemic events during carotid artery stent (CAS) placement using diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI).

METHODS

We analyzed data from patients who had undergone DW-MRI before and within 24 hours of CAS for symptomatic internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis (with last ischemic events within 3 months). The study was performed prospectively; patients were not randomized, and were treated either with a proximal balloon occlusion system (Mo.Ma; Invatec, Roncadelle, Italy) or filter-type distal protection device (Spider device; ev3, Plymouth, Minnesota, USA).

RESULTS

Of the 45 patients (mean age±SD: 66.9±9.8 years; 73.3% were men) who underwent CAS, 19 had proximal protection and 26 distal protection. New ischemic lesions were detected in 26/45 patients on DW-MRI scans obtained within 24 hours after CAS. The proportion of patients with new lesions on DW-MRI at 24 hours was not different between the two groups (47.4% vs 65.4% for proximal and distal protection, respectively). The mean number of new ischemic lesions on post-CAS DW-MRI was non-significantly higher in patients who underwent CAS with distal protection (2.80±3.54 for proximal protection vs 4.96±5.11 for distal protection; p=0.12). The proportion of patients with new lesions >1 cm did not differ between the two groups (5.3% for proximal protection vs 11.5% for distal protection; p=0.62). There was no difference in the rates of ischemic stroke between patients who underwent CAS treatment using proximal and distal protection (5.3% vs 7.7%; p=1.000).

CONCLUSIONS

We found a relatively high rate of new ischemic lesions in patients undergoing CAS with cerebral protection. There was no difference in the proportion of patients with new lesions between patients treated using distal protection and those treated using proximal protection.

Predictors of Stroke, Myocardial Infarction or Death within 30 Days of Carotid Artery Stenting: Results from the International Carotid Stenting Study

OBJECTIVES

Stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and death are complications of carotid artery stenting (CAS). The effect of baseline patient demographic factors, processes of care, and technical factors during CAS on the risk of stroke, MI, or death within 30 days of CAS in the International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) were investigated.

METHODS

In ICSS, suitable patients with recently symptomatic carotid stenosis > 50% were randomly allocated to CAS or endarterectomy. Factors influencing the risk of stroke, MI, or death within 30 days of CAS were examined in a regression model for the 828 patients randomized to CAS in whom the procedure was initiated.

RESULTS

Of the patients, 7.4% suffered stroke, MI, or death within 30 days of CAS. Independent predictors of risk were age (risk ratio [RR] 1.17 per 5 years of age, 95% CI 1.01-1.37), a right-sided procedure (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32-0.91), aspirin and clopidogrel in combination prior to CAS (compared with any other antiplatelet regimen, RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.36-0.98), smoking status, and the severity of index event. In patients in whom a stent was deployed, use of an open-cell stent conferred higher risk than use of a closed-cell stent (RR 1.92, 95% CI 1.11-3.33). Cerebral protection device (CPD) use did not modify the risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Selection of patients for CAS should take into account symptoms, age, and side of the procedure. The results favour the use of closed-cell stents. CPDs in ICSS did not protect against stroke.

Carotid Anatomy Does Not Predict the Risk of New Ischaemic Brain Lesions on Diffusion-Weighted Imaging after Carotid Artery Stenting in the ICSS-MRI Substudy

INTRODUCTION

The International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS, ISRCTN25337470) randomized patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis > 50% to carotid artery stenting (CAS) or endarterectomy. CAS increased the risk of new brain lesions visible on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DWI-MRI) more than endarterectomy in the ICSS-MRI Substudy. The predictors of new post-stenting DWI lesions were assessed in these patients.

METHODS

ICSS-MRI Substudy patients allocated to CAS were studied. Baseline or pre-stenting catheter angiograms were rated to determine carotid anatomy. Baseline patient demographics and the influence of plaque length, plaque morphology, internal carotid angulation, and external or common carotid atheroma were examined in negative binomial regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 115 patients (70% male, average age 70.4) were included; 50.4% had at least one new DWI-MRI-positive lesion following CAS. Independent risk factors increasing the number of new lesions were a left-sided stenosis (incidence risk ratio [IRR] 1.59, 95% CI 1.04-2.44, p = .03), age (IRR 2.10 per 10-year increase in age, 95% CI 1.61-2.74, p < .01), male sex (IRR 2.83, 95% CI 1.72-4.67, p < .01), hypertension (IRR 2.04, 95% CI 1.25-3.33, p < .01) and absence of cardiac failure (IRR 6.58, 95% CI 1.23-35.07, p = .03). None of the carotid anatomical features significantly influenced the number of post-procedure lesions.

CONCLUSION

Carotid anatomy seen on pre-stenting catheter angiography did not predict of the number of ischaemic brain lesions following CAS.

Demographic and Technical Risk Factors of 30-Day Stroke, Myocardial Infarction, and/or Death in Standard- and High-Risk Patients Who Underwent Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting

BACKGROUND

Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is an accepted treatment to prevent stroke in patients with carotid artery stenosis. The purpose of this study is to identify risk factors for major complications after CAS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a prospective study that was conducted at Shiraz University of Medical Sciences in southern Iran from March 2011 to June 2014. Consecutive patients undergoing CAS were enrolled. Both standard- and high-risk patients for endarterectomy were enrolled. Demographic data, atherosclerotic risk factors, site of stenosis, degree of stenosis, and data regarding technical factors were recorded. Thirty-day stroke, myocardial infarction, and/or death were considered as the composite primary outcomes of the study.

RESULTS

A total of 251 patients were recruited (mean age: 71.1 ± 9.6 years; male: 65.3%). Of these, 178 (70.9%) were symptomatic, 73 (29.1%) were diabetic, 129 (51.4%) were hyperlipidemic, 165 (65.7%) were hypertensive, and 62 (24.7%) patients were smokers. CAS was performed for left internal carotid artery (ICA) in 113 (45.4%) patients. Fourteen (5.6%) patients had sequential bilateral stenting. Mean stenosis of operated ICA was 80.2 ± 13.8%. An embolic protection device was used in 203 (96.2%) patients. Pre- and postdilation were performed in 39 (18.5%) and 182 (86.3%) patients, respectively. Composite outcomes were observed in 3.6% of patients (3.2% stroke, 0% myocardial infarction, and 1.2% death). Left-sided lesions and the presence of diabetes mellitus were significantly associated with poor short-term outcome (p = 0.025 and p = 0.020, respectively).

CONCLUSION

There was a higher risk of short-term major complications in diabetic patients and for left carotid artery intervention.

Event Rates in Randomized Clinical Trials Evaluating Cardiovascular Interventions and Devices

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard for evidence-based medicine. However, an accurate estimation of the event rate is crucial for their ability to test clinical hypotheses. Overestimation of event rates reduces the required sample size but can compromise the statistical power of the RCT. Little is known about the prevalence, extent, and impact of overestimation of event rates. The latest RCTs on 10 preselected topics in the field of cardiovascular interventions and devices were selected, and actual primary event rates in the control group were compared with their respective event rate estimations. We also assessed what proportion of the nonsignificant RCTs was truly able to exclude a relevant treatment effect. A total of 27 RCTs randomizing 19,436 patients were included. The primary event rate in the control group was overestimated in 20 of the 27 RCTs (74.1%) resulting in a substantial relative difference between observed and estimated event rates (mean -22.9%, 95% confidence interval -33.5% to -12.2%; median -16.3%, 95% confidence interval -30.3% to -6.5%). Event rates were particularly overestimated in RCTs on biodegradable polymer drug-eluting coronary stents and renal artery stenting. Of the 14 single end point superiority trials with nonsignificant results, only 3 (21.4%) actually resulted in truly negative conclusions. In conclusion, event rates in RCTs evaluating cardiovascular interventions and devices are frequently overestimated. This under-reported phenomenon has fundamental impact on the design of RCTs and can have an adverse impact on the statistical power of these trials to answer important questions about therapeutic strategies.

Stenting or endarterectomy for patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis

Carotid artery stenting is a less invasive alternative to endarterectomy to treat symptomatic carotid stenosis. Clinical trials showed a higher periprocedural risk of nondisabling stroke with stenting, and a higher periprocedural risk of myocardial infarction, cranial nerve palsy, and access site hematoma with endarterectomy. The excess in procedure-related strokes with stenting is mainly seen in patients aged 70 and over. After the procedural period, stenting and endarterectomy are equally effective in preventing stroke and recurrent carotid stenosis in the medium to long term. The choice of stenting versus endarterectomy should take into account risks of both procedures in individual patients.

Proximal protection with the Gore PAES can reduce DWI lesion size in high-grade stenosis during carotid stenting

AIMS

The aim was to determine the incidence of new ischaemic lesions on diffusion-weighted MR imaging (DWI) in a non-randomised cohort of patients after protected and unprotected carotid artery stent placement using the Parodi Anti-Emboli System (PAES).

METHODS AND RESULTS

A retrospective review was conducted on 269 patients who received DWI prior to, and 24-72 hours after, stent placement. All patients were enrolled in one centre. Forty patients stented with the PAES device were matched with 229 patients stented without protection (control group). New diffusion restriction on DWI was detected in 25.8% (PAES) versus 32.3% (control group); p=0.64. On average there were 0.7 lesions (PAES) versus 0.8 lesions (control group) per patient. The area of lesions was 1.7 (PAES) versus 5.6 mm2. In a subanalysis of patients (32 PAES, 148 non-protected) with >80% stenosis, the area of restricted diffusion was less when proximal protection was used (p<0.05). The number and area of DWI lesions did not differ on the contralateral, non-stented side. When the PAES system was used, patients were more likely not to have any lesion at all (p=0.028).

CONCLUSIONS

In high-grade stenosis, the use of the Gore PAES device significantly reduced the area of new DWI lesions and patients were more likely not to have any new DWI lesion at all.

Management of extracranial carotid artery disease

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

Randomized clinical trial comparing neurological outcomes after carotid endarterectomy or stenting

Background

Silent infarction in the brain can be detected in around 34 per cent of patients after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and 54 per cent after carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS). This study compared the risk of new infarctions in the brain in patients undergoing CEA or CAS.

Methods

Consecutive patients with internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis exceeding 70 per cent were screened for inclusion in this prospective study. Patients with indications for intervention, and eligible for both methods, were allocated randomly to CEA or CAS. Neurological examination, cognitive function tests and MRI of the brain were undertaken before and 24 h after intervention.

Results

Of 150 randomized patients, 73 (47 men; mean age 64·9(7·1) years) underwent CEA and 77 (58 men; 66·4(7·5) years) had CAS. New infarctions on MRI were found more frequently after CAS (49 versus 25 per cent; P = 0·002). Lesion volume was also significantly greater after CAS (P = 0·010). Multiple logistic regression analyses identified intervention in the right ICA as the only independent predictor of brain infarction (odds ratio 2·10, 95 per cent c.i. 1·03 to 4·25; P = 0·040). Stroke or transient ischaemic attack occurred in one patient after CEA and in two after CAS. No significant differences were found in cognitive test results between the groups.

Conclusion

These data confirm a higher risk of silent infarction in the brain on MRI after CAS in comparison with CEA, but without measurable change in cognitive function. Registration number: NCT01591005 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

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

Introduction

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

Aim

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

Material and methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Carotid Revascularization: An Update

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

Carotid artery stenting

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

Balloons in endovascular neurosurgery: history and current applications

The use of balloons in the field of neurosurgery is currently an essential part of our clinical practice. The field has evolved over the last 40 years since Serbinenko used balloons to test the feasibility of occluding cervical vessels for intracranial pathologies. Since that time, indications have expanded to include sacrificing cervical and intracranial vessels with detachable balloons, supporting the coil mass in wide-necked aneurysms (balloon remodeling technique), and performing intracranial and cervical angioplasty for atherosclerotic disease, as well as an adjunct to treat arteriovenous malformations. With the rapid expansion of endovascular technologies, it appears that the indications and uses for balloons will continue to expand. In this article, we review the history of balloons, the initial applications, the types of balloons available, and the current applications available for endovascular neurosurgeons.

State of the art in carotid artery stenting: trial data, technical aspects, and limitations

The volume of carotid artery stenting (CAS) safety and efficacy data has grown exponentially over the last decade. Recent comparative data with carotid endarterectomy, the utility of embolic protection devices, peri-procedural medications, basic technical aspects of CAS, developments in carotid stent design, potential complications of CAS, and complication risk factors are discussed in this review.