Long-term results of carotid artery stenting

Systemic immune-inflammation index as a predictor of prognosis after carotid artery stenting compared with C-reactive protein

BACKGROUND

Immune-inflammatory processes are highly associated with the progression of atherosclerosis. The systemic immune-inflammation index (SII) is a potential predictor for clinical outcomes in patients with stroke and ischemic heart disease. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate whether SII can accurately predict the short- and long-term prognoses in patients who underwent carotid artery stenting (CAS) compared to that with C-reactive protein (CRP).

METHODS

This study was a single-center retrospective investigation. Overall, 129 patients who underwent CAS were categorized into tertiles based on their SII levels. We primarily investigated the long-term major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and secondarily the in-hospital and long-term stroke incidence, as well as all-cause death.

RESULTS

The in-hospital stroke rate tended to increase with a rise in SII (P = 0.13). Over the 5-year follow-up period, the Kaplan-Meier overall incidence of MACCE was 9.3%, 16.3%, and 39.5% in the lowest to highest tertiles, respectively (log-rank trend test, P<0.001). The rates of stroke and MACCE during the long-term follow-up were significantly higher with increasing SII. Cox regression analysis showed that the highest tertile of SII (>647) was a predictor of the incidence of long-term stroke (hazard ratio (HR), 21.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.41-188; P = 0.006) and MACCE (HR, 3.98; 95% CI, 1.80-8.81; P<0.001). However, after adjusting for both SII and CRP, only SII remained a significant independent predictor, whereas CRP became less relevant. The receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of long-term MACCE showed that the area under the curve (AUC) for SII (AUC, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.60-0.84; P<0.001) was greater than that of CRP (AUC, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.51-0.77; P = 0.040).

CONCLUSION

SII was shown to be an independent predictor of long-term prognosis in patients who underwent CAS and was suggested to be superior to CRP as an inflammatory prognosis predictor.

Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels Are Associated With Subsequent Stented-Territory Ischemic Stroke After Carotid Artery Stenting: A Single Center Retrospective Study

Objective

The role of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) after carotid artery stenting (CAS) is not well known with respect to stented-territory infarction (STI) and in-stent restenosis (ISR). We hypothesized that LDL-C levels after CAS might be independently associated with STI and ISR.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study for patients with significant extracranial carotid stenosis who were subjected to CAS between September 2013 and May 2021. LDL-C levels were measured after 6 and 12 months following CAS. The association between STI and ISR, and LDL-C was explored using Cox proportional-hazard model.

Results

Of 244 patients enrolled, STI and ISR were observed in 11 (4.5%) and 10 (4.1%) patients, respectively. In multivariable analysis, higher white blood cell count (hazard ratio [HR], 1.408 per 10³/mm³; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.085-1.828; p=0.010), higher LDL-C levels after 12 months (HR, 1.037 per 1 mg/dL; 95% CI, 1.011-1.063; p=0.005), and ISR (HR, 13.526; 95% CI, 3.405-53.725; p<0.001) were independent predictors of STI. Diabetes (HR, 4.746; 95% CI, 1.026-21.948; p=0.046), smaller stent diameter (HR, 0.725 per 1 mm; 95% CI, 0.537-0.980; p=0.036), and higher LDL-C levels after 12 months (HR, 1.031 per 1 mg/dL; 95% CI, 1.007-1.055; p=0.011) were independent predictors of ISR.

Conclusion

We showed that LDL-C levels after 12 months independently predict STI and ISR after CAS. It is necessary to investigate the optimal target LDL-C level for STI prevention through well designed research in the future.

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.

Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate as a Predictor of Restenosis After Carotid Stenting Using First-Generation Stents

This study evaluated the impact of the baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) on clinical and angiographic outcomes and long-term in-stent restenosis (ISR) rates in patients undergoing elective carotid artery stenting (CAS) procedures. Consecutive patients who underwent CAS were retrospectively enrolled (n = 456). At the end of 3 years of follow-up, patients who had died or were lost follow-up were excluded from the study and a final analysis was performed using data from the remaining 405 patients. The study population (n = 405) was divided into 3 tertiles based on the tertile values of the eGFR level (T1, T2, and T3); then, clinical and procedural characteristics and 3-year ISR rates were compared between the groups. An ISR of 50% was detected in 49 (12%) surviving patients. The 3-year ISR was higher among patients with the lowest eGFR values (T1) by 3.7 times (95% CI: 2.01-11.38) than that among patients with the highest eGFR values (T3). These significant relationships persisted following adjustment for confounders. A lower baseline eGFR level was significantly associated with an increased ISR rate. Decreased renal function may be a predictor of ISR after CAS using first-generation stents.

Carotid artery stenting with Roadsaver stent. Early and four-year results from a single-center registry

INTRODUCTION

Prevention of peri- and postprocedural complications is still a challenge in carotid artery stenting (CAS).

AIM

To assess immediate and long-term safety and effectiveness of CAS using the Roadsaver double-nitinol-layer-micromesh stent.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Since 2014, 298 CAS procedures in 287 non-consecutive patients (203 men, mean age 70.5 ±8.6 years, 100% symptomatic/high risk lesions) have been performed using the Roadsaver stent and proximal (40%) or distal (60%) neuroprotection system. Clinical and neurological examinations as well as duplex ultrasound were completed before CAS, before discharge, at 1, 6 and 12 months, then annually.

RESULTS

All CAS procedures were successful. Carotid stenosis was reduced from 84.9 ±9.9% to 11.0 ±9.4% (p < 000.1). In hospital, 1 ipsilateral periprocedural major (0.3%) and 3 minor (1.34%) ischemic strokes occurred, 2 (0.7%) patients died due to a cerebral hemorrhage on day 9 and 21. Three (1.0%) additional ipsilateral minor strokes within 30 consecutive days occurred. Thus, 30-day complications were observed in 9 (3.0%) patients. Two minor strokes were associated with in-stent thrombosis (0.7%). The 4-year follow-up showed 82% overall survival (95% CI: 69-91%) with no significant difference between asymptomatic (77%) and symptomatic patients (97%; p = 0.076). The stroke-free survival was 89% (95% CI: 77-95%), 84% asymptomatic vs. 98% symptomatic (p = 0.187). Seven (2.3%) patients developed > 50% in-stent restenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Carotid artery stenting using the Roadsaver stent for symptomatic patients and high risk lesions showed to be safe and effective, with a low complication rate and acceptable in-stent restenosis risk in 4-year follow-up.

Clinical trial of carotid artery stenting using dual-layer CASPER stent for carotid endarterectomy in patients at high and normal risk in the Japanese population

BACKGROUND

The dual-layer nitinol CASPER stent was designed to prevent plaque prolapse into its strut and periprocedural stroke.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a clinical trial for government approval of the device in patients at either high or normal risk for carotid endarterectomy (CEA).

METHODS

Eligible patients had ≥50% symptomatic stenosis or ≥80% asymptomatic stenosis according to the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial methods (peak systolic velocity 130 and 230 cm/s on ultrasonography, respectively). The primary endpoint was the lack of major adverse events (MAEs), defined as death, stroke, and myocardial infarction within 30 days, and ipsilateral stroke within 1 year. The performance goal was set at 90.5%. MAE rates were also compared between the CEA high- and normal-risk groups.

RESULTS

140 carotid artery stenting procedures, including 40% of patients at high risk and 60% at normal risk for CEA, were performed in 13 institutes. MAEs occurred in two cases (one intraprocedural and one postprocedural stroke), and the MAE rate was 1.4%. The non-MAE rate was 98.6% according to Kaplan-Meier analysis, which was superior to the previously set performance goal. The deployment success, target lesion revascularization (TLR), in-stent restenosis, and cerebrovascular event rates were 99.3%, 2.4%, 8.5%, and 7.2%, respectively. The MAE rate in patients with normal CEA risk was 1.2%, which was similar to the high-risk CEA group, with no significant difference due to the small number of MAEs.

CONCLUSIONS

The MAE rate following use of the CASPER stent was low (1.4%). The MAE, deployment success, TLR, in-stenosis, and cerebrovascular event rates were similar to those of previous reports.

A meta-analysis of the effect of stent design on clinical and radiologic outcomes of carotid artery stenting

OBJECTIVE

Procedural characteristics, including stent design, may influence the outcome of carotid artery stenting (CAS). A thorough comparison of the effect of stent design on outcome of CAS is thus warranted to allow for optimal evidence-based clinical decision making. This study sought to evaluate the effect of stent design on clinical and radiologic outcomes of CAS.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases in May 2018. Included were articles reporting on the occurrence of clinical short- and intermediate-term major adverse events (MAEs; any stroke or death) or radiologic adverse events (new ischemic lesions on postprocedural magnetic resonance diffusion-weighted imaging [MR-DWI], restenosis, or stent fracture) in different stent designs used to treat carotid artery stenosis. Random effects models were used to calculate combined overall effect sizes. Metaregression was performed to identify the effect of specific stents on MAE rates.

RESULTS

From 2654 unique identified articles, two randomized, controlled trials and 66 cohort studies were eligible for analysis (including 46,728 procedures). Short-term clinical MAE rates were similar for patients treated with open cell vs closed cell or hybrid stents. Use of an Acculink stent was associated with a higher risk of short-term MAE compared with a Wallstent (risk ratio [RR], 1.51; P = .03), as was true for use of Precise stent vs Xact stent (RR, 1.55; P < .001). Intermediate-term clinical MAE rates were similar for open vs closed cell stents. Use of open cell stents predisposed to a 25% higher chance (RR, 1.25; P = .03) of developing postprocedural new ischemic lesions on MR-DWI. No differences were observed in the incidence of restenosis, stent fracture, or intraprocedural hemodynamic depression with respect to different stent design.

CONCLUSIONS

Stent design is not associated with short- or intermediate-term clinical MAE rates in patients undergoing CAS. Furthermore, the division in open and closed cell stent design might conceal true differences in single stent efficacy. Nevertheless, open cell stenting resulted in a significantly higher number of subclinical postprocedural new ischemic lesions detected on MR-DWI compared with closed cell stenting. An individualized patient data meta-analysis, including future studies with prospective homogenous study design, is required to adequately correct for known risk factors and to provide definite conclusions with respect to carotid stent design for specific subgroups.

Carotid Geometry as a Predictor of In-Stent Neointimal Hyperplasia - A Computational Fluid Dynamics Study

BACKGROUND

Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is emerging as an alternative treatment for carotid stenosis, but neointimal hyperplasia (NIH) remains a drawback of this treatment strategy. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of variations of carotid bifurcation geometry on local hemodynamics and NIH.Methods and Results:Hemodynamic and geometric effects on NIH were compared between 2 groups, by performing computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations both on synthetic models and patient-specific models. In the idealized models, multiple regression analysis revealed a significant negative relationship between internal carotid artery (ICA) angle and the local hemodynamics. In the patient-derived models, which were reconstructed from digital subtraction angiography (DSA) of 25 patients with bilateral CAS, a low time-average wall shear stress (TAWSS) and a high oscillatory shear index (OSI) were often found at the location of NIH. Larger difference values of the OSI percentage area (10.56±20.798% vs. -5.87±18.259%, P=0.048) and ECA/CCA diameter ratio (5.64±12.751% vs. -3.59±8.697%, P=0.047) were detected in the NIH-asymmetric group than in the NIH-symmetric group.

CONCLUSIONS

Changes in carotid bifurcation geometry can make apparent differences in hemodynamic distribution and lead to bilateral NIH asymmetry. It may therefore be reasonable to consider certain geometric variations as potential local risk factors for NIH.

Risk Factors for Recurrent Carotid-Artery Stenosis Following Stenting Treatment

BACKGROUND Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has been regarded as a reliable treatment approach for carotid artery stenosis. However, recurrent carotid artery stenosis after CAS affects long-term outcomes. In this study, we aimed to investigate the potential risk factors for carotid restenosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of patients diagnosed with carotid artery stenosis who underwent CAS implantation at our department from September 2012 to July 2015. Each included study patient was followed up with serial duplex ultrasound scanning. Kaplan-Meier estimates were used to evaluate freedom from restenosis and potential risk factors were analyzed. RESULTS There were 33 patients enrolled in our study. The mean age was 65.5±11.5 years. The technique was successfully achieved in all patients. No death or major stroke occurred after stenting. There were 2 events of minor stroke and one myocardial infarction within 30 days after stent implantation. All the patients were followed up for 3 years. Cumulative rates of freedom from recurrent stenosis at 1, 2, and 3 years were 87.4%, 74.6%, and 68.3% respectively. Cox multivariate regression analysis revealed that male sex, smoking and hyperlipidemia were independent risk factors associated with restenosis. CONCLUSIONS In this study, we identified that CAS was a reliable approach for carotid artery stenosis. Male sex, smoking, and hyperlipidemia were independent risk factors associated with restenosis. Thus, hyperlipidemia should be monitored and routine follow-up with ultrasonography are recommended especially for male patients with current or history of smoking.

Risk Factors for Restenosis After Carotid Revascularization: A Meta-Analysis of Hazard Ratios

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery restenosis after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS) will occur in 3%-30% of cases. Restenosis can lead to more frequent clinical and imaging monitoring and the potential for reoperation. We sought to define the demographic, clinical, and radiographic characteristics that influence the restenosis risk after carotid revascularization.

METHODS

The present study was performed in accordance with the PRISMA (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses) guidelines. A random effects model meta-analysis of hazard ratios (HRs) was conducted.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies with 17,106 patients were included. Diabetes (HR, 1.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-2.83; I², 76.7%), dyslipidemia (HR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.08-2.91; I², 22.5%), female gender (HR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.14-1.98, I², 0%), chronic kidney disease (HR, 4.15; 95% CI, 1.69-10.19; I², 44.5%), hypertension (HR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.07-3.72; I², 68%), smoking (HR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.15-2.37; I², 54.3%), and pretreatment stenosis >70% (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.0-1.08; I², 0%) showed a statistically significant increase in restenosis risk after carotid revascularization. Subgroup analyses of CEA and CAS showed that female gender and smoking status were significantly associated with recurrent stenosis after CEA but not after CAS. In contrast, hypertension was associated with restenosis after CAS but not after CEA. Patch endarterectomy (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.22-0.50; I², 0%) and symptomatic status at presentation in the CAS group (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.41-0.90; I², 0%) were associated with a decreased risk of restenosis. Antiplatelet use and coronary artery disease were not associated with restenosis risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes, dyslipidemia, female gender, renal failure, hypertension, and smoking were associated with an increased risk of restenosis, and patch endarterectomy and symptomatic status at presentation were associated with a decreased risk of carotid restenosis. Both female gender and current smoking status were only associated with recurrent stenosis after CEA, and hypertension was only associated with restenosis after CAS.

Carotid artery stenting in a single center, single operator, single type of device and 15 years of follow-up

Background

Revascularization with carotid stent (CAS) is considered the therapeutic alternative to endarterectomy (CEA). However, its role compared to CEA remains questioned, mainly due of the heterogeneity of long-term results. The objective of this study was to report the efficacy and durability of CAS in terms of stroke prevention in a "real world experience".

Method

This was a single-center retrospective analysis of 344 patients treated with CAS between January 2001 and December 2015.The primary outcome of the trial was stroke, myocardial infarction, or death during a periprocedural period or any stroke event over a 15-year follow-up. The secondary aim was to identify risk factors for 30-day complications, long-term neurological complications, and intra-stent restenosis.

Results

The primary composite end point (any stroke, myocardial infarction, or death during the periprocedural period) was 2.3%. The use of an EPD was protective against major complications.Long-term follow-up was achieved in 294 patients (85,5%) with a median of 50 months (range 0-155 months). Fifty-six (16,3%) died within this period, most commonly of nonvascular causes (4 patients had stroke-related deaths). During the follow-up period, 8 strokes and 3 TIAs were diagnosed (3.2%).ISR determined by sequential ultrasound was assessed in 4.4% of the patients and remained asymptomatic in all but 2 patients (0.6%). All patients with restenosis underwent revascularization with balloon angioplasty.

Conclusion

The long-term follow-up results of our study validate CAS as a safe and durable procedure with which to prevent ipsilateral stroke, with an acceptable rate of restenosis, recurrence and mortality.

Is diabetes a marker of higher risk after carotid revascularization? Experience from a single centre

PURPOSE

This single centre study investigates the influence of diabetes mellitus on outcomes following carotid artery endarterectomy or stenting.

METHODS

In total, 752 carotid revascularizations (58.2% carotid artery stenting and 41.8% carotid endarterectomy) were performed in 221 (29.4%) patients with diabetes and 532 (70.6%) patients without diabetes. The study outcomes were death, disabling and non-disabling stroke, transient ischaemic attack and restenosis within 36 months after the procedure.

RESULTS

Patients with diabetes had higher periprocedural risk of any stroke or death (3.6% diabetes vs 0.6% no diabetes; p < 0.05), transient ischaemic attack (1.8% diabetes vs 0.2% no diabetes; p > 0.05) and restenosis (2.7% diabetes vs 0.6% no diabetes; p < 0.05). During long-term follow-up, there were no significant differences in Kaplan-Meier estimates of freedom from death, any stroke and transient ischaemic attack, between people with and without diabetes for each carotid artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy subgroup. Patients with diabetes showed higher rates of restenosis during follow-up than patients without diabetes (36-months estimate risk of restenosis: 21.2% diabetes vs 12.5% no diabetes; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The presence of diabetes was associated with increased periprocedural risk, but no further additional risk emerged during longer term follow-up. Restenosis rates were higher among patients with diabetes.

Calcification in original plaque and restenosis following carotid artery stenting

Background:

The relationship between calcification in primary plaque and recurrent stenosis after carotid artery stenting (CAS) is not established, but an inverse association with restenosis following carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been suggested.

Methods:

We retrospectively analyzed 75 plaques of 109 consecutive CAS with regard to calcification, using the calcium score and shape, location, and other characteristics of original plaques together with stenting-related factors. CAS was performed in a standard fashion with an embolic protection device. Greater-than-moderate restenosis (≥50%) was assessed by peak systolic velocity (PSV) with duplex ultrasonography (≥130 cm/s, internal/common carotid or distal/proximal PSV ratio ≥2.0).

Results:

Univariate analysis revealed percentages of dyslipidemia treated with statins (P = 0.03), calcification in distal ICA (P = 0.02), and immediate residual stenosis (P = 0.02) were significantly higher in patients with greater-than-moderate restenosis, whereas calcification in carotid bulb and usage of open-cell stent were rather less frequent (P < 0.001 and P = 0.02, respectively). Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that rarity of calcification in carotid bulb was a sole independent predictor for greater-than-moderate recurrent carotid stenosis 1 year after CAS (OR = 0.21, CI = 0.06–0.77, P = 0.02).

Conclusions:

Calcium score was not significantly related to restenosis at 1 year after CAS, as was previously found following CEA, though scarcity of calcification in carotid bulb was suggested as a predictor of in-stent restenosis. Compared to post-CEA restenosis, carotid plaque calcification may be inversely but tenuously associated with recurrent stenosis 1 year post-CAS. No other stenting factors (e.g., stent design, pre-/post-dilation, or protection devices) showed a significant association with recurrent stenosis post-CAS.

Mesh-covered (Roadsaver) stent as a new treatment modality for symptomatic or high-risk carotid stenosis

Introduction

Prevention of periprocedural stroke has a crucial role in carotid artery stenting (CAS) procedures.

Aim

To assess retrospectively 30-day safety and effectiveness of 41 procedures of internal and common carotid artery stenting using the Roadsaver double nitinol layer micromesh stent in 40 non-consecutive patients with symptomatic or high-risk carotid artery stenosis.

Material and methods

The patients were men (n = 31) and women (n = 9); mean age was 67.8 ±7.9 years. Femoral access was used in 39 cases, whereas radial access was used in 2. Proximal (n = 27) or distal (n = 14) embolic neuroprotection was used.

Results

The Roadsaver stents (nominal diameter 7, 8 or 9 mm, length 25 or 30 mm) were implanted successfully in all cases. One minor stroke occurred after common carotid artery intubation with a guiding catheter (before stent deployment) and one transient postprocedural ischemic attack (TIA) of the ipsilateral cerebral hemisphere was observed. Internal/common carotid artery stenosis severity was evaluated by duplex Doppler. Maximal peak systolic velocity (PSV) before CAS was in the range: 2.0–7.0 m/s, mean: 3.9 ±1.0 m/s, at 24–48 h after stenting mean PSV was 1.1 ±0.4 m/s (p < 0.05), and at 30 days 1.1 ±0.3 m/s (p < 0.05). Maximal end-diastolic velocity (EDV) was 0.85–3.5 m/s, mean 1.4 ±0.5 m/s, at 24–48 h after stenting mean EDV was 0.3 ±0.1 m/s (p < 0.05), and at 30 days 0.4 ±0.1 m/s (p < 0.05). No restenosis or thrombosis was observed. Angiographic stenosis decreased from 82.9 ±9.1% (range: 61–97%) to 19.3 ±7.3% (range: 0–34%) (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The CAS using the Roadsaver stent seems to be safe and effective. Further studies involving larger patient populations and longer follow-up are needed.

Proximal Embolic Protection Devices in Complicated Carotid Artery Stenting

The most frequent complication during carotid artery stenting (CAS) is intraoperative distal embolization. Three categories of embolic protection devices (EPDs) are routinely used through a transfemoral or transcervical approach: distal occlusion devices, distal EPDs with flow preservation using filters, and the proximal occlusive protective systems. We report the case of the internal carotid artery (ICA) plaque rupture during CAS using a proximal EPD (the Mo.Ma system; INVATEC), treated with immediate surgery. The proximal occlusive protective system permitted the common carotid artery and ICA endoclamping for the time necessary to prepare the patient for the carotid endarterectomy. The EPDs should always be chosen considering the patient's and lesion's characteristics. This knowledge allows their use even as "bridge" endovascular devices.

Restenosis after carotid artery stenting

As a common etiology for ischemic stroke, atherosclerotic carotid stenosis has been targeted by vascular surgery since 1950s. Compared with carotid endarterectomy, carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is almost similarly efficacious and less invasive. These advantages make CAS an alternative in treating carotid stenosis. However, accumulative evidences suggested that the long-term benefit-risk ratio of CAS may be decreased or even neutralized by the complications related to in-stent restenosis (ISR). Therefore, investigating the mechanisms and identifying the influential factors of ISR are of vital importance for improving the long-term outcomes of CAS. As responses to intrinsic and extrinsic injuries, intimal hyperplasia and vascular smooth muscle cell proliferation have been regarded as the principle mechanisms for ISR development. Due to the lack of consensus-based definition and consistent follow-up protocol, the reported incidences of ISR after CAS varied widely among studies. These variations made the inter-study comparisons of ISR largely illogical. To eliminate restenosis after CAS, both surgery and endovascular procedures have been attempted with promising results. For preventing ISR, drug-eluting stents and antiplatelets have been proposed as potential solutions.

Long-Term Outcomes of Carotid Artery Stenting in Clinical Practice

Background—

There is a lack of long-term data and data outside of controlled clinical trials in carotid artery stenting. Thus, we sought to evaluate the long-term effectiveness in stroke prevention by carotid artery stenting in a large number of patients in a real-world setting.

Methods and Results—

The present work represents an all-comer registry with a strict, prospectively designed, follow-up protocol, including an independent pre- and postprocedural neurological assessment. Between November 1999 and March 2015, 1000 procedures in 901 patients were consecutively performed in a single center. Mean age was 71±9 years, and symptomatic stenosis was present in 262 patients (29.1%). The population was also characterized by a high comorbidity: 289 patients (32.1%) would have been excluded according to the CREST protocol (Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stent Trial). The median length of follow-up was 5.5 (interquartile range, 2.6–7.9) years and complete in 93% of the patients. The rate of the primary end point (composite of stroke, death, and myocardial infarction [major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event] by day 30 plus ipsilateral stroke beyond 30 days) was 6.9% (9.9% in symptomatic versus 5.7% in asymptomatic patients; P =0.03). The rate was higher in CREST ineligible than in CREST eligible patients (11.4% versus 4.9%; P =0.001).

Conclusions—

Long-term stroke prevention by carotid artery stenting is effective in experienced centers. A high percentage of patients who would have been excluded from controlled clinical trials undergoes carotid artery stenting in daily clinical practice. However, these patients have a substantially higher risk for an acute major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event.

In-Stent Restenosis After Carotid Artery Stenting: From Diagnosis to Treatment

Although carotid artery stenting is a safe and effective treatment for preventing ischaemic stroke in significant carotid atherosclerotic disease, it can be complicated by in-stent restenosis (ISR). Factors involved in the ISR process are both mechanical and patient-related, but the most important is the neointimal thickening within stent struts, leading to lumen reduction. Overall incidence of carotid ISR is low and related embolic risk seems to be lower than native disease. Digital subtraction angiography is the gold standard for diagnosis. Nowadays, Doppler ultrasound should be considered the first-line investigation, due to its non-invasiveness and reproducibility. Computed tomography angiography remains useful when Doppler ultrasound is inconclusive. Indication and modality of treatment of ISR are still debated: both surgery (carotid endarterectomy with stent removal in most cases) or interventional procedures such as percutaneous transluminal angioplasty with simple balloon, cutting-balloon, drug-eluting balloon, and stenting, showed safety and efficacy in follow-up. Surgery is currently reserved for selected cases. Carotid ISR is an overall rare complication which can be easily identified at routine follow-up. This paper is a literature review and state-of-the-art assessment of ISR, clinical features, diagnosis, and treatment.

Impact of coexisting multivessel coronary artery disease on short-term outcomes and long-term survival of patients treated with carotid stenting

INTRODUCTION

Systemic atherosclerosis can result in both coronary artery disease (CAD) and carotid artery disease. Recently it has been shown that patients with CAD have a higher incidence of microembolization during carotid artery stenting (CAS), and it has been hypothesized that they could be at higher risk in this intervention.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated an institutional registry with 437 consecutive patients who underwent coronary angiography and CAS to evaluate their short-term outcomes and long-term survival with regard to the presence of coexisting multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD).

RESULTS

We performed 220 CAS procedures in MVD patients and 318 CAS procedures in non-MVD patients. The incidence of in-hospital CAS-related adverse events was 2.7% and 2.5% in the MVD and non-MVD groups, respectively (p = 0.88). At 30 days, there was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the number of patients with adverse events (hierarchically death/stroke/myocardial infarction; 8.8% vs. 5.5%; p = 0.18). The median duration of follow-up was 4.23 years. Survival free of all-cause mortality at 1, 3 and 5 years was 90% (95% CI: 86-94%), 79% (95% CI: 73-85%) and 70% (95% CI: 64-77%), and 92% (95% CI: 89-95%), 85% (95% CI: 80-90%) and 76% (95% CI: 70-82%) for the MVD and non-MVD groups (p = 0.02), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that patients with MVD combined with carotid artery disease are probably not at higher risk of early post-CAS adverse clinical events, but they have significantly worse long-term survival rates.

The Effect of Stent Cell Geometry on Carotid Stenting Outcomes

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of stent cell geometry on midterm results of carotid artery stenting (CAS).

MATERIALS AND METHOD

One hundred fifty-five patients underwent CAS between February 2010 and December 2012. Ninety-one open- and 84 closed-cell stents were used in this non-randomized, retrospective study. Periprocedural complications were defined as the ones happened during the procedure or within 30 days afterwards. Starting from the 6th month after the procedure, in-stent restenosis was detected with multidetector computed tomography angiography and classified into four groups from focal restenosis to occlusion.

RESULTS

Eleven complications were encountered in the periprocedural period (four on the open- and seven on the closed-cell group). Total complication rate was 6.3% (11/175). No significant difference was detected in terms of periprocedural complications between two groups (p = 0.643). There was statistically significant difference between stent design groups in regard to radiological findings (p = 0.002). Sixteen of open-cell stents and three of closed-cell stents had focal restenosis. One closed-cell stent had diffuse proliferative restenosis and one open-cell stent had total occlusion.

CONCLUSION

In-stent restenosis was more common in open-cell stent group, which have larger free cell area than closed-cell stents. Although our radiologic findings promote us to use closed-cell design if 'possible', no difference was detected in terms of clinical outcomes.

The myth of restenosis after carotid angioplasty and stenting

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Reported rates of in-stent restenosis after carotid artery stenting (CAS) vary, and restenosis risk factors are poorly understood. We evaluated restenosis rates and risk factors, and compared patients with 'hostile-neck' carotids (a history of ipsilateral neck surgery or irradiation) and atherosclerotic lesions.

METHODS

Demographic, clinical, and radiological characteristics of patients undergoing cervical CAS between 1995 and 2010 with at least 1 month of follow-up were reviewed. Patients with substantial (≥50%) radiographic restenosis were compared with those without significant restenosis to identify restenosis risk factors.

RESULTS

The analysis included 121 patients with 133 stented vessels; 91 (68.4%) lesions were symptomatic. Indications for stent placement included hostile-neck lesions, substantial surgical comorbidities, inclusion in a randomized carotid stenting trial, acute carotid occlusion, tandem stenosis, large pseudoaneurysm, high carotid bifurcation, and contralateral laryngeal nerve palsy. Procedures were technically successful in all but one lesion (99.2%). Perioperative stroke occurred in four cases (3.0%). Mean follow-up was 38 months (range 1-204 months), during which 23 vessels (17.3%) developed restenosis. Hostile-neck carotids (n=57) comprised 42.9% of all vessels treated and were responsible for 15 of 23 restenosis cases, resulting in a significantly higher restenosis rate than that of primary atherosclerotic lesions (26.3% vs 10.5%, p=0.017). By univariate analysis, the presence of calcified plaque was significantly associated with the incidence of in-stent restenosis (p=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Restenosis rates after carotid angioplasty and stenting are low. Patients with a history of ipsilateral neck surgery or irradiation are at higher risk for substantial radiographic and symptomatic restenosis.

Carotid artery pseudoaneurysm as a complication of carotid artery stenting

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has been adopted more in the treatment of carotid artery stenosis recently. The vast majority of studies about this procedure have concentrated mainly on the short- and long-term clinical complications, that is, stroke, myocardial infarction, and restenosis. However, mechanical complications including both stent fracture and carotid pseudoaneurysm are under-reported. In the present report, we present a patient with a common carotid artery psuedoaneurysm as a complication of CAS.

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.

Argatroban for preventing occlusion and restenosis after extracranial artery stenting

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Restenosis following extracranial artery stenting is a limitation that affects long-term outcomes. Effective and satisfying pharmacological strategies in preventing restenosis have not been established. This study aimed to evaluate whether argatroban, a direct thrombin inhibitor, could reduce the risk of in-stent restenosis after extracranial artery stenting.

METHODS

One hundred and fourteen patients hospitalized between August 2010 and August 2011 were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned to argatroban (n = 58) and blank control groups (n = 56). The patients in the argatroban arm were treated with 10 mg of intravenous argatroban twice daily 2 days before and 3 days after the stenting procedures. Patients were followed for 12 months after the procedure. During follow-up, restenosis and target revascularization were analyzed. Recurrent cerebrovascular and cardiovascular events and deaths were also compared between the groups.

RESULTS

One patient in the stenting group withdrew immediately after the procedure due to unsuccessful stenting. Restenosis occurred in 4 patients (7.4%) in the argatroban group and in 11 patients (21.6%) in the control group during the 6- to 9-month angiographic follow-up period (p = 0.032). Nine months after the procedures, argatroban-treated patients had a trend towards a lower incidence of target revascularization compared with the controls (5.4 vs. 13.7%, p = 0.188). No major bleeding events or other adverse events occurred in the argatroban group.

CONCLUSION

This pilot clinical trial is the first that uses argatroban to prevent restenosis in ischemic cerebrovascular disease, and suggests that intravenous administration of argatroban is effective and safe in preventing restenosis after extracranial artery stenting. Larger randomized controlled clinical trials are warranted.

Has carotid artery stenting found its place? A 10-year regional centre perspective

INTRODUCTION

The post-Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial era has seen a dramatic decline in the practice of carotid artery stenting (CAS). A retrospective review of prospectively collected CAS outcomes over a 10-year period by a single operator was undertaken to determine if this change in practice is justified and to identify the place of carotid stenting in current practice.

METHODS

One hundred fifty-nine carotid stent procedures were undertaken on 137 patients from 2002 to 2012. Cases were selected for CAS only if they fulfilled the inclusion criteria for the SAPPHIRE trial. Post-procedural outcomes were compared against those of a contemporaneous cohort of patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) by the same operator and against published meta-analyses. The measure of CAS durability was need for re-intervention, based on the presence of ultrasound-detected re-stenosis >70%.

RESULTS

No significant difference was identified in 30-days' complication rates between patients undergoing CAS and those having CEA. Compared to published meta-analyses of CAS, our practice was accompanied by a significantly lower rate of peri-procedural stroke (1.26% versus 6%, P = 0.014) while carrying equivalent 30-days' death and myocardial infarction. Four stented arteries had re-intervention, due to asymptomatic in-stent stenosis of >70%. Further intervention was declined in a fifth case. This represents a re-stenosis rate of 3.1% over a mean follow-up of 40.2 ± 27.6 months.

DISCUSSION

CAS can provide a safe and durable treatment option for selected patients with carotid artery disease, in the hands of appropriately trained proceduralists who meet accepted standards of practice.

Patient-specific finite element analysis of carotid artery stenting: a focus on vessel modeling

Finite element analysis is nowadays a well-assessed technique to investigate the impact of stenting on vessel wall and, given the rapid progression of both medical imaging techniques and computational methods, the challenge of using the simulation of carotid artery stenting as procedure planning tool to support the clinical practice can be approached. Within this context, the present study investigates the impact of carotid stent apposition on carotid artery anatomy by means of patient-specific finite element analysis. In particular, we focus on the influence of the vessel constitutive model on the prediction of carotid artery wall tensional state of lumen gain and of vessel straightening. For this purpose, we consider, for a given stent design and CA anatomy, two constitutive models for the CA wall, that is, a hyperelastic isotropic versus a fiber-reinforced hyperelastic anisotropic model. Despite both models producing similar patterns with respect to stress distribution, the anisotropic model predicts a higher vessel straightening and a more evident discontinuity of the lumen area near the stent ends as observed in the clinical practice. Although still affected by several simplifications, the present study can be considered as further step toward a realistic simulation of carotid artery stenting.

United Kingdom carotid artery stent registry: short- and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has evolved to treat carotid artery disease with the intention of prevent stroke. The British Society of Interventional Radiologists developed a voluntary registry to monitor the practice of this novel procedure. We present the data from the United Kingdom (UK) CAS registry for short and long-term outcomes for symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid disease.

METHODS

The UK CAS registry collected data from 1998 to 2010 from 31 hospitals across the UK for 1,154 patients. All interventions were enrolled in the registry for both asymptomatic and symptomatic patients. Initial entry forms were completed for each patient entered with data including indications, demographic data, CAS data (including stents and protection device details) and 30-day outcomes. Complications were documented. Follow-up data were collected at yearly intervals.

RESULTS

Nine hundred fifty-three (83 %) symptomatic and 201 (17 %) asymptomatic patients were enrolled into the registry. The 30-day all stroke and death rates for symptomatic patients were 5.5 and 2.2 % for those with asymptomatic disease. The 30-day mortality rate was 1.7 % for symptomatic and 0.6 % for asymptomatic patients. For symptomatic patients undergoing CAS, the 7-year all-cause mortality rate was 22.2 % and for asymptomatic patients 18.1 %. The 7-year all-cause mortality and disabling stroke rates were 25.3 and 19.4 %, respectively.

CONCLUSION

These data indicate that outside of the tight constraints of a randomised trial, CAS provides effective prophylaxis against stroke and death.

The role of embolic protection devices during carotid stenting prior to cardiac surgery in asymptomatic patients: empty filters?

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to analyze the debris captured in the distal protection filters used during carotid artery stenting (CAS).

BACKGROUND

CAS is an option available to high-risk patients requiring revascularization. Filters are suggested for optimal stroke prevention during CAS.

METHODS

From May 2005 to June 2007, filters from 59 asymptomatic patients who underwent CAS were collected and sent to a specialized laboratory for light-microscope and histological analysis. Peri- and postprocedural outcomes were assessed during 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

On the basis of biomedical imaging of the filter debris, the captured material could not be identified as embolized particles from the carotid plaque. On histological analysis the debris consisted mainly of red blood cell aggregates and/ or platelets, occasionally accompanied by granulocytes. We found no consistent histological evidence of embolized particles originating from atherosclerotic plaques. Post-procedure, three neurological events were reported: two (3.4%) transient ischemic attacks (TIA) and one (1.7%) ipsilateral minor stroke.

CONCLUSION

The filters used during CAS in asymptomatic patients planned for cardiac surgery often remained empty. These findings may be explained by assuming that asymptomatic patients feature a different atherosclerotic plaque composition or stabilization through antiplatelet medication. Larger, randomized trials are clearly warranted, especially in the asymptomatic population.

Analysis of Florida and New York state hospital discharges suggests that carotid stenting in symptomatic women is associated with significant increase in mortality and perioperative morbidity compared with carotid endarterectomy

BACKGROUND

Although large randomized studies have established the efficacy and safety of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and, recently, carotid artery stenting (CAS), the under-representation of women in these trials leaves the comparison of risks to benefits of performing these procedures on women an open question. To address this issue, we reviewed the hospital outcomes and delineated patient characteristics predicting outcome in women undergoing carotid interventions using New York and Florida statewide hospital discharge databases.

METHODS

We analyzed in-hospital mortality, postoperative stroke, cardiac postoperative complications, and combined postoperative stoke and mortality in 20,613 CEA or CAS hospitalizations for the years 2007 to 2009. Univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses of variables were performed.

RESULTS

CEA was performed in 16,576 asymptomatic and 1744 symptomatic women and CAS in 1943 asymptomatic and 350 symptomatic women. Compared with CAS, CEA rates, in asymptomatic vs symptomatic, were significantly lower for in-hospital mortality (0.3% vs 0.8% and 0.4% vs 3.4%), stroke (1.5% vs 2.6% and 3.5% vs 9.4%), and combined stroke/mortality (1.7% vs 3.1% and 3.8% vs 10.9%). In cohorts matched by propensity scores, the same trend favoring CEA remained significant in symptomatic women. There was no difference in cardiac complication rates among asymptomatic women, but among symptomatic woman cardiac complications were more frequent after CAS (10.6% vs 6.5%; P = .0077). Among symptomatic women, the presence of renal disease, coronary artery disease, or age ≥80 years increased the risk of CAS over CEA threefold for the composite end point of stroke or death. For asymptomatic women only in those with coronary artery disease or diabetes, there was a statistical difference in the composite mortality/stroke rates favoring CEA (1.9% vs 3.3% and 1.7% vs 3.4%, respectively). After adjusting for relevant clinical and demographic risk factors and hospital annual volume, for CAS vs CEA, the risk of the composite end point of stroke or mortality was 1.7-fold higher in symptomatic and 3.4-fold higher in asymptomatic patients. Medicaid insurance, symptomatic patient, history of cancer, and presence of heart failure on admission were among other strong predictors of composite stroke/mortality outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Databases reflecting real-world practice performance and management of carotid disease in women suggest that CEA compared with CAS has overall better perioperative outcomes in women. Importantly, CAS is associated with significantly higher morbidity in certain clinical settings and this should be taken into account when choosing a revascularization procedure.

Long-term outcome in patients with carotid artery stenting and contralateral carotid occlusion: a single neurovascular center prospective analysis

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical features and early and late outcome of patients treated with carotid artery stenting for carotid stenosis with occlusion of the contralateral vessel (CAS-CCO), and compare them to patients without occlusion (CAS-NO).

METHODS

From 1999 through 2010, 426 patients with 479 procedures were prospectively recorded, 61 patients (14.3%) CAS-CCO, and 365 patients CAS-NO. Immediate CAS complications, complications within the first 30 days and long-term complications were documented through annual clinical and ultrasonological follow-up visits. Stenosis rate was recorded.

RESULTS

Patients with mean age of 68.4 years, 80% men had: (1) periprocedural stroke in three cases (0.7%), (2) cumulative 30-day stroke, ischemic cardiopathy, and death in 4.2%, without differences between groups (CAS-CCO 3.3%, CAS-NO 4.4%). Mean follow-up period was 55 ± 32.78 months, median 56 months. (3) Stroke during the follow-up in 8%, without differences between CAS-CCO and CAS-NO groups (3.7% and 8.8%). (4) Myocardial infarction in 11.2% and (5) global mortality in 24.3%, without statistical differences between groups. Of the 254 cases enrolled in the restenosis analysis, 44 patients (17.3%) had restenosis of any grade during a mean follow-up period of 52 months, without statistical differences between CAS-CCO and CAS-NO groups. Only 7.5% presented restenosis ≥ 50%. Its occurrence was statistically associated with previous neck radiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Periprocedural risks and long-term outcomes of patients treated with CAS and presenting a contralateral carotid occlusion does not differ from regular patients treated with CAS. Based on the low stenosis rate of our study, our results do not give credit to extra surveillance measures in patients with contralateral carotid occlusion.

Carotid stent fracture and restenosis management

We report an unusual case of asymptomatic accelerated right carotid artery in-stent restenosis in a patient referred for revascularization of a de novo stenosis of her left internal carotid artery.

Article Commentary: Late Outcomes of Carotid Artery Stenting: A Critical Review

The role of carotid artery stenting (CAS) as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy for the treatment of extracranial carotid occlusive disease for stroke prevention continues to evolve. Although technical and device refinements aimed at making CAS safer continue to this day, safety as measured by 30-day and 1-year outcomes has been the primary recipient of regulatory and practice attention. Relatively less emphasis has been placed on the incidence of recurrent stenosis after CAS and the efficacy of CAS in late stroke prevention. Data on late outcomes of CAS, including factors of potential influence, have been emerging and are addressed in this review.

Follow-up Outcomes of Self-Expanding Stents for Carotid Artery Angioplasty at a Single Hospital

Carotid artery angioplasty and stent placement (CASP) is widely accepted as a valuable alternative to carotid endarterectomy, particularly among high-risk patient populations. We analyzed the follow-up data of patients who underwent CASP with self-expanding stents for carotid lesions. Since 2001, self-expanding stents have been deployed in 59 lesions in 56 patients. Forty-seven patients were male, and nine were female. The median age was 73 years, ranging 50 to 83 years. There were 31 asymptomatic lesions and 28 symptomatic lesions. The median follow-up period was 27 months, ranging six to 102 months. All lesions received stents and technical success was achieved in 58 (98.3%) out of 59 lesions. The 30-day transient ischemic attack rate was 8.6%, the stroke rate was 3.4%, and the death rate was 0%. No ischemic attack was observed on the ipsilateral side after 30 days. Recurrent stenosis (>50%) was observed in three patients (5.1%) and in two (3.4%) of these, revascularization was performed. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that the rates for one year and two year freedom from any stroke or death were 93.1% and 90.9%, respectively. The incidence of recurrent carotid stenosis is acceptably low after CASP. CASP is effective to prevent ipsilateral ischemic stroke in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients.

Late Outcomes After Carotid Artery Stenting Versus Carotid Endarterectomy

Background— In patients with carotid artery disease, carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) are treatment options. Controversy exists as to the relative efficacy of the 2 techniques in preventing late events.

Methods and Results— The Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) Registry recruited >68 000 outpatients ≥45 years of age with established atherothrombotic disease or ≥3 risk factors for atherothrombosis. Patients with CAS or CEA were chosen and followed up prospectively for the occurrence of cardiovascular events. Propensity score matching was performed to assemble a cohort of patients in whom all baseline covariates would be well balanced. Primary outcome was defined as death or stroke at the 2-year follow-up. Secondary outcome was stroke or transient ischemic attack. Tertiary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke and the individual outcomes. Of the 68 236 patients with atherothrombosis, 3412 patients (5%) had a history of carotid artery revascularization (70% asymptomatic carotid stenosis), 1025 (30%) with CAS and 2387 (70%) with CEA. Propensity score analyses matched 836 CAS patients with 836 CEA patients. At the end of 2 years of follow-up, in the propensity score–matched cohort, CAS was associated with a risk similar to CEA for the primary (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57 to 1.26), secondary (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.96), and tertiary (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.01) composite outcome, death (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40 to 1.00), and stroke (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 0.79 to 2.80).

Conclusion— In a real-world cohort of patients with a history of carotid artery revascularization, CAS was comparable to CEA for late outcomes.

Are Symptomatic Patients Appropriate Candidates For Carotid Artery Stenting? No (at Least Not At Present)

Most symptomatic patients should not be candidates for carotid artery stenting (CAS); at least not at present. In these patients, CAS is associated with higher stroke, as well as recurrent stenosis rates compared with carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Furthermore, CAS is considerably more expensive than CEA. These facts raise the question, why perform CAS in symptomatic patients when you have CEA, which is associated with lower stroke and recurrent stenosis rates, and is also a more cost-effective option. This article supports the theory that currently most symptomatic patients are not appropriate candidates for CAS.

Are symptomatic patients currently appropriate candidates for carotid artery stenting? Yes

Most of the currently published randomized trials (RCTs) for carotid artery stenting (CAS) versus carotid endarterectomy (CEA) on symptomatic patients have concluded that CAS is associated with outcomes that are inferior to those of CEA. However, before final decision making on the future of CAS, there are some major issues of concern. Randomized controlled trials condemning CAS suffer from major study flaws, rendering comparison with CEA ineffective. These trials are challenged by methodological gaps, underpowered results, old-fashioned equipment and underuse of cerebral protection devices or even of stents. On the other hand, physicians' experience in CAS has not been that much appreciated, whereas CEA has been widely performed during the last 30 years by experienced and fully trained vascular surgeons. CAS is a recently emerged treatment that cannot yet be standardized. No matter the final verdict on CAS, the procedure will never be for low volume practitioners. It is required that CAS be performed exclusively in high volume centers with specific dedicated experience and adequate training. Yet, optimistic results on CAS have been constantly reported from single, highly specialized CAS centers around the world. Regarding restenosis rates, they should be evaluated on the true need for re-intervention, since its clinical significance is still debated; but even when decision is undertaken to operate a restenosis, a repeat endovascular procedure is safe with reported complication rates < 1%. Concluding, vascular surgeons should be thoughtful about rejecting it as an alternative to CEA, because with advancing technology, vascular surgeons electing to stay away, and not perform CAS, will stay out of the "race."