Characteristics of participants consenting versus declining follow-up for up to 10 years in a randomized clinical trial

Real world data in mechanical thrombectomy: who are we losing to follow-up?

BACKGROUND

Missing outcome data (MOD) is a common problem in clinical trials and registries, and a potential bias when drawing conclusions from these data. Identifying factors associated with MOD may help to increase follow-up rates and assess the need for imputation strategies. We investigated MOD in a multicenter, prospective registry study of mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in large vessel occlusion ischemic stroke.

METHODS

13 082 patients enrolled in the German Stroke Registry-Endovascular Treatment from May 2015 to December 2021 were analyzed with regard to MOD (90 day modified Rankin Scale, mRS). Univariate logistic regression analyses identified factors unbalanced between patients with and without MOD. Subgroup analyses were performed to identify patients for whom increased efforts to perform clinical follow-up after hospital discharge are needed.

RESULTS

We identified 19.7% (2580/13 082) of patients with MOD at the 90 day follow-up. MOD was more common with higher pre-stroke disability (mRS 3-5, 32.2% vs mRS 0-2, 13.7%; P<0.001), absence of bridging intravenous thrombolysis, longer time to treatment, and in patients with high post-stroke disability at discharge (mRS 3-5 vs 0-2: OR 1.234 (95% CI 1.107 to 1.375); P<0.001). In contrast, MOD was less common with futile recanalization (thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (TICI) score of 0-2a, 12.4% vs TICI 2b-3, 15.0%; P=0.001). In patients discharged alive with well documented baseline characteristics, shorter hospital stay (OR 0.992 (95% CI 0.985 to 0.998); P=0.010) and discharge to institutional care or hospital (OR 1.754 (95% CI 1.558 to 1.976); P<0.001) were associated with MOD.

CONCLUSION

MOD in routine care MT registry data was not random. Increased efforts to perform clinical follow-up are needed, especially in the case of higher pre-stroke and post-stroke disability and discharge to hospital or institutional care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03356392.

Long-term outcomes of symptomatic and asymptomatic patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy in an average-volume community hospital

BACKGROUND

Long-term benefit of carotid endarectomy has not yet been fully investigated in average volume centers. Thus our purpose is to evaluate long-term results of carotid endarterectomies at a medium-volume hospital.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of carotid artery stenosis operated between 2008 and 2017 in a community hospital was done. Demographic and postoperative outcomes were evaluated in short and long-term by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis.

RESULTS

167 procedures in 159 patients were included. Average age was 72 years, and 65% were men. Twenty-nine percent of the patients were symptomatic and the rest asymptomatic. Median hospitalization was 3 (IQR 3-4) days and the mean follow-up was 56 months. No hospital mortality was recorded. At 120-month follow-up, freedom of stroke was 97.4%, death 97.3%, restenosis, 98.7% and all combined events 92.9% (log rank p = .042) Combined event-free survival was 84.4% in symptomatic patients, and 96.1% in asymptomatic patients (log rank p = .025).

CONCLUSIONS

In a medium-volume hospital combined event-free survival was 84.4% in symptomatic patients and 96.1% in asymptomatic at a 10-year follow-up.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Reasons for Declining Consent in a Population-Based Cohort Study Conducted in a Rural South American Community

There is limited information on participants' adherence and reasons for declining consent in observational cohort studies conducted in remote rural communities. We aimed at sharing lessons learned during the Atahualpa Project, a population-based cohort study conducted in a rural Ecuadorian village. Atahualpa residents aged ≥40 years identified during door-to-door surveys who signed a consent form were enrolled. Annual surveys were conducted to assess the number of participants who moved out of the village, as well as those who died, declined consent, and newly entered the study. Reasons for declining consent were tabulated. Abstracted data included age, sex, education, disability, time between enrollment and declining consent, and reasons for withdrawal. We also counted participants who, despite expressing their willingness to continue in the study, refused specific procedures. After five years of follow-up, 54 (6.3%) of 863 enrolled individuals declined consent. Increasing age and disability had no impact on declining consent. In contrast, refusal was higher among relatives or neighbors of a given participant declining consent. Most people who declined consent did so after one or two years of enrollment. Less than 20% of enrolled individuals refused certain procedures. "Fear of the needle" was the most frequent reason for refusing blood tests, and common reasons for declining complimentary exams were lack of interest and time constraints. Cohort retention in the Atahualpa Project is high. Main reasons for this adherence include adequate selection of the village, detailed planning of procedures, assurance of sponsorship, and field personnel who continuously engage with study participants. This trial is registered with NCT01627600.

Challenge and Yield of Enrolling Racially and Ethnically Diverse Patient Populations in Low Event Rate Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

We report patient enrollment and retention by race and ethnicity in the CREST (Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stent Trial) and assess potential effect modification by race/ethnicity. In addition, we discuss the challenge of detecting differences in study outcomes when subgroups are small and the event rate is low.

METHODS

We compared 2502 patients by race, ethnicity, baseline characteristics, and primary outcome (any periprocedural stroke, death, or myocardial infarction and subsequent ipsilateral stroke up to 10 years).

RESULTS

Two hundred forty (9.7%) patients were minority by race (6.1%) or ethnicity (3.6%); 109 patients (4.4%) were black, 32 (1.3%) Asian, 2332 (93.4%) white, 11 (0.4%) other, and 18 (0.7%) unknown. Ninety (3.6%) were Hispanic, 2377 (95%) non-Hispanic, and 35 (1.4%) unknown. The rate of the primary end point for all patients was 10.9%±0.9% at 10 years and did not differ by race or ethnicity (P_inter>0.24).

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of minorities recruited to CREST was below their representation in the general population, and retention of minority patients was lower than for whites. Primary outcomes did not differ by race or ethnicity. However, in CREST (like other studies), the lack of evidence of a racial/ethnic difference in the treatment effect should be interpreted with caution because of low statistical power to detect such a difference.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00004732.

Endarterectomy achieves lower stroke and death rates compared with stenting in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis

BACKGROUND

It is currently unclear if carotid artery stenting (CAS) is as safe as carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for patients with significant asymptomatic stenosis. The aim of our study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of trials comparing CAS with CEA.

METHODS

On March 17, 2017, a search for randomized controlled trials was performed in MEDLINE and Scopus databases with no time limits. We performed meta-analyses with Peto odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Quality of evidence was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation method. The primary safety and efficacy outcome measures were stroke or death rate at 30 days and ipsilateral stroke at 1 year (including ipsilateral stroke and death rate at 30 days), respectively. Perioperative stroke, ipsilateral stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and cranial nerve injury (CNI) were all secondary outcome measures.

RESULTS

The systematic review of the literature identified nine randomized controlled trials reporting on 3709 patients allocated into CEA (n = 1479) or CAS (n = 2230). Stroke or death rate at 30 days was significantly higher for CAS (64/2176 [2.94%]) compared with CEA (27/1431 [1.89%]; OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.01-2.44; P = .044), with low level of heterogeneity beyond chance (I² = 0%). Also, stroke rate at 30 days was significantly higher for CAS (63/2176 [2.90%]) than for CEA (26/1431 [1.82%]; OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.04-2.54; P = .032; I² = 0%). MI at 30 days was nonsignificantly lower for CAS (12/1815 [0.66%]) compared with CEA (16/1070 [1.50%]; OR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.24-1.14; P = .105; I² = 0%); however, CNI at 30 days was significantly lower for CAS (2/1794 [0.11%]) than for CEA (33/1061 [3.21%]; OR, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.07-0.26; P < .00001; I² = 0%). Regarding the long-term outcome of stroke or death rate at 30 days plus ipsilateral stroke during follow-up, this was significantly higher for CAS (79/2173 [3.64%]) than for CEA (35/1430 [2.45%]; OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.02-2.24; P = .04; I² = 0%). Quality of evidence for all stroke outcomes was graded moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with asymptomatic stenosis undergoing carotid intervention, there is moderate-quality evidence to suggest that CEA had significantly lower 30-day stroke and also stroke or death rates compared with CAS at the cost of higher CNI and nonsignificantly higher MI rates. The long-term efficacy of CEA in ipsilateral stroke prevention, taking into account perioperative stroke and death, was preserved during follow-up. There is an urgent need for high-quality research before a firm recommendation is made that CAS is inferior or not to CEA.