Endarterectomy versus stenting for the prevention of periprocedural stroke or death in patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid stenosis: a meta-analysis of 10 randomized trials

Advances in the Endovascular Management of Cerebrovascular Disease

The field of endovascular neurosurgery has experienced remarkable progress over the last few decades. Endovascular treatments have continued to gain traction as the advancement of technology, technique, and procedural safety has allowed for the expansion of treatment indications of various cerebrovascular pathologies. Interventions such as the coiling of intracranial aneurysms, carotid artery stenting, mechanical thrombectomy in the setting of ischemic stroke, and endovascular embolization of arteriovenous malformations have all seen transformations in their safety and efficacy, expanding the scope of endovascularly treatable conditions and offering new hope to patients who may have otherwise not been candidates for surgical intervention. Despite this notable progress, challenges persist, including complications associated with device deployment and questions regarding long-term outcomes. This article explores the advancements in endovascular neurosurgical techniques, highlighting the impact on patient care, outcomes, and the evolution of traditional surgical methods.

Outcomes Following Carotid Endarterectomy and Carotid Artery Stenting in Patients with Carotid Artery Stenosis: A Retrospective Study from a Single Center in South Korea

BACKGROUND Previous randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses comparing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) included a large number of patients, but the diagnosis, treatment selection, and performance were heterogeneous. This retrospective study from a single center in South Korea aimed to evaluate outcomes following CEA and CAS in patients with carotid artery stenosis. MATERIAL AND METHODS A retrospective analysis was performed using the data of patients who underwent carotid revascularization between September 2016 and June 2021 at a single institution. The primary outcomes were stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and death during the periprocedural period. RESULTS We enrolled a total of 61 (44 symptomatic and 17 asymptomatic) patients who underwent CEA or CAS. Among them, 36 (59%) underwent CEA and 25 (41%) underwent CAS. Statistically significant differences were found between the groups in degree of carotid stenosis (CEA: 87.0±9.1, CAS: 80.5±9.3, P=0.007). All patients with confirmed plaque ulceration before carotid revascularization underwent CEA. Two (3.3%) periprocedural strokes occurred, 1 in each group, on the ipsilateral side. There were no significant differences between CEA and CAS in the event-free survival rate for stroke during the follow-up (log-rank test=0.806). CONCLUSIONS Favorable outcomes in terms of periprocedural stroke were observed. We found no significant difference between the 2 carotid revascularization techniques in the incidence of periprocedural stroke in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. To confirm our findings, further studies involving a larger number of patients and continuous follow-up are necessary.

The potential benefit of endothelin receptor antagonists' therapy in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis: A meta-analysis of results from randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Fibrotic diseases take a very heavy toll in terms of morbidity and mortality equal to or even greater than that caused by metastatic cancer. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of endothelin receptor antagonists on idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

METHOD

A systematic search of the clinical trials from the Medline, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and PubMed electronic databases was performed. Stata version 12.0 statistical software (Stata Crop LP, College Station, TX) was adopted as statistical software.

RESULT

A total of 5 studies, which included 1500 participants. Our analysis found there is no significant difference between using the endothelin receptor antagonists' group and placebo groups regarding the lung function via estimating both the change of forced vital capacity from baseline and DLco index. Exercise capacity and serious adverse effects are taken into consideration as well; however, there is still no significant change between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis provides insufficient evidence to support that endothelin receptor antagonists' administration provides a benefit among included participants who encounter idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis.

Predictors of the multiwire technique use in carotid artery stenting

OBJECTIVES

The multiwire technique (MWT) in carotid artery stenting (CAS), characterized by the use of more than one guidewire to support guiding catheter in patients with hostile neck anatomy, increases procedural time, enhancing the risk of periprocedural stroke. The aim of the present study was to identify which factors are predictors of the MWT use in CAS, in order to stratify patients with longer procedure at potential higher risk of periprocedural stroke.

METHODS

The study retrospectively included patients who underwent CAS for stenotic plaque between January 2015 and December 2019. Exclusion criteria was incomplete clinical data. For each patients were registered clinical data, main aortic arch and supra-aortic vessel anatomical features, carotid plaque characteristics, and procedural details. The sample was divided in two group on the basis of the number of guides used during the stenting procedure: one guide (standard technique, ST) or more than one guidewire (MWT) to support the guiding catheter. Differences between groups were tested by Chi-square text or Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney U test. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors for the use of the MWT. The area under the ROC (AUC) curve was used to assess performance of the model to predict the use of the multiwire technique.

RESULTS

The final sample included 146 of the 204 (71%) patients who underwent CAS during the study period. The median age of the patients was 79 years (IQR 71-83 years) with 47/146 (32%) females. CAS was performed with MWT in 17/146 (12%) of the cases. MWT was used more likely in patients with aortic arch type II or III as compared to ST (71% vs 37%, P = 0.02) while plaques with heavy concentric calcifications were more frequent in ST as compared to MWT (38% vs 12%, P = 0.03). At multivariable analysis aortic arch type II or III (OR 5.08, 95% CI 1.48-17.93, P < 0.01), plaque stenosis > 79% (OR 4.13, 95% CI 1.03-16.61, P = 0.04), and plaque heavy concentric calcifications (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.94, P = 0.04) were independent predictors of MWT use. The model showed an AUC of 0.827 (95% CI 0.756-0.884) for the prediction of the MWT use during CAS.

CONCLUSIONS

Aortic arch type II or III, carotid plaque with stenosis higher than 79% of the lumen or without heavy concentric calcifications were predictors for the use of the MWT during CAS. These features should be considered during planning of CAS as hallmark of vascular stiffness and therefore of higher procedure complexity.