Diagnosis, Treatment and Follow-up in Extracranial Carotid Stenosis

Identification of patient characteristics that may improve procedure selection for the treatment of carotid stenosis

BACKGROUND

Carotid endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting are common procedures for the treatment of carotid artery stenosis. The aim of this study was to identify factors that modify the effect between type of treatment and outcome, and could thus be used to refine the selection of treatment procedure.

METHODS

All patients who underwent either carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting between 2012 and 2018 in German hospitals were included. The analysis of effect modification was focused on baseline patient characteristics. The outcome was a composite of any stroke or death until discharge from hospital. For multivariable analyses, a generalized linear mixed regression model was used.

RESULTS

Some 221 282 patients were included, of whom 68% were male. In patients who underwent carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting, the risk of any stroke or death was 2.3% and 3.7% respectively. Patient age was statistically significantly associated with a higher risk of a composite outcome of any stroke or death (main effect of age: adjusted OR 1.21 (95% c.i. 1.17 to 1.26), P < 0.001). The age effect was stronger in patients treated with carotid artery stenting (interaction effect: adjusted OR 1.29 (95% c.i. 1.20 to 1.38), P < 0.001). Statistically significant interaction effects were identified for side of treatment, ASA grade, contralateral degree of stenosis, and the time interval between the index event and treatment.

CONCLUSION

This analysis shows that carotid artery stenting may be particularly disadvantageous in older patients, in patients with right-sided stenosis, and in symptomatic patients treated within the first 2 days after the index event. In patients with contralateral occlusion, carotid artery stenting appears equivalent to carotid endarterectomy.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic value of computed tomography angiography for severe internal carotid artery stenosis

BACKGROUND

Due to the increasing incidence of ischaemic cerebrovascular diseases, the accurate assessment of internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis is crucial for the development of treatment plans. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of computed tomography angiography (CTA) for severe ICAstenosis, thereby providing support for clinical decision-making and promoting diagnostic updates.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang Database, VIP Database for Chinese Technical Periodicals (VIP), and Chinese Biomedical Literature (CBM) electronic databases were searched from inception to March 21, 2024, to identify publicly available research literature on the use of CTA to diagnose severe ICA stenosis. Literature screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were conducted based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria as well as the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) standards. Data analysis was performed using Stata 17.0 and Meta-Disc 1.4 software. The sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio of the included studies were calculated using Stata 17.0 software, and forest plots and summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves were generated. The area under the curve (AUC) was calculated, and funnel plots were constructed to assess publication bias.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies with 2368 vascular segments were included. The meta-analysis revealed that the combined sensitivity and specificity of CTA for severe ICA stenosis were 0.93 (95% CI: 0.88 ~ 0.96) and 0.99 (95% CI: 0.96 ~ 1.00), respectively. The combined positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio were 92.0 (95% CI: 24.2 ~ 349.6) and 0.07 (95% CI: 0.04 ~ 0.13), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio was 1302 (95% CI: 257 ~ 6606), and the AUC of the SROC curve was 0.98. The Deeks funnel plot suggested no publication bias among the included studies.

CONCLUSION

CTA demonstrated high sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing severe ICA stenosis. Therefore, this study provided important evidence for the accurate diagnosis and treatment of severe ICA stenosis. However, there was considerable heterogeneity among the included studies, thus indicating the need for additional high-quality prospective studies to confirm the clinical applicability of CTA.

Effectiveness of Compound Dilong Capsules in Patients with Asymptomatic Cerebral Carotid Artery Stenosis: A Retrospective Case-Control Study

Purpose

Asymptomatic cerebral carotid artery stenosis (ACCAS) benefits from secondary prevention via statins and antiplatelets; nonetheless, the impact of medication alone is often limited. Evidence has suggested enhanced therapeutic outcomes when Chinese patent medicine-specifically, compound dilong capsules (CDC)-is integrated with conventional secondary prevention measures.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively analyzed 319 ACCAS patients from January 2018 to December 2022 at Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University. Depending on the clinical outcomes-improvement or stabilization versus progression-patients were classified into effective or ineffective treatment groups. Patient medical records and questionnaire responses were the primary data sources. The study accounted for demographic variables, clinical history, and medication details, with the primary focus on CDC use and its duration. Treatment outcomes were gauged alongside Transcranial color-coded sonography and Carotid Doppler ultrasonography findings. We employed both univariate and multivariate statistical methods to assess the data.

Results

CDC administration (aOR=2.51, 95% CI 1.39-4.54, P=0.002) and extended usage beyond six months (aOR=3.54, 95% CI 1.71-7.32, P=0.001) demonstrate a statistically significant correlation with treatment efficacy. Gender (aOR=2.54, 95% CI 1.30-5.00, P=0.007), hypertension management (aOR=0.56, 95% CI 0.33-0.95, P=0.031), and antiplatelet therapy with aspirin (aOR=9.53, 95% CI 1.15-78.89, P=0.037) or clopidogrel (aOR=9.97, 95% CI 1.10-90.12, P=0.041) also influenced the therapeutic outcome significantly.

Conclusion

Incorporating CDC as part of a secondary prevention strategy for over six months can beneficially modulate and limit the progression of vascular stenosis in ACCAS. These findings underscore the value of combining traditional Chinese medicine with modern pharmacological interventions in ACCAS management.

Navigating complexity with low-crossing profile dual-layer micromesh carotid stent: implications for contemporary carotid artery stenting outcomes (ROADSAVER study insights)

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of carotid artery stenting (CAS) can be affected by certain technical and anatomical factors. However, it is not known whether the use of a dual-layer micromesh stent (DLMS) with a low-crossing profile could reduce the risks associated with complex vascular anatomies during CAS.

METHODS

This study involved 1965 asymptomatic or symptomatic carotid artery stenosis patients who received the Roadsaver DLMS during CAS, as part of a prospective, multicenter observational ROADSAVER study, conducted from January 2018 to February 2021. The primary outcome was the 30-day rate of major adverse events (MAE; i.e. any death or stroke) after CAS. Procedural details and outcomes were compared between patients with complex anatomical features and those without.

RESULTS

One or more complex anatomical characteristics were identified in 1639 (83.4%) patents. Patients with complex anatomies were older and had a higher prevalence of arterial hypertension, cardiovascular disease, and prior stroke. Between patients with or without complex anatomical features, no significant differences were found either in procedural techniques, or in 30-day MAE (age-adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) for complexities vs. no complexities: 0.76 (0.35, 1.66); p=0.4905) and any stroke (age-adjusted odds ratio (95% CI) for complexities vs. no complexities: 0.89 (0.37, 2.17); p=0.8032) incidence. Furthermore, neither the presence of specific types of anatomic complexity nor their number (per patient) markedly influenced the 30-day MAE and any stroke incidence.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world cohort of patients undergoing CAS with the Roadsaver DLMS, no significant difference in the occurrence of 30-day MAE and any stroke was observed between patients with or without high-risk anatomical features.

Brazilian Angiology and Vascular Surgery Society Guidelines for the treatment of extracranial cerebrovascular disease

Extracranial cerebrovascular disease has been the subject of intense research throughout the world, and is of paramount importance for vascular surgeons. This guideline, written by the Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery (SBACV), supersedes the 2015 guideline. Non-atherosclerotic carotid artery diseases were not included in this document. The purpose of this guideline is to bring together the most robust evidence in this area in order to help specialists in the treatment decision-making process. The AGREE II methodology and the European Society of Cardiology system were used for recommendations and levels of evidence. The recommendations were graded from I to III, and levels of evidence were classified as A, B, or C. This guideline is divided into 11 chapters dealing with the various aspects of extracranial cerebrovascular disease: diagnosis, treatments and complications, based on up-to-date knowledge and the recommendations proposed by SBACV.

Association between hospital ownership and patient selection, management, and outcomes after carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting : - Secondary data analysis of the Bavarian statutory quality assurance database

BACKGROUND

This study analyses the association between hospital ownership and patient selection, treatment, and outcome of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or carotid artery stenting (CAS).

METHODS

The analysis is based on the Bavarian subset of the nationwide German statutory quality assurance database. All patients receiving CEA or CAS for carotid artery stenosis between 2014 and 2018 were included. Hospitals were subdivided into four groups: university hospitals, public hospitals, hospitals owned by charitable organizations, and private hospitals. The primary outcome was any stroke or death until discharge from hospital. Research was funded by Germany's Federal Joint Committee Innovation Fund (01VSF19016 ISAR-IQ).

RESULTS

In total, 22,446 patients were included. The majority of patients were treated in public hospitals (62%), followed by private hospitals (17%), university hospitals (16%), and hospitals under charitable ownership (6%). Two thirds of patients were male (68%), and the median age was 72 years. CAS was most often applied in university hospitals (25%) and most rarely used in private hospitals (9%). Compared to university hospitals, patients in private hospitals were more likely asymptomatic (65% vs. 49%). In asymptomatic patients, the risk of stroke or death was 1.3% in university hospitals, 1.5% in public hospitals, 1.0% in hospitals of charitable owners, and 1.2% in private hospitals. In symptomatic patients, these figures were 3.0%, 2.5%, 3.4%, and 1.2% respectively. Univariate analysis revealed no statistically significant differences between hospital groups. In the multivariable analysis, compared to university hospitals, the odds ratio of stroke or death in asymptomatic patients treated by CEA was significantly lower in charitable hospitals (OR 0.19 [95%-CI 0.07-0.56, p = 0.002]) and private hospitals (OR 0.47 [95%-CI 0.23-0.98, p = 0.043]). In symptomatic patients (elective treatment, CEA), patients treated in private or public hospitals showed a significantly lower odds ratio compared to university hospitals (0.36 [95%-CI 0.17-0.72, p = 0.004] and 0.65 [95%-CI 0.42-1.00, p = 0.048], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital ownership was related to patient selection and treatment, but not generally to outcomes. The lower risk of stroke or death in the subgroup of electively treated patients in private hospitals might be due to the right timing, the choice of treatment modality or actually to better structural and process quality.

Radiation Dose and Fluoroscopy Time of Extracranial Carotid Artery Stenting : Elective vs. Emergency Treatment Including Combined Mechanical Thrombectomy in Tandem Occlusion

PURPOSE

Fluoroscopically guided endovascular carotid artery stenting (CAS) of extracranial carotid stenosis (ECS) is a reasonable alternative to carotid endarterectomy in selected patients. Diagnostic reference levels (DRL) for this common neurointervention have not yet been defined and respective literature data are sparse. We provide detailed dosimetrics for useful expansion of the DRL catalogue.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center study of patients undergoing CAS between 2013 and 2021. We analyzed dose area product (DAP) and fluoroscopy time considering the following parameters: indications for CAS, semielective/elective versus emergency including additional mechanical thrombectomy (MT) in extracranial/intracranial tandem occlusion, etiology of ECS (atherosclerotic vs. radiation-induced), periprocedural features, e.g., number of applied stents, percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) and MT maneuvers, and dose protocol. Local DRL was defined as 75% percentile of the DAP distribution.

RESULTS

A total of 102 patients were included (semielective/elective CAS n = 75, emergency CAS n = 8, CAS + MT n = 19). Total median DAP was 78.2 Gy cm2 (DRL 117 Gy cm2). Lowest and highest median dosimetry values were documented for semielective/elective CAS and CAS + MT (DAP 49.1 vs. 146.8 Gy cm2, fluoroscopy time 27.1 vs. 43.8 min; p < 0.005), respectively. Dosimetrics were significantly lower in patients undergoing 0-1 PTA maneuvers compared to ≥ 2 maneuvers (p < 0.05). Etiology of ECS, number of stents and MT maneuvers had no significant impact on dosimetry values (p > 0.05). A low-dose protocol yielded a 33% reduction of DAP.

CONCLUSION

This CAS study suggests novel local DRLs for both elective and emergency cases with or without intracranial MT. A dedicated low-dose protocol was suitable for substantial reduction of radiation dose.

Carotid artery interventions - endarterectomy versus stenting

Current management of patients with carotid artery stenosis is based on well-established guidelines, including surgical procedures - carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and endovascular carotid artery stenting (CAS) - and optimal medical treatment alone. Outcomes in the postprocedural period after CAS and CEA are similar, suggesting strong clinical durability for both treatments. Recent advances, which include the emergence of novel endovascular treatment tools and techniques, combined with more recent randomised trial data shed new light on optimal patient selection and treatment in contemporary practice. Improved, modern technologies including enhanced embolic protection devices and dual-layered micromesh stents yield better outcomes and should result in further improvements in CAS. In centres of excellence, nowadays, the majority of patients with severe carotid artery stenosis can be successfully treated with either CEA or CAS.

What are the benefits and drawbacks of statins in carotid artery disease? A perspective review

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of carotid artery stenosis in the general population is approximately 3%, but approximately 20% among people with acute ischemic stroke. Statins are recommended by multiple international guidelines as the drug of choice for lipid control in people with asymptomatic or symptomatic carotid artery stenosis due to their lipid-lowering and other pleiotropic effects.

AREAS COVERED

This review discusses the guidelines for statin usage as a cornerstone in the prevention and management of atherosclerotic carotid artery disease and the impact of statins on stroke incidence and mortality. Statin side effects, alternative therapy, and genetic polymorphisms are reviewed.

EXPERT OPINION

Statin therapy is associated with a decreased incidence of stroke and mortality as well as improved outcomes for patients treated with carotid revascularization. Statins are a safe and effective class of medications, but the initiation of therapy warrants close monitoring to avoid rare and potentially serious side effects. Lack of clinical efficacy or the presence of side effects suggests a need for treatment with an alternative therapy such as PCSK9 inhibitors. Understanding the interplay between the mechanisms of statins and PCSK9 inhibition therapies will allow optimal benefits while minimizing risks. Future research into genetic polymorphisms may improve patient selection for personalized therapy.

Carotid Artery Stenting for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis: What We Need to Know for Treatment Decision

A clinical decision on the treatment of asymptomatic carotid stenosis is challenging, unlike symptomatic carotid stenosis. Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has been recommended as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) based on the finding that the efficacy and safety of CAS were comparable to CEA in randomized trials. However, in some countries, CAS is often performed more frequently than CEA for asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Moreover, it has been recently reported that CAS is not superior to the best medical treatment in asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Due to these recent changes, the role of CAS in asymptomatic carotid stenosis should be revisited. When determining the treatment for asymptomatic carotid stenosis, one should consider several clinical factors including stenosis degree, patient life expectancy, stroke risk by medical treatment, availability of a vascular surgeon, high risk for CEA or CAS, and insurance coverage. This review aimed to present and pragmatically organize the information that is necessary for a clinical decision on CAS in asymptomatic carotid stenosis. In conclusion, although the traditional benefit of CAS is being revisited recently, it seems too early to conclude that CAS is no longer beneficial under intense and systemic medical treatment. Instead, a treatment strategy with CAS should evolve to select eligible or medically high-risk patients more precisely.

[Important recommendations of the German-Austrian S3 guidelines on management of extracranial carotid artery stenosis]

BACKGROUND

Lesions of the extracranial carotid artery are the cause of 10-15 % of all cases of cerebral ischemia. The aims of the updated S3 guidelines are evidence-based and consensus-based recommendations for action on comprehensive care of patients with extracranial carotid stenosis in Germany and Austria.

METHODS

A systematic literature search (1990-2019) and methodical assessment of existing guidelines and systematic reviews were carried out. Consensus answers to 37 key questions with evidence-based recommendations.

RESULTS

The prevalence of extracranial carotid stenosis is approximately 4% and increases after the age of 65 years. The most important examination method is duplex sonography. Randomized controlled studies (RCT) have shown that carotid endarterectomy (CEA) of an asymptomatic 60-99% carotid artery stenosis reduces the absolute risk of stroke (absolute risk reduction, ARR) within 5 years in comparison to drug treatment alone by 4.1%. Due to an improved pharmaceutical prevention of arteriosclerosis, the S3 guidelines recommend a prophylactic CEA of a 60-99% stenosis only for patients without an increased surgical risk. Additionally, one or more clinical or imaging results should be present, which indicate an increased risk of carotid-related stroke in the follow-up. For medium-grade (50-69 %) and high-grade (70-99 %) symptomatic stenoses the ARRs after 5 years are 4.6% and 15.6%, respectively. Systematic reviews of RCTs have shown that CEA is associated with a ca. 50% lower periprocedural risk of stroke compared to carotid artery stenting (CAS). There are no differences in the long-term course. The CEA is recommended for high-grade asymptomatic, medium-grade and high-grade symptomatic carotid stenosis as a standard procedure, alternatively CAS can be considered. For both procedures the periprocedural stroke rate/mortality during hospitalization should be a maximum of 2% (asymptomatic stenosis) or 4% (symptomatic stenosis).

CONCLUSION

Both CEA and CAS necessitate a critical evaluation of the indications and strict quality criteria. Future studies should evaluate even better selection criteria for an individual, optimal, conservative, operative or endovascular treatment.

Optimal management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis in 2021: the jury is still out. An International, multispecialty, expert review and position statement

OBJECTIVES

The recommendations of international guidelines for the management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis (ACS) often vary considerably and extend from a conservative approach with risk factor modification and best medical treatment (BMT) alone, to a more aggressive approach with a carotid intervention plus BMT. The aim of the current multispecialty position statement is to reconcile the conflicting views on the topic.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature review was performed with a focus on data from recent studies.

RESULTS

Several clinical and imaging high-risk features have been identified that are associated with an increased long-term ipsilateral ischemic stroke risk in patients with ACS. Such high-risk clinical/imaging features include intraplaque hemorrhage, impaired cerebrovascular reserve, carotid plaque echolucency/ulceration/ neovascularization, a lipid-rich necrotic core, a thin or ruptured fibrous cap, silent brain infarction, a contralateral transient ischemic attack/stroke episode, male patients <75 years and microembolic signals on transcranial Doppler. There is growing evidence that 80-99% ACS indicate a higher stroke risk than 50-79% stenoses.

CONCLUSIONS

Although aggressive risk factor control and BMT should be implemented in all ACS patients, several high-risk features that may increase the risk of a future cerebrovascular event are now documented. Consequently, some guidelines recommend a prophylactic carotid intervention in high-risk patients to prevent future cerebrovascular events. Until the results of the much-anticipated randomized controlled trials emerge, the jury is still out regarding the optimal management of ACS patients.

European Stroke Organisation guideline on endarterectomy and stenting for carotid artery stenosis

Atherosclerotic stenosis of the internal carotid artery is an important cause of stroke. The aim of this guideline is to analyse the evidence pertaining to medical, surgical and endovascular treatment of patients with carotid stenosis. These guidelines were developed based on the ESO standard operating procedure and followed the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The working group identified relevant questions, performed systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the literature, assessed the quality of the available evidence, and wrote recommendations. Based on moderate quality evidence, we recommend carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with ≥60-99% asymptomatic carotid stenosis considered to be at increased risk of stroke on best medical treatment (BMT) alone. We also recommend CEA for patients with ≥70-99% symptomatic stenosis, and we suggest CEA for patients with 50-69% symptomatic stenosis. Based on high quality evidence, we recommend CEA should be performed early, ideally within two weeks of the last retinal or cerebral ischaemic event in patients with ≥50-99% symptomatic stenosis. Based on low quality evidence, carotid artery stenting (CAS) may be considered in patients < 70 years old with symptomatic ≥50-99% carotid stenosis. Several randomised trials supporting these recommendations were started decades ago, and BMT, CEA and CAS have evolved since. The results of another large trial comparing outcomes after CAS versus CEA in patients with asymptomatic stenosis are anticipated in the near future. Further trials are needed to reassess the benefits of carotid revascularisation in combination with modern BMT in subgroups of patients with carotid stenosis.