Treatment of carotid artery stenosis: medical therapy, surgery, or stenting?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Lanzino G
PROVIDER: S-EPMC2665982 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Symptomatic carotid artery disease is a significant cause of ischemic stroke, and these patients are at high risk for recurrent vascular events. Patients with symptoms of stroke or transient ischemic attack attributable to a significantly stenotic vessel (70-99% luminal narrowing) should be treated with intensive medical therapy. Intensive medical therapy is a combination of pharmacologic and lifestyle interventions consistent with best-known practices as follows: initiation of antiplatelet agent or anticoagulation if medically indicated, high potency statin medication, blood pressure control with goal blood pressure of greater than 140/90, Mediterranean-style diet, exercise, and smoking cessation. Further, patients who have extracranial culprit lesions should be considered for revascularization with either carotid endarterectomy or carotid angioplasty and stenting depending on several factors including the patient's anatomy, age, gender, and procedural risk. Based on current evidence, patients with symptomatic intracranial stenosis should be managed with intensive medical therapy, including the use of dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel for the first 90 days following the ischemic event. While the literature has shown a stronger benefit of revascularization of extracranial symptomatic disease among certain subgroups of patients with greater than 70% stenosis, there is less benefit from revascularization with endarterectomy in patients with moderate stenosis of 50-69% if the surgeon's risk of perioperative stroke or death rate is greater than 6%.
| S-EPMC5496976 | biostudies-other
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7041119 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCarotid-artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy are both options for treating carotid-artery stenosis, an important cause of stroke.MethodsWe randomly assigned patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid stenosis to undergo carotid-artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. The primary composite end point was stroke, myocardial infarction, or death from any cause during the periprocedural period or any ipsilateral stroke within 4 years after randomization.ResultsFor 2502 patients over a median follow-up period of 2.5 years, there was no significant difference in the estimated 4-year rates of the primary end point between the stenting group and the endarterectomy group (7.2% and 6.8%, respectively; hazard ratio with stenting, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.51; P=0.51). There was no differential treatment effect with regard to the primary end point according to symptomatic status (P=0.84) or sex (P=0.34). The 4-year rate of stroke or death was 6.4% with stenting and 4.7% with endarterectomy (hazard ratio, 1.50; P=0.03); the rates among symptomatic patients were 8.0% and 6.4% (hazard ratio, 1.37; P=0.14), and the rates among asymptomatic patients were 4.5% and 2.7% (hazard ratio, 1.86; P=0.07), respectively. Periprocedural rates of individual components of the end points differed between the stenting group and the endarterectomy group: for death (0.7% vs. 0.3%, P=0.18), for stroke (4.1% vs. 2.3%, P=0.01), and for myocardial infarction (1.1% vs. 2.3%, P=0.03). After this period, the incidences of ipsilateral stroke with stenting and with endarterectomy were similarly low (2.0% and 2.4%, respectively; P=0.85).ConclusionsAmong patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid stenosis, the risk of the composite primary outcome of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death did not differ significantly in the group undergoing carotid-artery stenting and the group undergoing carotid endarterectomy. During the periprocedural period, there was a higher risk of stroke with stenting and a higher risk of myocardial infarction with endarterectomy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00004732.)
| S-EPMC2932446 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis is a common problem in the elderly. Despite two randomized trials that did not show a benefit of renal-artery stenting with respect to kidney function, the usefulness of stenting for the prevention of major adverse renal and cardiovascular events is uncertain.We randomly assigned 947 participants who had atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis and either systolic hypertension while taking two or more antihypertensive drugs or chronic kidney disease to medical therapy plus renal-artery stenting or medical therapy alone. Participants were followed for the occurrence of adverse cardiovascular and renal events (a composite end point of death from cardiovascular or renal causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for congestive heart failure, progressive renal insufficiency, or the need for renal-replacement therapy).Over a median follow-up period of 43 months (interquartile range, 31 to 55), the rate of the primary composite end point did not differ significantly between participants who underwent stenting in addition to receiving medical therapy and those who received medical therapy alone (35.1% and 35.8%, respectively; hazard ratio with stenting, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 1.17; P=0.58). There were also no significant differences between the treatment groups in the rates of the individual components of the primary end point or in all-cause mortality. During follow-up, there was a consistent modest difference in systolic blood pressure favoring the stent group (-2.3 mm Hg; 95% CI, -4.4 to -0.2; P=0.03).Renal-artery stenting did not confer a significant benefit with respect to the prevention of clinical events when added to comprehensive, multifactorial medical therapy in people with atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis and hypertension or chronic kidney disease. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00081731.).
| S-EPMC4815927 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNo completed trials have compared carotid artery stenting (CAS) to medical therapy (MT). We examined the effectiveness of CAS compared with MT in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of 219 979 Veterans ≥65 years who received carotid imaging for asymptomatic carotid stenosis between 2005 and 2009 in the US Veterans Health Administration. We constructed a sample of patients who received MT (n=2509) and comparable patients who received CAS (n=551) and followed them for 5 years. Using target trial methodology, we computed weighted Kaplan-Meier curves and estimated the risk of fatal and nonfatal stroke in each group over 5 years of follow-up. We also estimated the cumulative incidence functions for fatal and nonfatal stroke accounting for nonstroke deaths as competing risks.ResultsFive hundred fifty-one patients received CAS, and 2509 patients received MT. The observed rate of stroke or death (perioperative complications) within 30 days in the CAS arm was 2.2%. Using the target trial methodology, the 5-year risk of fatal and nonfatal stroke was similar among patients assigned to CAS (6.9%) compared with patients assigned to MT (7.1%; risk difference, -0.1% [95% CI, -2.6% to 2.7%]). In an analysis that incorporated the competing risk of death, the risk difference between the two arms remained nonsignificant (risk difference, -1.5% [95% CI, -3.0% to 0.3%]).ConclusionsIn this sample of older male adults, we found no difference between MT and CAS in the treatment of asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Future studies in other settings are needed to confirm these findings.
| S-EPMC8960339 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC517628 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cervical artery dissection (CeAD) with an intramural haematoma can lead to stroke risk, especially in young patients. We performed comprehensive searches of the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register, the CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE to review the effectiveness of surgical and endovascular interventions versus best medical treatment alone for symptomatic CeAD. Furthermore, we aim to elaborate on the phenotypic individual disease manifestations of spontaneous Cervical Artery Dissection (sCAD) and how they translate into stroke and risk of dissection recurrence. Primary outcomes were ipsilateral stroke and disability. Secondary outcomes were death, any stroke, or transient ischaemic attack, residual stenosis >50%, recurrence of CeAD, expanding pseudo-aneurysm or major bleeding. Our search yielded no randomised controlled trials and/or controlled clinical trials (CCTs) comparing either carotid surgery or endovascular therapy with optimal medical management; thus there was no evidence to support the use of any specific method for management of extracranial CeAD in patients who fail antithrombotic therapy. However, despite the absence of controlled studies to compare surgery or endovascular therapy in patients who fail antithrombotic therapy, carotid surgery in young patients can be justified as a personalized precision approach given the high morbidity and mortality in this age group.
| S-EPMC8350712 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Failure of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) is a critical event in the development and progression of diseases such as acute ischemic stroke, chronic ischemia or small vessels disease that affect the central nervous system. It is not known whether BBB breakdown in subjects with chronic carotid artery stenosis can be restrained with postoperative recovery of cerebral perfusion. The aim of the study was to assess the short-term effect of internal carotid artery stenting on basic perfusion parameters and permeability surface area-product (PS) in such a population. Forty subjects (23 males) with stenosis of >70% within a single internal carotid artery and neurological symptoms who underwent a carotid artery stenting procedure were investigated. Differences in the following computed tomography perfusion (CTP) parameters were compared before and after surgery: global cerebral blood flow (CBF), cerebral blood volume (CBV), mean transit time (MTT), time to peak (TTP) and PS. PS acquired by CTP is used to measure the permeability of the BBB to contrast material. In all baseline cases, the CBF and CBV values were low, while MTT and TTP were high on both the ipsi- and contralateral sides compared to reference values. PS was approximately twice the normal value. CBF was higher (+6.14%), while MTT was lower (-9.34%) on the contralateral than on the ipsilateral side. All perfusion parameters improved after stenting on both the ipsilateral (CBF +22.66%; CBV +18.98%; MTT -16.09%, TTP -7.62%) and contralateral (CBF +22.27%, CBV +19.72%, MTT -14.65%, TTP -7.46%) sides. PS decreased by almost half: ipsilateral -48.11%, contralateral -45.19%. The decline in BBB permeability was symmetrical on the ipsi- and contralateral sides to the stenosis. Augmented BBB permeability can be controlled by surgical intervention in humans.
| S-EPMC5454921 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial, we found no significant difference between the stenting group and the endarterectomy group with respect to the primary composite end point of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death during the periprocedural period or any subsequent ipsilateral stroke during 4 years of follow-up. We now extend the results to 10 years.MethodsAmong patients with carotid-artery stenosis who had been randomly assigned to stenting or endarterectomy, we evaluated outcomes every 6 months for up to 10 years at 117 centers. In addition to assessing the primary composite end point, we assessed the primary end point for the long-term extension study, which was ipsilateral stroke after the periprocedural period.ResultsAmong 2502 patients, there was no significant difference in the rate of the primary composite end point between the stenting group (11.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.1 to 14.8) and the endarterectomy group (9.9%; 95% CI, 7.9 to 12.2) over 10 years of follow-up (hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.44). With respect to the primary long-term end point, postprocedural ipsilateral stroke over the 10-year follow-up occurred in 6.9% (95% CI, 4.4 to 9.7) of the patients in the stenting group and in 5.6% (95% CI, 3.7 to 7.6) of those in the endarterectomy group; the rates did not differ significantly between the groups (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.52). No significant between-group differences with respect to either end point were detected when symptomatic patients and asymptomatic patients were analyzed separately.ConclusionsOver 10 years of follow-up, we did not find a significant difference between patients who underwent stenting and those who underwent endarterectomy with respect to the risk of periprocedural stroke, myocardial infarction, or death and subsequent ipsilateral stroke. The rate of postprocedural ipsilateral stroke also did not differ between groups. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and Abbott Vascular Solutions; CREST ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00004732.).
| S-EPMC4874663 | biostudies-literature