-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Stent Design, Restenosis and Recurrent Stroke After Carotid Artery Stenting in the International Carotid Stenting Study.
- Mandy D Müller, John Gregson, McCabeDominick J HDJHVascular Neurology Research Foundation, Department of Neurology and Stroke Service, The Adelaide and Meath Hospital, Dublin, incorporating the National Children's Hospital, Dublin/Tallaght University Hospital, Ireland; Irish Center fo, Paul J Nederkoorn, H Bart van der Worp, Gert J de Borst, Trevor Cleveland, Thomas Wolff, Stefan T Engelter, Philippe A Lyrer, Martin M Brown, and Leo H Bonati.
- From the Department of Neurology and Stroke Center (M.D.M., S.T.E., P.A.L., L.H.B.).
- Stroke. 2019 Nov 1; 50 (11): 3013-3020.
AbstractBackground and Purpose- Open-cell carotid artery stents are associated with a higher peri-procedural stroke risk than closed-cell stents. However, the effect of stent design on long-term durability of carotid artery stenting (CAS) is unknown. We compared the medium- to long-term risk of restenosis and ipsilateral stroke between patients treated with open-cell stents versus closed-cell stents in the ICSS (International Carotid Stenting Study). Methods- Patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis were randomized to CAS or endarterectomy and followed with duplex ultrasound for a median of 4.0 years. We analyzed data from patients with completed CAS procedures, known stent design, and available ultrasound follow-up. The primary outcome, moderate or higher restenosis (≥50%) was defined as a peak systolic velocity of >1.3 m/s on ultrasound or occlusion of the treated internal carotid artery and analyzed with interval-censored models. Results- Eight hundred fifty-five patients were allocated to CAS. Seven hundred fourteen patients with completed CAS and known stent design were included in the current analysis. Of these, 352 were treated with open-cell and 362 with closed-cell stents. Moderate or higher restenosis occurred significantly less frequently in patients treated with open-cell (n=113) than closed-cell stents (n=154; 5-year risks were 35.5% versus 46.0%; unadjusted hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53-0.88). There was no significant difference in the risk of severe restenosis (≥70%) after open-cell stenting (n=27) versus closed-cell stenting (n=43; 5-year risks, 8.6% versus 12.7%; unadjusted hazard ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.37-1.05). The risk of ipsilateral stroke beyond 30 days after treatment was similar with open-cell and closed-cell stents (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.35-1.75). Conclusions- Moderate or higher restenosis after CAS occurred less frequently in patients treated with open-cell stents than closed-cell stents. However, both stent designs were equally effective at preventing recurrent stroke during follow-up. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.isrctn.com/. Unique identifier: ISRCTN25337470.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.