Carotid Artery Stenting

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has achieved clinical equipoise with carotid endarterectomy (CEA), as evidenced by 2 large U.S. randomized clinical trials, multiple pivotal registry trials, and 2 multispecialty guideline documents endorsed by 14 professional societies. The largest randomized trial conducted in patients at average surgical risk of CEA, CREST (Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial) found no difference between CAS and CEA for the combined endpoint of stroke, death, and myocardial infarction (MI) after 4 years of follow-up. The largest randomized trial comparing CAS and CEA in patients at increased surgical risk, SAPPHIRE (Stenting and Angioplasty with Protection in Patients at High Risk for Endarterectomy), looked at 1-year stroke, death, and MI incidence and found no difference in symptomatic patients, but a significantly better outcome in asymptomatic patients for CAS (9.9% vs. 21.5%; p = 0.02). Given that >70% of carotid revascularization procedures are performed in asymptomatic patients for primary prevention of stroke, it is incumbent upon clinicians to demonstrate that revascularization has an incremental benefit over highly effective modern medical therapy alone.     

An evidence‐based review of the impact of periprocedural myocardial infarction in carotid revascularization

Landmark trials comparing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) with medical therapy in patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic atherosclerotic stenosis of extracranial carotid arteries have favored carotid revascularization. Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has emerged as a minimally invasive option for revascularization of carotid artery stenoses and has been shown to be noninferior to CEA, regardless of patient symptom status. Debate continues regarding the importance of periprocedural myocardial infarction (PMI) as an endpoint in carotid revascularization trials. Recent randomized comparisons of CEA and CAS pre‐specify PMI as an endpoint. Understanding PMI in CEA and CAS, the need for routine biomarker assessment surrounding both revascularization strategies, the effect of PMI on long‐term morbidity and mortality, and the groups most at risk for PMI are of critical importance when choosing a carotid revascularization strategy for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients, since decreasing the incidence of PMI will make revascularization safer. This review examines available data regarding the relevance of PMI in vascular and carotid‐specific outcomes. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Carotid artery surgery vs. stent: a cardiovascular perspective.

Stroke is a major health catastrophe that is responsible for the third most common cause of death and the leading cause of disability. Carotid artery stenosis is an important cause of brain infarctions and the risk of stroke is directly related to the severity of carotid artery stenosis and to the presence of symptoms. Familiarity with different methods of measuring degrees of carotid artery stenosis is a key in understanding the role of revascularization of this disorder. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA), surgical removal of the carotid atherosclerotic plaque, is intended to prevent stroke in patients with carotid artery stenosis and currently the most commonly performed vascular procedure in the United States. Several randomized clinical trials had demonstrated the benefits of CEA in selected groups of patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. However, CEA can cause stroke, the very thing it intended to prevent, and is associated with significant perioperative complications such as those related to general anesthesia, cardiac or nerve injury. Moreover, several anatomical and medical conditions may limit candidates for CEA. Carotid artery stenting (CS) is an evolving and less invasive technique for carotid artery revascularization. Recent studies demonstrated that CS with embolic protection devices has become an alternative to CEA for high-surgical-risk patients and the procedure of choice for stenoses inaccessible by surgery. The role of CS in low risk patients awaits the completion of several ongoing studies.     

颈动脉狭窄患者的脑功能储备评价

颈动脉支架置入术（CAS）和颈动脉内膜切除术（QEA）是目前颈动脉狭窄患者最主要的非药物治疗方法。评价颈动脉狭窄患者的脑功能储备,不仅能筛选出近期可能面临卒中的高危患者,而且还能对无症状颈动脉狭窄患者行CEA和CAS的纳入标准进行修正,从而为患者提供最佳的治疗方案。文章对颈动脉狭窄患者的脑功能储备评价和MRI在其中的应用做了综述。     

颈动脉支架与内膜切除术治疗颈动脉狭窄疗效和安全性的Meta分析

目的 系统评价颈动脉支架(carotid artery stenting,CAS)和颈动脉内膜切除术(carotid endarterectomy,CEA)治疗颈动脉狭窄的安全性和疗效.方法 计算机检索PubMed、EMbase、Cochrane图书馆临床对照试验资料库、中国期刊全文数据库(CNKI)、中文科技期刊数据库(VIP)以及万方医学数据库,并辅以手工检索,收集CAS和CEA治疗颈动脉狭窄的随机对照试验,采用Cochrane协作网提供的RevMan 5.0.24软件进行Meta分析.结果 共纳入12个研究,6903例患者,其中CAS组3460例,CEA组3443例.CAS组术后30 d脑卒中或死亡联合发生风险(RR=1.64,95%CI:1.33～2.03,P＜0.00001)以及脑卒中风险(RR=1.70,95%CI:1.34～2.14,P＜0.00001)高于CEA组;CEA组术后30 d心肌梗死风险(RR=0.62,95%CI:0.39～0.97,P=0.04)和颅神经损伤风险(RR=0.07,95%CI:0.03～0.16,P＜0.00001)高于CAS组;两组术后30 d死亡风险(RR=1.33,95%CI:0.78～2.28,P=0.29)、致残性脑卒中风险(RR=1.27,95%CI:0.82～1.96,P=0.29)和术后1年脑卒中或死亡联合发生风险(RR=0.96,95%CI:0.63～1.46,P=0.84)差异无统计学意义.结论 从安全性方面考虑,对于一般手术风险的颈动脉狭窄患者,CEA仍是治疗颈动脉狭窄的首选治疗手段.具有手术高危因素或不适合手术的患者,CAS治疗更具有优势.

Abstract：

Objective To compare the safety and efficacy of carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy(CEA) for the treatment of carotid stenosis. Methods The electronic databases (PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CNKI, VIP and Wanfang) were searched in order to retrieve randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about comparing CAS and CEA for the treatment of carotid stenosis. Cochrane collaboration's RevMan 5.0.24 were used for analyzing data. Results Twelve RCTs totalling 6903 patients (3460 patients were randomized to CAS and 3443 randomized to CEA) with symptomatic or asymptomatic stenosis were included in the meta-analysis. There were significantly higher 30-day relative risks after CAS than after CEA for death or any stroke [RR=1.64, 95%CI (1.33-2.03), P＜0.00001] and for stroke [RR=1.70, 95%CI (1.34-2.14), P＜0.00001]. The relative risks of myocardial infarction [RR=0.62, 95%CI (0.39-0.97), P=0.04] and cranial neuropathy [RR=0.07, 95%CI (0.03-0.16), P＜0.00001] was significantly less after CAS than after CEA. The relative risks of death [RR=1.27, 95%CI (0.82-1.96), P=0.29] or disabling stroke within 30 days [RR=1.33, 95%CI (0.78-2.28), P=0.29] and any stroke or death at 1 year after the procedures [RR=0.96, 95%CI (0.63-1.46), P=0.84] did not differ significantly between CAS and CEA operation. Conclusions CEA remains the first choice for treatment of carotid stenosis for patients with low surgery risk. For patients with high surgery risk and unsuitable for surgery, CAS has more advantages. It is reasonable to view CAS and CEA as complementary rather than competing modes of therapy.     

Carotid Endarterectomy: When and in Whom?

Carotid endarterectomy has been a widely used method of preventing primary or secondary cerebrovascular ischemic events since the 1950s. Over the past several years, the interest in this surgical procedure has increased due to the publication of several large randomized trials comparing best medical therapy (antithrombotic) with carotid endarterectomy. The North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET) has demonstrated a risk reduction of 65% in patients who underwent carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis. The Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study (ACAS) also demonstrated a benefit of carotid endarterectomy, however, in a group of asymptomatic patients. There was an approximate reduction of 6% in stroke in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy in this series. Carotid endarterectomy is the treatment of choice in patients with symptomatic extracranial carotid atherosclerosis. Data is now emerging that this is also an effective therapy in patients with asymptomatic carotid stenosis. The perioperative stroke risk by the surgeon performing the procedure and the patient's co-morbid medical conditions are important factors to consider before proceeding with surgical treatment of this disorder.     

Carotid Endarterectomy: Current Concepts and Practice Patterns

Background Stroke is the number one cause of disability and third leading cause of death among adults in the United States. A major cause of stroke is carotid artery stenosis (CAS) caused by atherosclerotic plaques. Randomized trials have varying results regarding the equivalence and perioperative complication rates of stents versus carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in the management of CAS. Objectives We review the evidence for the current management of CAS and describe the current concepts and practice patterns of CEA. Methods A literature search was conducted using PubMed to identify relevant studies regarding CEA and stenting for the management of CAS. Results The introduction of CAS has led to a decrease in the percentage of CEA and an increase in the number of CAS procedures performed in the context of all revascularization procedures. However, the efficacy of stents in patients with symptomatic CAS remains unclear because of varying results among randomized trials, but the perioperative complication rates exceed those found after CEA. Conclusions Vascular surgeons are uniquely positioned to treat carotid artery disease through medical therapy, CEA, and stenting. Although data from randomized trials differ, it is important for surgeons to make clinical decisions based on the patient. We believe that CAS can be adopted with low complication rate in a selected subgroup of patients, but CEA should remain the standard of care. This current evidence should be incorporated into practice of the modern vascular surgeon.     

Carotid angioplasty and stenting versus carotid endarterectomy: randomized trial in a community hospital.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to determine whether carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is equivalent to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis >70% by a randomized, controlled trial in a community hospital. BACKGROUND: Carotid angioplasty and stenting has been suggested to be as effective as CEA for treatment of symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. METHODS: A total of 104 patients presenting with cerebrovascular ischemia ipsilateral to carotid stenosis were selected randomly for CEA or carotid stenting and followed for two years. RESULTS: Stenosis decreased to an average of 5% after CAS. The patency of the reconstructed artery remained satisfactory regardless of the technique as determined by sequential ultrasound. One death occurred in the CEA group (1/51); one transient ischemic attack occurred in the CAS group (1/53); no individual sustained a stroke. The perception of procedurally related pain/discomfort was similar. Hospital stay was similar, although the CAS group tended to be discharged earlier (mean = 1.8 days vs. 2.7 days). Complications associated with CAS prolonged hospitalization when compared with those sustaining a CEA-related complication (mean = 5.6 days vs. 3.8 days). Return to full activity was achieved within one week by 80% of the CAS group and 67% of the patients receiving CEA. Hospital charges were slightly higher for CAS. CONCLUSIONS: Carotid stenting is equivalent to CEA in reducing carotid stenosis without increased risk for major complications of death/stroke. Because of shortened hospitalization and convalescence, CAS challenges CEA as the preferred treatment of symptomatic carotid stenosis if a reduction in costs can be achieved.     

Surgery Insight: carotid endarterectomy--which patients to treat and when?

Over the past 15 years, we have witnessed a resurgence of surgery for prevention of ischemic stroke. Landmark trials including the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial and the European Carotid Surgery Trial have explored the role of carotid endarterectomy in this context, comparing the procedure with best medical treatment in patients with high-grade stenosis of the internal carotid artery and transient ischemic attack or minor nondisabling stroke in the same territory. Here, we discuss the lessons learnt from these trials, and review the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study and the Asymptomatic Carotid Surgery Trial, which attempted to resolve the rather vexing issue of surgical treatment for patients with asymptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis. We also review the best medical treatment for patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy in the perioperative period, and examine the risk of ischemic stroke after CABG surgery, both when this procedure is performed alongside endarterectomy and when CABG surgery and endarterectomy are performed as a two-staged procedure.     

颈动脉狭窄的血管内治疗

颈动脉内膜切除术(CEA)是公认的预防有症状或无症状重度颈动脉狭窄患者卒中的标准治疗方法。近年来,包括球囊扩张术和支架成形术在内的颈动脉血管内治疗在临床上得到广泛应用,无论是单中心研究还是世界范围的多中心研究均显示出良好的治疗效果,尤其是在CEA高危患者中,栓子保护装置下的颈动脉支架成形术效果更佳。越来越多的证据表明,血管内治疗可能成为CEA之后治疗颈动脉粥样硬化性狭窄的又一重要方法。     

Symptomatic carotid artery stenosis: what is the preferred treatment?

Stroke is a major cause of mortality, morbidity, and disability. Carotid artery disease is the etiology for 15% to 20% of stroke. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) reduces the risk of ipsilateral stroke and death in symptomatic patients with 50% to 99% carotid artery stenosis when the operative risk of stroke or death is less than 6%. Treatment benefit is greater with earlier surgery, more severe stenoses, and older age. Recently, carotid artery stenting (CAS) has emerged as a treatment option, especially in patients with high surgical risk due to anatomic or clinical variables. Nondisabling stroke risk may be higher with CAS than CEA, but the difference is narrowed with the use of embolic protection devices. The risk for myocardial infarction is lower with CAS than CEA. There is no difference in risk for disabling stroke or death. Worse results with new or low-volume CAS operators is a concern. CEA and CAS are complementary revascularization strategies. CEA may be preferred in older patients with complex anatomy or bulky plaques. CAS may be preferred in younger patients and those with restenosis, history of neck radiation, surgical contraindications, or surgically inaccessible lesions. The role for optimal medical therapy as an alternative treatment strategy remains to be defined. Nevertheless, all patients should be treated with lifestyle interventions and secondary risk factor control to target levels to reduce the risk of subsequent atherosclerotic events.     

Karotisstenose

Carotid stenosis amenable to surgical or interventional revascularization accounts for 5–12% of all new strokes. Duplex sonography, due to its high sensitivity and specificity is the first and most important step in establishing the diagnosis. Several randomised trials have proven the superiority of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) over medical treatment of symptomatic and also asymptomatic stenoses. For a growing number of patients carotid artery stenting (CAS) can be an alternative. The safety of CAS has improved in recent years due to technical developments, especially cerebral protection systems. According to large registries and also randomised trials the complication rate is comparable to CEA, at least for high surgical risk patients. Results of further randomised trials remain awaited before CAS will also be recommended for low risk patients and patients with asymptomatic stenoses.     

Carotid angioplasty and stenting under protection. State of the art

A carotid stenosis is responsible for about 30% of strokes occurring. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is considered to be the gold standard treatment of a carotid stenosis. Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is emerging as a new alternative treatment for a carotid artery stenosis, but the risk of neurological complications and brain embolism remain the major drawback to this procedure. So as to reduce the risk, we need: good indications, good patient and lesion selection; correct techniques; brain protection devices (cerebral protection devices should be routinely used and are mandatory for any procedure. Three types of protection devices are available: filters are the most commonly used. Nevertheless, all protection devices have limitations and cannot prevent from embolic events. However neurological complications can be reduced by 60%. New protection devices will be discussed); good choice of the stent and correct implantation (all stents are not equivalent and have different geometrical effects); pharmacological adjuncts; good team. Indications are well accepted for high-risk patients and recent studies have shown that CAS has superior short-term outcomes than CEA in this group of patients. Indications for low-risk and asymptomatic patients are controversial. New selection criteria have to be discussed. But there are enough reported data to conclude that CAS is also not inferior to CEA in low-risk and asymptomatic patients. In our series of 844 procedures, without protection (n = 187) 30-day death and stroke rate was 3.7% and with protection (n = 657) 1% (1.3% for symptomatic patients, 0.9% for asymptomatic patients, 1.4% in high-risk patients, 0.4% in low-risk patients). CAS under protection is the standard of care and is maybe becoming the gold standard treatment of a carotid stenosis at least in some subgroups of patients.     

Carotid artery disease: Stenting versus endarterectomy

Atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis is a major cause of disabling stroke or death. Although carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is currently considered to be the standard of care for patients with a severe symptomatic stenosis and selected patients with an asymptomatic carotid stenosis, carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is increasingly being used as an alternative treatment modality. This article briefly summarizes the current trial data on CEA and CAS. More importantly, potential risk factors for CEA and CAS are reviewed and the complementary role of these techniques in the management of the individual patient is discussed.     

Revascularization of carotid artery stenosis - a brief update on current evidence

Major and long-awaited trials comparing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) with carotid stenting (CAS) were published in recent years. Both, ICSS and CREST, documented a higher rate of periprocedural stroke and death in CAS, in particular in elderly patients, thereby confirming the results of prior trials and meta-analyses. In CREST, the composite endpoint included myocardial infarction (MI), which led to statistical equipoise between the treatment arms due to a higher rate of MI with CEA. However, whether MI is a relevant endpoint in trials for stroke prevention remains debatable. The stroke preventive benefit seems equally sustained after CEA and CAS, although the significance of restenoses, whose frequency is twice as high after CAS compared to CEA, is unclear in the long range. Emergent CEA in patients with clinically unstable carotid stenosis is associated with a very high complication risk, but the optimal treatment strategy for these patients remains to be elucidated. Recent evidence indicates a very low stroke risk of asymptomatic stenoses with intensive medical treatment, rendering revascularization almost unnecessary. The detection of microembolic signals on transcranial Doppler and rapid stenosis progression by duplex sonography might help to identify patients with higher stroke risk in whom revascularization is warranted.     

Zerebrale Protektion bei der Karotisstentangioplastie

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is an efficient procedure for the treatment of symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis and is nowadays well established as an interesting alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in daily clinical routine. The use of cerebral protection systems led to a significantly lower periprocedural incidence of stroke and death. Filter systems and balloon occlusion systems are available for cerebral protection. This overview compiles the technique, benefit and need for cerebral protection during carotid artery stenting.     

Evolving treatment strategies for carotid artery stenosis

Opinion statement Internal carotid artery stenosis is an important cause of ischemic stroke. Treatment decisions frequently center on whether the patient is symptomatic or asymptomatic. For recently symptomatic patients with severe stenosis (70% to 99%) and low to medium surgical risk, carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is extremely useful for stroke prevention. CEA is moderately useful for patients with 50% to 69% symptomatic stenosis and is not indicated for patients with symptomatic stenosis of less than 50%. CEA may be useful for select patients with severe asymptomatic stenosis (80% to 99%) but only if the surgical complication is kept below the 3% level. Carotid stenting is an emerging option for the future but is still experimental. In addition to carotid intervention, patients with carotid stenosis should receive aggressive risk factor management, including treatment with antiplatelet agents and statins.     

Management of carotid artery stenosis: Comparing endarterectomy and stenting

Stroke ranks as the third leading cause of death, behind diseases of the heart and cancer. It is also the most important cause of disability. Approximately 750,000 people experience a stroke annually, costing an estimated $40 billion in direct and indirect costs. Approximately 25% of these ischemic events are related to occlusive disease of the cervical internal carotid artery. Carotid atherovascular stenosis increases the risk of ischemic stroke by acting as an embolic source, and causing hypoperfusion of the ipsilateral cerebral hemisphere. With some limitations, the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial (NASCET), European Carotid Surgery Trialists' Collaborative Group (ECST), and Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study (ACAS) have shown that carotid endarterectomy (CEA) substantially reduces the risk of stroke associated with certain grades of carotid stenosis. During the past few years, carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) has evolved as an alternative to CEA, particularly in patients who are known to have a higher complication rate with CEA.     

Treatment strategies for carotid stenosis in patients at increased risk for surgery

The purpose of carotid revascularization is stroke prevention. The merits of carotid revascularization as well as the type of revascularization are dependent on the “natural risk” and the “revascularization risk.” In general, the natural risk of stroke in any patient with carotid stenosis (CS) is dependent on the symptomatic status of the patient and CS severity. Contemporary choices for carotid revascularization include carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS). Anatomical (hostile neck situations, severe bilateral CS, CEA restenosis) and clinical (severe cardiopulmonary diseases, prior cranial nerve injury) factors may increase the risk of CEA. Likewise, anatomical (complex aortic arch and brachiocephalic arterial anatomy, presence of thrombus, and heavy calcification) and clinical (need for heart surgery within 30 days) factors may increase the risk of CAS. Other factors such as the presence of symptomatic CS (transient ischemic attack or stroke within 6 months), decreased cerebral reserve, chronic kidney disease, and age older than 75 years may increase the risk of CEA and CAS. In general, symptomatic patients with severe CS exceed revascularization risk. In contrast, asymptomatic patients who are high risk for CEA should be considered for CAS because the natural risk of stroke should undergo careful assessment of baseline cognitive function, aortic arch and carotid artery anatomy, and likelihood of survival for 3 years. Patients who have normal cognitive function, favorable anatomy, and high likelihood of survival more than 3 years should be considered for CAS, whereas patients with multiple unfavorable features may be treated with optimal medical therapy, without revascularization.     

Interventional Management of Asymptomatic Extracranial Carotid Stenosis

Carotid artery stenosis is a major risk factor for stroke and transient ischemic attack. Although carotid endarterectomy is the established gold standard for carotid revascularization, carotid artery angioplasty and stenting (CAS)—proven by large randomized clinical trials and rigorous registries and supported by improving stent designs, embolic protection, and increasing neurointerventionalist experience—is developing into a safer and more efficacious method of stroke prevention. Today, protected CAS is approved for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with severe carotid stenosis with high surgical risk. We reviewed recently published data regarding new developments in the use of protected CAS, particularly in patients with carotid stenosis who are either asymptomatic or at low surgical risk.