BACKGROUND: The Warfarin-AspirinSymptomatic Intracranial Disease (WASID) trial showed that patients with symptomatic 70% to 99% intracranial arterial stenosis are at particularly high risk of ipsilateral stroke on medical therapy: 18% at 1 year (95% CI = 3% to 24%). The Wingspan intracranial stent is another therapeutic option but there are limited data on the technical success of stenting and outcome of patients with 70% to 99% stenosis treated with a Wingspan stent. METHODS:Sixteen medical centers enrolled consecutive patients treated with a Wingspan stent in this registry between November 2005 and October 2006. Data on stenting indication, severity of stenosis, technical success (stent placement across the target lesion with <50% residual stenosis), follow-up angiography, and outcome were collected. RESULTS: A total of 129 patients with symptomatic 70% to 99% intracranial stenosis were enrolled. The technical success rate was 96.7%. The mean pre and post-stent stenoses were 82% and 20%. The frequency of any stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, or death within 30 days or ipsilateral stroke beyond 30 days was 14.0% at 6 months (95% CI = 8.7% to 22.1%). The frequency of >or=50% restenosis on follow-up angiography was 13/52 (25%). CONCLUSION: The use of a Wingspan stent in patients with severe intracranial stenosis is relatively safe with high rate of technical success with moderately high rate of restenosis. Comparison of the event rates in high-risk patients in Warfarin-Aspirin Symptomatic Intracranial Disease (WASID) vs this registry do not rule out either that stenting could be associated with a substantial relative risk reduction (e.g., 50%) or has no advantage compared with medical therapy. A randomized trial comparing stenting with medical therapy is needed.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The Warfarin-Aspirin Symptomatic Intracranial Disease (WASID) trial showed that patients with symptomatic 70% to 99% intracranial arterial stenosis are at particularly high risk of ipsilateral stroke on medical therapy: 18% at 1 year (95% CI = 3% to 24%). The Wingspan intracranial stent is another therapeutic option but there are limited data on the technical success of stenting and outcome of patients with 70% to 99% stenosis treated with a Wingspan stent. METHODS: Sixteen medical centers enrolled consecutive patients treated with a Wingspan stent in this registry between November 2005 and October 2006. Data on stenting indication, severity of stenosis, technical success (stent placement across the target lesion with <50% residual stenosis), follow-up angiography, and outcome were collected. RESULTS: A total of 129 patients with symptomatic 70% to 99% intracranial stenosis were enrolled. The technical success rate was 96.7%. The mean pre and post-stent stenoses were 82% and 20%. The frequency of any stroke, intracerebral hemorrhage, or death within 30 days or ipsilateral stroke beyond 30 days was 14.0% at 6 months (95% CI = 8.7% to 22.1%). The frequency of >or=50% restenosis on follow-up angiography was 13/52 (25%). CONCLUSION: The use of a Wingspan stent in patients with severe intracranial stenosis is relatively safe with high rate of technical success with moderately high rate of restenosis. Comparison of the event rates in high-risk patients in Warfarin-Aspirin Symptomatic Intracranial Disease (WASID) vs this registry do not rule out either that stenting could be associated with a substantial relative risk reduction (e.g., 50%) or has no advantage compared with medical therapy. A randomized trial comparing stenting with medical therapy is needed.
Authors: O O Zaidat; D B Zahuranec; E E Ubogu; J A Fernandes-Filho; J I Suárez; J L Sunshine; R W Tarr; S Mirarchi; S G Nour; W R Selman; D M D Landis Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2003-12-04 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Adnan I Qureshi; Wendy C Ziai; Abutaher M Yahia; Yousef Mohammad; Souvik Sen; Pinky Agarwal; Osama O Zaidat; Jose I Suarez; Robert J Wityk Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Arani Bose; Marius Hartmann; Hans Henkes; Hon Man Liu; Michael M H Teng; Istvan Szikora; Ansgar Berlis; Jurgen Reul; Simon C H Yu; Michael Forsting; Matt Lui; Winston Lim; Siu Po Sit Journal: Stroke Date: 2007-03-29 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: R Gupta; H C Schumacher; S Mangla; P M Meyers; H Duong; A G Khandji; R S Marshall; J P Mohr; J Pile-Spellman Journal: Neurology Date: 2003-12-23 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Elad I Levy; Ricardo A Hanel; Bernard R Bendok; Alan S Boulos; Mary L Hartney; Lee R Guterman; Adnan I Qureshi; L Nelson Hopkins Journal: J Neurosurg Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 5.115
Authors: F Nahab; M J Lynn; S E Kasner; M J Alexander; R Klucznik; O O Zaidat; J Chaloupka; H Lutsep; S Barnwell; M Mawad; B Lane; M I Chimowitz Journal: Neurology Date: 2009-03-18 Impact factor: 9.910