Literature DB >> 18774746

Results of the Stent-Protected Angioplasty versus Carotid Endarterectomy (SPACE) study to treat symptomatic stenoses at 2 years: a multinational, prospective, randomised trial.

Hans-Henning Eckstein1, Peter Ringleb, Jens-Rainer Allenberg, Jürgen Berger, Gustav Fraedrich, Werner Hacke, Michael Hennerici, Robert Stingele, Jens Fiehler, Hermann Zeumer, Olav Jansen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The SPACE trial is a multinational, prospective, randomised study to test the hypothesis that carotid artery stenting is not inferior to carotid endarterectomy for treating patients with severe symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. We did not prove non-inferiority of carotid artery stenting compared with carotid endarterectomy for the 30-day complication rate, and we now report the results at 2 years.
METHODS: Between March, 2001, and February, 2006, patients with symptomatic, severe (>or=70%) carotid artery stenosis were recruited to this non-inferiority trial and randomly assigned with a block randomisation design to have carotid artery angioplasty with stenting or carotid artery endarterectomy. 2-year endpoints include several clinical endpoints and the incidence of recurrent carotid stenosis of at least 70%. Clinical and vascular follow-up was done by a certified neurologist. Analyses were by intention to treat and per protocol. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 57874028.12.
FINDINGS: 1 214 patients were randomly assigned (613 were randomly assigned to carotid angioplasty with stenting and 601 were randomly assigned to carotid endarterectomy). In both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses the Kaplan-Meier estimates of ipsilateral ischaemic strokes up to 2 years after the procedure and any periprocedural stroke or death do not differ between the carotid artery stenting and the carotid endarterectomy groups (intention to treat 9.5%vs 8.8%; hazard ratio (HR) 1.10, 95%CI 0.75 to 1.61; log-rank p=0.62; per protocol 9.4%vs 7.8%; HR 1.23, 95%CI 0.82 to 1.83; log-rank p=0.31). In both the intention-to-treat and per-protocol populations, recurrent stenosis of 70% or more is significantly more frequent in the carotid artery stenting group compared with the carotid endarterectomy group, with a life-table estimate of 10.7% versus 4.6% (p=0.0009) and 11.1% versus 4.6% (p=0.0007), respectively. Only two incidences of recurrent stenoses after carotid artery stenting led to neurological symptoms.
INTERPRETATION: After 2 years' follow-up, the rate of recurrent ipsilateral ischaemic strokes reported in the SPACE trial is similar for both treatment groups. The incidence of recurrent carotid stenosis at 2 years, as defined by ultrasound, is significantly higher after carotid artery stenting. However, it cannot be excluded that the degree of in-stent stenosis is slightly overestimated by conventional ultrasound criteria.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18774746     DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(08)70196-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet Neurol        ISSN: 1474-4422            Impact factor:   44.182


  136 in total

Review 1.  [Carotid artery stenosis: current state of therapy].

Authors:  K I Schmidt; P Papanagiotou; A Zimmer; H-J Schäfers; W Reith
Journal:  Radiologe       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 0.635

Review 2.  Management of combined severe carotid and coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Marco Roffi; Flavio Ribichini; Fausto Castriota; Alberto Cremonesi
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 2.931

3.  Carotid Artery Stenting Versus Carotid Endarterectomy: Post CREST.

Authors:  Michael Buschur; Hitinder S Gurm
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2012-02-05       Impact factor: 2.931

4.  10-years experience with the Athero-Express study.

Authors:  Willem E Hellings; Frans L Moll; Dominique P V de Kleijn; Gerard Pasterkamp
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2012-03

5.  In-hospital outcomes alone underestimate rates of 30-day major adverse events after carotid artery stenting.

Authors:  Patric Liang; Yoel Solomon; Nicholas J Swerdlow; Chun Li; Rens R B Varkevisser; Livia E V M de Guerre; Marc L Schermerhorn
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2020-02-13       Impact factor: 4.268

6.  Outcome of carotid artery stenting in the hands of vascular surgeons.

Authors:  Carola Marie Wieker; S Demirel; N Attigah; M Hakimi; U Hinz; D Böckler
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2017-05-30       Impact factor: 3.445

7.  Secular Trends in Procedural Stroke or Death Risks of Stenting Versus Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis.

Authors:  Mandy D Müller; Stefanie von Felten; Ale Algra; Jean-Pierre Becquemin; Richard Bulbulia; David Calvet; Hans-Henning Eckstein; Gustav Fraedrich; Alison Halliday; Jeroen Hendrikse; George Howard; John Gregson; Olav Jansen; Martin M Brown; Jean-Louis Mas; Thomas G Brott; Peter A Ringleb; Leo H Bonati
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 6.546

8.  Carotid endarterectomy benefits patients with CKD and symptomatic high-grade stenosis.

Authors:  Anna Mathew; Michael Eliasziw; P J Devereaux; Jose G Merino; Henry J M Barnett; Amit X Garg
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2009-12-10       Impact factor: 10.121

9.  Immediate and Delayed Procedural Stroke or Death in Stenting Versus Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis.

Authors:  Mandy D Müller; Stefanie von Felten; Ale Algra; Jean-Pierre Becquemin; Martin Brown; Richard Bulbulia; David Calvet; Hans-Henning Eckstein; Gustav Fraedrich; Alison Halliday; Jeroen Hendrikse; John Gregson; George Howard; Olav Jansen; Jean-Louis Mas; Thomas G Brott; Peter A Ringleb; Leo H Bonati
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 7.914

10.  Carotid artery stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment of carotid artery stenosis.

Authors:  Mandy D Müller; Philippe Lyrer; Martin M Brown; Leo H Bonati
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-02-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.