Literature DB >> 23563478

Impact of SAMMPRIS on the future of intracranial atherosclerotic disease management: polling results from the ICAD symposium at the International Stroke Conference.

Osama O Zaidat1, Alicia C Castonguay, Thanh N Nguyen, Kyra J Becker, Colin P Derdeyn, Peter K Nelson, Pierre Amarenco, Thomas G Brott.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: There are few data regarding the effect of the Stenting and Aggressive Medical Management for Preventing Recurrent Stroke in Intracranial Stenosis (SAMMPRIS) trial results on the management of intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD). We sought to understand the impact of the SAMMPRIS trial on current ICAD clinical practices and future trial design.
METHODS: During the ICAD symposium at the 2012 International Stroke Conference, electronic data were collected regarding attendees' clinical management of ICAD and opinions on the feasibility of future trials post-SAMMPRIS.
RESULTS: 217 attendees from different specialties, including neurologists (57%), neurointerventionalists (9%) and neurosurgeons (5%), participated in the session. The majority of respondents (77%) indicated that the results of SAMMPRIS have impacted their consideration for intracranial stenting. Post-SAMMPRIS, 84% selected 'SAMMPRIS-style' medical management for the treatment of ICAD. For patients with ICAD who failed aggressive medical therapy, 82% would consider an alternative approach to continuing medical therapy (30% considered clinical trial enrollment, 28% suggested angioplasty and stenting and 24% angioplasty). The majority of participants (85%) were willing to randomize patients with symptomatic ICAD in future trials. For the next ICAD trial, 29% indicated that angioplasty alone should be compared with aggressive medical therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Our polling results suggest that the SAMMPRIS trial has had an impact on the current treatment of ICAD. Treatment of patients who failed medical therapy varied widely from aggressive medical therapy to balloon angioplasty, stenting or enrollment in future clinical trials. The willingness to continue clinical trials and randomize patients supports the need for future ICAD studies.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Angioplasty; Atherosclerosis; Intervention; Stenosis; Stroke

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23563478     DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2013-010667

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurointerv Surg        ISSN: 1759-8478            Impact factor:   5.836


  6 in total

1.  Primary Angioplasty Versus Stenting for Endovascular Management of Intracranial Atherosclerotic Disease Following Acute Ischemic Stroke.

Authors:  Mark R Villwock; David J Padalino; Raghu Ramaswamy; Eric M Deshaies
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Neurol       Date:  2016-06

Review 2.  Role of stenting for intracranial atherosclerosis in the post-SAMMPRIS era.

Authors:  Dale Ding; Robert M Starke; R Webster Crowley; Kenneth C Liu
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 3.411

3.  Safety of low-dose aspirin in endovascular treatment for intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis.

Authors:  Ning Ma; Ziqi Xu; Dapeng Mo; Feng Gao; Kun Gao; Xuan Sun; Xiaotong Xu; Lian Liu; Ligang Song; Tiejun Wang; Xingquan Zhao; Yilong Wang; Yongjun Wang; Zhongrong Miao
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-08-21       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 4.  Endovascular Treatment of Large Vessel Occlusion Strokes Due to Intracranial Atherosclerotic Disease.

Authors:  Jin Soo Lee; Seong-Joon Lee; Ji Man Hong; Francisco José Arruda Mont Alverne; Fabricio Oliveira Lima; Raul G Nogueira
Journal:  J Stroke       Date:  2022-01-31       Impact factor: 6.967

5.  Endovascular Treatment of Intracranial Atherosclerotic Stenosis: Current Debates and Future Prospects.

Authors:  Jichang Luo; Tao Wang; Peng Gao; Timo Krings; Liqun Jiao
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2018-08-21       Impact factor: 4.003

6.  Endovascular treatment for symptomatic intracranial artery stenosis: protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Tao Wang; Xue Wang; Kun Yang; Jing Zhang; Jichang Luo; Peng Gao; Yan Ma; Liqun Jiao; Feng Ling
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2018-07-10       Impact factor: 2.692

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.