Literature DB >> 26886419

Randomized Trial of Stent versus Surgery for Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis.

Kenneth Rosenfield1, Jon S Matsumura1, Seemant Chaturvedi1, Tom Riles1, Gary M Ansel1, D Chris Metzger1, Lawrence Wechsler1, Michael R Jaff1, William Gray1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Previous clinical trials have suggested that carotid-artery stenting with a device to capture and remove emboli ("embolic protection") is an effective alternative to carotid endarterectomy in patients at average or high risk for surgical complications.
METHODS: In this trial, we compared carotid-artery stenting with embolic protection and carotid endarterectomy in patients 79 years of age or younger who had severe carotid stenosis and were asymptomatic (i.e., had not had a stroke, transient ischemic attack, or amaurosis fugax in the 180 days before enrollment) and were not considered to be at high risk for surgical complications. The trial was designed to enroll 1658 patients but was halted early, after 1453 patients underwent randomization, because of slow enrollment. Patients were followed for up to 5 years. The primary composite end point of death, stroke, or myocardial infarction within 30 days after the procedure or ipsilateral stroke within 1 year was tested at a noninferiority margin of 3 percentage points.
RESULTS: Stenting was noninferior to endarterectomy with regard to the primary composite end point (event rate, 3.8% and 3.4%, respectively; P=0.01 for noninferiority). The rate of stroke or death within 30 days was 2.9% in the stenting group and 1.7% in the endarterectomy group (P=0.33). From 30 days to 5 years after the procedure, the rate of freedom from ipsilateral stroke was 97.8% in the stenting group and 97.3% in the endarterectomy group (P=0.51), and the overall survival rates were 87.1% and 89.4%, respectively (P=0.21). The cumulative 5-year rate of stroke-free survival was 93.1% in the stenting group and 94.7% in the endarterectomy group (P=0.44).
CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving asymptomatic patients with severe carotid stenosis who were not at high risk for surgical complications, stenting was noninferior to endarterectomy with regard to the rate of the primary composite end point at 1 year. In analyses that included up to 5 years of follow-up, there were no significant differences between the study groups in the rates of non-procedure-related stroke, all stroke, and survival. (Funded by Abbott Vascular; ACT I ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00106938.).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26886419     DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1515706

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  100 in total

1.  In-hospital outcomes of transcarotid artery revascularization and carotid endarterectomy in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative.

Authors:  Marc L Schermerhorn; Patric Liang; Hanaa Dakour-Aridi; Vikram S Kashyap; Grace J Wang; Brian W Nolan; Jack L Cronenwett; Jens Eldrup-Jorgensen; Mahmoud B Malas
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 4.268

2.  Carotid endarterectomy should not be based on consensus statement duplex velocity criteria.

Authors:  Jesse A Columbo; Bjoern D Suckow; Claire L Griffin; Jack L Cronenwett; Philip P Goodney; Timothy G Lukovits; Robert M Zwolak; Mark F Fillinger
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2017-02-09       Impact factor: 4.268

Review 3.  Use of Mortality as an Endpoint in Noninferiority Trials May Lead to Ethically Problematic Conclusions.

Authors:  Andrew M Hersh; Robert J Walter; Scott K Abberegg
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2019-02-12       Impact factor: 5.128

4.  Understanding the roles of randomized trials for robotic prostatectomy.

Authors:  Alexander P Cole; David F Friedlander; Quoc-Dien Trinh
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-12

Review 5.  Carotid Artery Stenosis in Women.

Authors:  Michael J McArdle; Anne L Abbott; Zvonimir Krajcer
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  2018-08-01

6.  Asymptomatic carotid stenosis: Medicine alone or combined with carotid revascularization.

Authors:  Donald V Heck; Gary S Roubin; Kenneth G Rosenfield; William A Gray; Christopher J White; Tudor G Jovin; Jon S Matsumura; Brajesh K Lal; Barry T Katzen; Guilherme Dabus; Brian T Jankowitz; Thomas G Brott
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  2017-04-26       Impact factor: 9.910

7.  Vascular disease: Carotid artery stenosis - stenting or endarterectomy?

Authors:  Irene Fernández-Ruiz
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2016-03-03       Impact factor: 32.419

8.  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

9.  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

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.