SummaryBackgroundStents are an alternative treatment to carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis, but previous trials have not established equivalent safety and efficacy. We compared the safety of carotid artery stenting with that of carotid endarterectomy.MethodsThe International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) is a multicentre, international, randomised controlled trial with blinded adjudication of outcomes. Patients with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive carotid artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. Randomisation was by telephone call or fax to a central computerised service and was stratified by centre with minimisation for sex, age, contralateral occlusion, and side of the randomised artery. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients were followed up by independent clinicians not directly involved in delivering the randomised treatment. The primary outcome measure of the trial is the 3-year rate of fatal or disabling stroke in any territory, which has not been analysed yet. The main outcome measure for the interim safety analysis was the 120-day rate of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction. Analysis was by intention to treat (ITT). This study is registered, number ISRCTN25337470.FindingsThe trial enrolled 1713 patients (stenting group, n=855; endarterectomy group, n=858). Two patients in the stenting group and one in the endarterectomy group withdrew immediately after randomisation, and were not included in the ITT analysis. Between randomisation and 120 days, there were 34 (Kaplan-Meier estimate 4·0%) events of disabling stroke or death in the stenting group compared with 27 (3·2%) events in the endarterectomy group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·28, 95% CI 0·77–2·11). The incidence of stroke, death, or procedural myocardial infarction was 8·5% in the stenting group compared with 5·2% in the endarterectomy group (72 vs 44 events; HR 1·69, 1·16–2·45, p=0·006). Risks of any stroke (65 vs 35 events; HR 1·92, 1·27–2·89) and all-cause death (19 vs seven events; HR 2·76, 1·16–6·56) were higher in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group. Three procedural myocardial infarctions were recorded in the stenting group, all of which were fatal, compared with four, all non-fatal, in the endarterectomy group. There was one event of cranial nerve palsy in the stenting group compared with 45 in the endarterectomy group. There were also fewer haematomas of any severity in the stenting group than in the endarterectomy group (31 vs 50 events; p=0·0197).InterpretationCompletion of long-term follow-up is needed to establish the efficacy of carotid artery stenting compared with endarterectomy. In the meantime, carotid endarterectomy should remain the treatment of choice for patients suitable for surgery.FundingMedical Research Council, the Stroke Association, Sanofi-Synthélabo, European Union.

Endovascular strategies for the treatment of critical infrageniculate peripheral arterial occlusive disease exist and are becoming the primary methodology for such lesions at many centers. Although technically feasible for experienced operators, the evidence to support this strategy for below the knee (BTK) interventions is still evolving. We studied the 6-month and 1-year outcomes of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) alone, PTA with stenting, and excimer laser recanalization for BTK lesions in patients with critical limb ischemia. Between September 2002 and June 2005, 443 patients (355 Rutherford category 4, 82 category 5, 6 category 6) underwent intervention for 681 BTK lesions. Follow-up was performed at 6-month intervals after index intervention: limb salvage data were recorded and duplex ultrasonography was performed to measure the patency of treated areas. The primary patency and limb salvage rates of the entire population were 85.2% and 97.0% and 74.2% and 96.6% at 6 months and 1 year, respectively. Stratified for the treatment strategy (PTA alone in 79, PTA with stenting in 300 patients, and excimer laser in 64), 1-year primary patency rates were 68.6%, 75.5%, and 75.4%, whereas the limb salvage rates were 96.7%, 98.6%, and 87.9% for each modality, respectively. Endovascular intervention will become the primary treatment for BTK lesions in patients with critical limb ischemia, with 1-year primary patency and limb salvage rates that compare favorably with published surgical data. Prospective, randomized, multicenter trials will be needed to further establish the role of endovascular intervention in this challenging patient group.

The results of our Durability-200 study show an acceptable primary patency rate after 1 year was obtained in this patient cohort with TASC C and D femoropopliteal lesions.

After carotid stenting, complication rates vary according to stent type, free cell area and cell design. In the symptomatic population (and also in the total population), post-procedural complication rates are highest for the open cell types and increase with larger free cell area.

We conclude that increased analysis of device design variables may be necessary. Particularly in symptomatic patients or with echolucent lesions, closed-cell design and eccentric filters seem superior. Prospective investigation comparing open-cell vs closed-cell stents and eccentric vs concentric filter devices may be warranted.

In this study, the heparin-bonded ePTFE graft provided promising early patency and limb salvage results, with no device-related complications, in patients with occlusive vascular disease. Longer-term and randomized studies are warranted to determine whether this graft provides results superior to those achieved with other prostheses, especially in patients at increased risk of early graft failure, such as those undergoing below-knee bypass and those with poor run-off or advanced vascular disease.

Compared to published historical data for superficial femoral artery type A/B lesion stenting using 6-F devices, the 4-F devices applied in this trial showed similar patency at 12 months, fewer access site complications, and shorter manual compression times, supporting the supposition that 4-F endovascular treatment is safe and effective.

No abstract