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.
The irregular, aperiodic character of the EEG is usually explained by a stochastic model. In this view the EEG is linearly filtered noise. According to chaos theory such irregular signals can also result from low dimensional deterministic chaos. In this case the underlying dynamics is nonlinear, and has only few effective degrees of freedom. In contrast, stochastic models are less efficient, because they require in principle infinite degrees of freedom. Chaotic dynamics in the EEG can be studied by calculating the correlation dimension (D2). Although it has become clear that D2 calculations alone cannot prove chaos, the D2 has potential value as an EEG diagnostic. In this study we investigated whether D2 could be used to discriminate EEGs from normal controls, demented patients and Parkinson patients. We have analyzed epochs (20 channels; 2.5 s) from 52 EEGs (20 controls; 15 patients with dementia; 17 patients with Parkinson's disease). Controls had a mean D2 of 6.5 (0.9); demented patients of 4.4 (1.5), and Parkinson patients of 5.3 (0.9). Both groups were significantly different from controls (p < 0.001). There was a significant positive correlation between D2 and relative power in the beta band (r = 0.81) and a significant negative correlation between D2 and power in the delta (r = -0.60) and theta band (r = -0.37). These results suggest the possible usefulness of multichannel D2 estimation in a clinical setting.
Motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were studied in 28 patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. MEPs after cortical stimulation were abnormal in 27 patients, the responses in the leg muscles being affected the most often. Clinically asymptomatic motor lesions were detected in 7 patients (25%). The central motor conduction time (CMCT) for the abductor digiti minimi muscles correlated significantly with the clinical disability, whereas the radiological findings did not correlate with the clinical and neurophysiological parameters. In 9 patients MEPs were also recorded in the biceps muscles. The 7 patients with an abnormal CMCT for the biceps muscles had the most severe stenosis at the C-4-C-5 level or higher. The 2 patients with normal MEPs of the biceps muscles both had a stenosis at the C-5-C-6 level. The results of this study suggest that MEPs are useful for detecting spinal cord dysfunction and for localizing the level of the lesion. Some recommendations regarding the possible use of MEPs in the clinical evaluation of patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy are given.
, during the period 1970-1982. Five of these patients developed respiratory failure, and in four this was the initial symptom. The occurrence of respiratory failure as an early symptom of this muscular disease is discussed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.