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.

No abstract

This paper reports the use of a vein cuff to facilitate the anastomosis of a prosthetic graft to a small artery. This technique makes it easier to perform a good anastomosis and may improve the chances of long‐term patency.

Objectives: Single centre series have suggested that endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) for ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAA) may reduce mortality versus open surgery. This has not been substantiated in the only randomized controlled trial, leading to suggestion that anatomical suitability for rEVAR may independently improve prognosis of rAAA. Our aim was to assess the outcome of open rAAA repair in patients dependant on their suitability for rEVAR on pre-operative computed tomography (CT) assessment. Methods: A retrospective review of all ruptured aneurysms presenting to our unit since January 1998 was performed. Patients were grouped based on anatomical suitability for rEVAR by pre-operative CT. Results: Of 118 patients presenting with rAAA, 48 underwent pre-operative CT. Of these 9 scans had been "culled" and were excluded. 16 patients were suitable for rEVAR and 23 unsuitable. The groups were well matched demographically with no difference in Glasgow Aneurysm Score between groups. There was a non-significant trend towards reduction in 30-day mortality for patients suitable for EVAR (suitable 6.9% versus unsuitable 30.4%; P Z 0.066) with no difference in operative time, transfusion requirement, length of stay or in-hospital morbidity. Conclusions: Anatomical suitability for EVAR seems to beneficially affect outcome following open repair for ruptured AAA. Further study is required to confirm these findings.