Pierre Garnier

Endarterectomy Versus Angioplasty in Patients with Symptomatic Severe Carotid Stenosis (EVA-3S) trial: results up to 4 years from a randomised, multicentre trial

BACKGROUND Carotid stenting is a potential alternative to carotid endarterectomy but whether this technique is as safe as surgery and whether the long-term protection against stroke is similar to that of surgery are unclear. We previously reported that in patients in the Endarterectomy Versus Angioplasty in Patients with Symptomatic Severe Carotid Stenosis (EVA-3S) trial, the rate of any stroke or death within 30 days after the procedure was higher with stenting than with endarterectomy. We now report the results up to 4 years. METHODS In this follow-up study of a multicentre, randomised, open, assessor-blinded, non-inferiority trial, we compared outcome after stenting with outcome after endarterectomy in 527 patients who had carotid stenosis of at least 60% that had recently become symptomatic. The primary endpoint of the EVA-3S trial was the rate of any periprocedural stroke or death (ie, within 30 days after the procedure). The prespecified main secondary endpoint was a composite of any periprocedural stroke or death and any non-procedural ipsilateral stroke during up to 4 years of follow-up. Other trial outcomes were any stroke or periprocedural death, any stroke or death, and the above endpoints restricted to disabling or fatal strokes. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00190398. FINDINGS 262 patients were randomly assigned to endarterectomy and 265 to stenting. The cumulative probability of periprocedural stroke or death and non-procedural ipsilateral stroke after 4 years of follow-up was higher with stenting than with endarterectomy (11.1%vs 6.2%, hazard ratio [HR] 1.97, 95% CI 1.06-3.67; p=0.03). The HR for periprocedural disabling stroke or death and non-procedural fatal or disabling ipsilateral stroke was 2.00 (0.75-5.33; p=0.17). A hazard function analysis showed the 4-year differences in the cumulative probabilities of outcomes between stenting and endarterectomy were largely accounted for by the higher periprocedural (within 30 days of the procedure) risk of stenting compared with endarterectomy. After the periprocedural period, the risk of ipsilateral stroke was low and similar in both treatment groups. For any stroke or periprocedural death, the HR was 1.77 (1.03-3.02; p=0.04). For any stroke or death, the HR was 1.39 (0.96-2.00; p=0.08). INTERPRETATION The results of this study suggest that carotid stenting is as effective as carotid endarterectomy for middle-term prevention of ipsilateral stroke, but the safety of carotid stenting needs to be improved before it can be used as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis.

Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Anticoagulation vs. Antiplatelets after Stroke

BACKGROUND Trials of patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure to prevent recurrent stroke have been inconclusive. We investigated whether patients with cryptogenic stroke and echocardiographic features representing risk of stroke would benefit from PFO closure or anticoagulation, as compared with antiplatelet therapy. METHODS In a multicenter, randomized, open‐label trial, we assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, patients 16 to 60 years of age who had had a recent stroke attributed to PFO, with an associated atrial septal aneurysm or large interatrial shunt, to transcatheter PFO closure plus long‐term antiplatelet therapy (PFO closure group), antiplatelet therapy alone (antiplatelet‐only group), or oral anticoagulation (anticoagulation group) (randomization group 1). Patients with contraindications to anticoagulants or to PFO closure were randomly assigned to the alternative noncontraindicated treatment or to antiplatelet therapy (randomization groups 2 and 3). The primary outcome was occurrence of stroke. The comparison of PFO closure plus antiplatelet therapy with antiplatelet therapy alone was performed with combined data from randomization groups 1 and 2, and the comparison of oral anticoagulation with antiplatelet therapy alone was performed with combined data from randomization groups 1 and 3. RESULTS A total of 663 patients underwent randomization and were followed for a mean (±SD) of 5.3±2.0 years. In the analysis of randomization groups 1 and 2, no stroke occurred among the 238 patients in the PFO closure group, whereas stroke occurred in 14 of the 235 patients in the antiplatelet‐only group (hazard ratio, 0.03; 95% confidence interval, 0 to 0.26; P<0.001). Procedural complications from PFO closure occurred in 14 patients (5.9%). The rate of atrial fibrillation was higher in the PFO closure group than in the antiplatelet‐only group (4.6% vs. 0.9%, P=0.02). The number of serious adverse events did not differ significantly between the treatment groups (P=0.56). In the analysis of randomization groups 1 and 3, stroke occurred in 3 of 187 patients assigned to oral anticoagulants and in 7 of 174 patients assigned to antiplatelet therapy alone. CONCLUSIONS Among patients who had had a recent cryptogenic stroke attributed to PFO with an associated atrial septal aneurysm or large interatrial shunt, the rate of stroke recurrence was lower among those assigned to PFO closure combined with antiplatelet therapy than among those assigned to antiplatelet therapy alone. PFO closure was associated with an increased risk of atrial fibrillation. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health; CLOSE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00562289.)

Automatic Cardiac Event Recorders Reveal Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation after Unexplained Strokes or Transient Ischemic Attacks

Background: The etiology of stroke or transitory ischemic attack (TIA) remains frequently unknown. While paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) is often suspected, its presence remains difficult to establish. Therefore, we investigated the occurrence of PAF episodes in such a population using a long‐term automatic cardiac event recorder.

Clopidogrel Plus Aspirin Versus Warfarin in Patients With Stroke and Aortic Arch Plaques

Background and Purpose— Severe atherosclerosis in the aortic arch is associated with a high risk of recurrent vascular events, but the optimal antithrombotic strategy is unclear. Methods— This prospective randomized controlled, open-labeled trial, with blinded end point evaluation (PROBE design) tested superiority of aspirin 75 to 150 mg/d plus clopidogrel 75 mg/d (A+C) over warfarin therapy (international normalized ratio 2–3) in patients with ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, or peripheral embolism with plaque in the thoracic aorta >4 mm and no other identified embolic source. The primary end point included cerebral infarction, myocardial infarction, peripheral embolism, vascular death, or intracranial hemorrhage. Follow-up visits occurred at 1 month and then every 4 months post randomization. Results— The trial was stopped after 349 patients were randomized during a period of 8 years and 3 months. After a median follow-up of 3.4 years, the primary end point occurred in 7.6% (13/172) and 11.3% (20/177) of patients on A+C and on warfarin, respectively (log-rank, P=0.2). The adjusted hazard ratio was 0.76 (95% confidence interval, 0.36–1.61; P=0.5). Major hemorrhages including intracranial hemorrhages occurred in 4 and 6 patients in the A+C and warfarin groups, respectively. Vascular deaths occurred in 0 patients in A+C arm compared with 6 (3.4%) patients in the warfarin arm (log-rank, P=0.013). Time in therapeutic range (67% of the time for international normalized ratio 2–3) analysis by tertiles showed no significant differences across groups. Conclusions— Because of lack of power, this trial was inconclusive and results should be taken as hypothesis generating. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00235248.

Long-Term Follow-Up Study of Endarterectomy Versus Angioplasty in Patients With Symptomatic Severe Carotid Stenosis Trial

Background and Purpose— We aimed at comparing the long-term benefit–risk balance of carotid stenting versus endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis. Methods— Long-term follow-up study of patients included in Endarterectomy Versus Angioplasty in Patients With Symptomatic Severe Carotid Stenosis (EVA-3S), a randomized, controlled trial of carotid stenting versus endarterectomy in 527 patients with recently symptomatic severe carotid stenosis, conducted in 30 centers in France. The main end point was a composite of any ipsilateral stroke after randomization or any procedural stroke or death. Results— During a median follow-up of 7.1 years (interquartile range, 5.1–8.8 years; maximum 12.4 years), the primary end point occurred in 30 patients in the stenting group compared with 18 patients in the endarterectomy group. Cumulative probabilities of this outcome were 11.0% (95% confidence interval, 7.9–15.2) versus 6.3% (4.0–9.8) in the endarterectomy group at the 5-year follow-up (hazard ratio, 1.85; 1.00–3.40; P=0.04) and 11.5% (8.2–15.9) versus 7.6% (4.9–11.8; hazard ratio, 1.70; 0.95–3.06; P=0.07) at the 10-year follow-up. No difference was observed between treatment groups in the rates of ipsilateral stroke beyond the procedural period, severe carotid restenosis (≥70%) or occlusion, death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization procedures. Conclusions— The long-term benefit–risk balance of carotid stenting versus endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis favored endarterectomy, a difference driven by a lower risk of procedural stroke after endarterectomy. Both techniques were associated with low and similar long-term risks of recurrent ipsilateral stroke beyond the procedural period. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00190398.

Rheumatic heart disease and Sneddon's syndrome.

Background As the pathogenesis of Sneddons syndrome is unknown, research for associated disease can facilitate our understanding. Case Description Of nine patients with Sneddons syndrome, three had rheumatic heart disease (mitral valve stenosis, regurgitation, or both) due to rheumatic fever or Sydenhams chorea. Transient anticardiolipin antibodies or positive skin lupus band test were present. Conclusions Sneddons syndrome can have multiple causes. In some patients, rheumatic heart disease is a possible causal association.

Isolated Horner's syndrome may herald stroke.

Isolated Horner’s Syndrome May Herald Stroke Jean-Michel de Bray a, Ralf Baumgartnerb, Benoit Guillon c, Vivien Pautot a, Rainer Dziewas d, Erich Bernd Ringelsteind, Matthias Sturzeneggerb, Pierre Garnier e, Xavier Ducrocq f, Denis Saudeaug, Jean-Philippe Neau h, Vincent Larrue i, Fabrice Vuillier j, Jacques Boulliat k, Jean-Michel Verret l, Christophe Verny a, Frédéric Dubas a aDepartment of Neurology, University Hospital Angers, France; b Department of Neurology, University Hospital Zurich and Bern, Switzerland; c Department of Neurology, University Hospital Nantes, France; d Department of Neurology, University Hospital Münster, Germany; e Department of Neurology, University Hospital St-Etienne, f Department of Neurology, University Hospital Nancy, g Department of Neurology, University Hospital Tours, hDepartment of Neurology, University Hospital Poitiers, i Department of Neurology, University Hospital Toulouse, j Department of Neurology, University Hospital Besançon, k Department of Neurology, Hospital Bourg-en-Bresse, and l Neurologist, Le Mans, France