Pierre P. Leimgruber

Stenting versus Endarterectomy for Treatment of Carotid-Artery Stenosis

BACKGROUND Carotid-artery stenting and carotid endarterectomy are both options for treating carotid-artery stenosis, an important cause of stroke. METHODS We randomly assigned patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid stenosis to undergo carotid-artery stenting or carotid endarterectomy. The primary composite end point was stroke, myocardial infarction, or death from any cause during the periprocedural period or any ipsilateral stroke within 4 years after randomization. RESULTS For 2502 patients over a median follow-up period of 2.5 years, there was no significant difference in the estimated 4-year rates of the primary end point between the stenting group and the endarterectomy group (7.2% and 6.8%, respectively; hazard ratio with stenting, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 0.81 to 1.51; P=0.51). There was no differential treatment effect with regard to the primary end point according to symptomatic status (P=0.84) or sex (P=0.34). The 4-year rate of stroke or death was 6.4% with stenting and 4.7% with endarterectomy (hazard ratio, 1.50; P=0.03); the rates among symptomatic patients were 8.0% and 6.4% (hazard ratio, 1.37; P=0.14), and the rates among asymptomatic patients were 4.5% and 2.7% (hazard ratio, 1.86; P=0.07), respectively. Periprocedural rates of individual components of the end points differed between the stenting group and the endarterectomy group: for death (0.7% vs. 0.3%, P=0.18), for stroke (4.1% vs. 2.3%, P=0.01), and for myocardial infarction (1.1% vs. 2.3%, P=0.03). After this period, the incidences of ipsilateral stroke with stenting and with endarterectomy were similarly low (2.0% and 2.4%, respectively; P=0.85). CONCLUSIONS Among patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid stenosis, the risk of the composite primary outcome of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death did not differ significantly in the group undergoing carotid-artery stenting and the group undergoing carotid endarterectomy. During the periprocedural period, there was a higher risk of stroke with stenting and a higher risk of myocardial infarction with endarterectomy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00004732.)

Restenosis after successful coronary angioplasty in patients with single-vessel disease.

To determine risk factors for restenosis, we studied 998 patients who underwent elective coronary angioplasty (PTCA) to native coronary arteries between July 1980 and July 1984. Restenosis, defined as a luminal narrowing of greater than 50% at follow-up, was present in 302 patients (30.2%). Univariate analysis of 29 factors revealed seven factors related to restenosis: vessel dilated (circumflex coronary artery 18%, right coronary artery 27%, left anterior descending artery 34%; p less than .01), final gradient of 15 mm Hg or less compared with greater than 15 mm Hg (27% vs 38%, p less than .01), duration of angina greater than 2 months compared with angina of shorter duration (27% vs 35%, p = .01), post-PTCA stenosis of 30% or less compared with 31% to 50% (28% vs 36%, p less than .025), stable vs unstable angina (26% vs 34%, p less than .05), presence vs absence of intimal dissection (26% vs 32%, p = .07), and female gender vs male gender (25% vs 32%, p = .08). Multivariate analysis revealed five factors independently related to increased risk of restenosis in the following order of importance: PTCA in the left anterior descending artery, absence of intimal dissection immediately after PTCA, final gradient greater than 15 mm Hg, a large residual stenosis after PTCA, and unstable angina. Restenosis after PTCA is a multifactorial problem. The hemodynamic and angiographic result at the time of PTCA significantly influences long-term outcome, but additional measures aimed at reducing the rate of recurrence of atherosclerotic plaque are required.

Effect of nifedipine on recurrent stenosis after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty

This double-blind, randomized study evaluated the effect of nifedipine on restenosis after coronary angioplasty. Two hundred forty-one patients with dilation of 271 coronary sites were randomized at the time of hospital discharge to receive nifedipine, 10 mg (123 patients), or placebo (118 patients) four times daily for 6 months. No patient was known to have coronary artery spasm. The mean duration of therapy was 4.4 +/- 2 (mean +/- SD) months for nifedipine and 4.3 +/- 2 months for placebo. A restudy angiogram was available in 100 patients (81%) in the nifedipine group and 98 patients (83%) in the placebo group. A recurrent coronary stenosis was noted in 28% of patients in the nifedipine group and in 29.5% of those in the placebo group (p = NS). The mean diameter stenosis was 36.4 +/- 23% for the nifedipine group and 36.7 +/- 23% for the placebo group (p = NS). By pill count, 78% of patients receiving nifedipine and 82% of those receiving placebo complied with the study drug regimen. Coronary stenosis recurred in 33% of patients in the placebo group and in 29% of patients in the nifedipine group who complied with the regimen and had angiograms (p = NS). In conclusion, the study did not demonstrate a significant beneficial effect of nifedipine on the incidence of recurrent stenosis after successful percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty.

Long-Term Results of Stenting Versus Endarterectomy for Carotid-Artery Stenosis

BACKGROUND In the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial, we found no significant difference between the stenting group and the endarterectomy group with respect to the primary composite end point of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death during the periprocedural period or any subsequent ipsilateral stroke during 4 years of follow-up. We now extend the results to 10 years. METHODS Among patients with carotid-artery stenosis who had been randomly assigned to stenting or endarterectomy, we evaluated outcomes every 6 months for up to 10 years at 117 centers. In addition to assessing the primary composite end point, we assessed the primary end point for the long-term extension study, which was ipsilateral stroke after the periprocedural period. RESULTS Among 2502 patients, there was no significant difference in the rate of the primary composite end point between the stenting group (11.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 9.1 to 14.8) and the endarterectomy group (9.9%; 95% CI, 7.9 to 12.2) over 10 years of follow-up (hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.44). With respect to the primary long-term end point, postprocedural ipsilateral stroke over the 10-year follow-up occurred in 6.9% (95% CI, 4.4 to 9.7) of the patients in the stenting group and in 5.6% (95% CI, 3.7 to 7.6) of those in the endarterectomy group; the rates did not differ significantly between the groups (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.52). No significant between-group differences with respect to either end point were detected when symptomatic patients and asymptomatic patients were analyzed separately. CONCLUSIONS Over 10 years of follow-up, we did not find a significant difference between patients who underwent stenting and those who underwent endarterectomy with respect to the risk of periprocedural stroke, myocardial infarction, or death and subsequent ipsilateral stroke. The rate of postprocedural ipsilateral stroke also did not differ between groups. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and Abbott Vascular Solutions; CREST ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00004732.).

Multicenter study of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty for right coronary artery ostial stenosis

Over a 5 year period at three centers, 53 patients underwent percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of a right coronary artery ostial stenosis. The procedure was successful in 42 patients (79%) and unsuccessful in 11, of whom 5 (9.4%) required emergency coronary artery bypass grafting because of abrupt closure. The right coronary ostial lesion had distinctive technical requirements to achieve success, including high pressure balloon inflation (10 +/- 4 atm) and the need for unconventional right coronary guide catheters. Technical factors that account for increased difficulty in these patients include: problems with guide catheter impaction and ostial trauma; inability to inflate the balloon with adequate guide catheter support; and need for increased intracoronary manipulation. The stenoses were quite discrete (4 +/- 5 mm) and calcified in the majority (40) of the 53 patients. Long-term follow-up (mean 12.5 months, range 4 to 60) of these patients demonstrated clinical recurrence of angina in 20 patients (48%) and angiographically proved restenosis in 16 (38%). Repeat coronary angioplasty was successful in three of six patients for relief of symptoms for over 6 months. In conclusion, angioplasty of the right coronary ostial lesion compared with nonostial dilation leads to a suboptimal early success rate; an apparent high risk of emergency bypass surgery; and a high restenosis rate. Careful assessment of the patient with this lesion and improved technology appear to be warranted.

Myocardial Infarction After Carotid Stenting and Endarterectomy Results From the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial

Background— The Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial (CREST) found a higher risk of stroke after carotid artery stenting and a higher risk of myocardial infarction (MI) after carotid endarterectomy. Methods and Results— Cardiac biomarkers and ECGs were performed before and 6 to 8 hours after either procedure and if there was clinical evidence of ischemia. In CREST, MI was defined as biomarker elevation plus either chest pain or ECG evidence of ischemia. An additional category of biomarker elevation with neither chest pain nor ECG abnormality was prespecified (biomarker+ only). Crude mortality and risk-adjusted mortality for MI and biomarker+ only were assessed during follow-up. Among 2502 patients, 14 MIs occurred in carotid artery stenting and 28 MIs in carotid endarterectomy (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.26 to 0.94; P =0.032) with a median biomarker ratio of 40 times the upper limit of normal. An additional 8 carotid artery stenting and 12 carotid endarterectomy patients had biomarker+ only (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.27 to 1.61; P =0.36), and their median biomarker ratio was 14 times the upper limit of normal. Compared with patients without biomarker elevation, mortality was higher over 4 years for those with MI (hazard ratio, 3.40; 95% confidence interval, 1.67 to 6.92) or biomarker+ only (hazard ratio, 3.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.46 to 8.68). After adjustment for baseline risk factors, both MI and biomarker+ only remained independently associated with increased mortality. Conclusions— In patients randomized to carotid endarterectomy versus carotid artery stenting, both MI and biomarker+ only were more common with carotid endarterectomy. Although the levels of biomarker elevation were modest, both events were independently associated with increased future mortality and remain an important consideration in choosing the mode of carotid revascularization or medical therapy. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: . Unique identifier: [NCT00004732][1]. # Clinical Perspective {#article-title-38} [1]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT00004732&atom=%2Fcirculationaha%2F123%2F22%2F2571.atomBackground— The Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial (CREST) found a higher risk of stroke after carotid artery stenting and a higher risk of myocardial infarction (MI) after carotid endarterectomy. Methods and Results— Cardiac biomarkers and ECGs were performed before and 6 to 8 hours after either procedure and if there was clinical evidence of ischemia. In CREST, MI was defined as biomarker elevation plus either chest pain or ECG evidence of ischemia. An additional category of biomarker elevation with neither chest pain nor ECG abnormality was prespecified (biomarker+ only). Crude mortality and risk-adjusted mortality for MI and biomarker+ only were assessed during follow-up. Among 2502 patients, 14 MIs occurred in carotid artery stenting and 28 MIs in carotid endarterectomy (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.26 to 0.94; P=0.032) with a median biomarker ratio of 40 times the upper limit of normal. An additional 8 carotid artery stenting and 12 carotid endarterectomy patients had biomarker+ only (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.27 to 1.61; P=0.36), and their median biomarker ratio was 14 times the upper limit of normal. Compared with patients without biomarker elevation, mortality was higher over 4 years for those with MI (hazard ratio, 3.40; 95% confidence interval, 1.67 to 6.92) or biomarker+ only (hazard ratio, 3.57; 95% confidence interval, 1.46 to 8.68). After adjustment for baseline risk factors, both MI and biomarker+ only remained independently associated with increased mortality. Conclusions— In patients randomized to carotid endarterectomy versus carotid artery stenting, both MI and biomarker+ only were more common with carotid endarterectomy. Although the levels of biomarker elevation were modest, both events were independently associated with increased future mortality and remain an important consideration in choosing the mode of carotid revascularization or medical therapy. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00004732.

Optimum percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty compared with routine stent strategy trial (OPUS-1): a randomised trial

BACKGROUND Whether routine implantation of coronary stents is the best strategy to treat flow-limiting coronary stenoses is unclear. An alternative approach is to do balloon angioplasty and provisionally use stents only to treat suboptimum results. We did a multicentre trial to compare the outcomes of patients treated with these strategies. METHODS We randomly assigned 479 patients undergoing single-vessel coronary angioplasty routine stent implantation or initial balloon angioplasty and provisional stenting. We followed up patients for 6 months to determine the composite rate of death, myocardial infarction, cardiac surgery, and target-vessel revascularisation. RESULTS Stents were implanted in 227 (98.7%) of the patients assigned routine stenting. 93 (37%) patients assigned balloon angioplasty had at least one stent placed because of suboptimum angioplasty results. At 6 months the composite endpoint was significantly lower in the routine stent strategy (14 events, 6.1%) than with the strategy of balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting (37 events, 14.9%, p=0.003). The cost of the initial revascularisation procedure was higher than when a routine stent strategy was used (US

Management of Vascular Risk Factors in the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial (CREST)

389 vs

Myocardial Infarction After Carotid Stenting and Endarterectomy

339, p<0.001) but at 6 months, average per-patient hospital costs did not differ (

Myocardial Infarction After Carotid Stenting and EndarterectomyClinical Perspective: Results From the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial

10,206 vs