Wayne M. Clark

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.)

Endovascular Therapy after Intravenous t-PA versus t-PA Alone for Stroke

BACKGROUND Endovascular therapy is increasingly used after the administration of intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (t-PA) for patients with moderate-to-severe acute ischemic stroke, but whether a combined approach is more effective than intravenous t-PA alone is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned eligible patients who had received intravenous t-PA within 3 hours after symptom onset to receive additional endovascular therapy or intravenous t-PA alone, in a 2:1 ratio. The primary outcome measure was a modified Rankin scale score of 2 or less (indicating functional independence) at 90 days (scores range from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating greater disability). RESULTS The study was stopped early because of futility after 656 participants had undergone randomization (434 patients to endovascular therapy and 222 to intravenous t-PA alone). The proportion of participants with a modified Rankin score of 2 or less at 90 days did not differ significantly according to treatment (40.8% with endovascular therapy and 38.7% with intravenous t-PA; absolute adjusted difference, 1.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.1 to 9.1, with adjustment for the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale [NIHSS] score [8-19, indicating moderately severe stroke, or ≥20, indicating severe stroke]), nor were there significant differences for the predefined subgroups of patients with an NIHSS score of 20 or higher (6.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.4 to 18.1) and those with a score of 19 or lower (-1.0 percentage point; 95% CI, -10.8 to 8.8). Findings in the endovascular-therapy and intravenous t-PA groups were similar for mortality at 90 days (19.1% and 21.6%, respectively; P=0.52) and the proportion of patients with symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage within 30 hours after initiation of t-PA (6.2% and 5.9%, respectively; P=0.83). CONCLUSIONS The trial showed similar safety outcomes and no significant difference in functional independence with endovascular therapy after intravenous t-PA, as compared with intravenous t-PA alone. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00359424.).

Solitaire flow restoration device versus the Merci Retriever in patients with acute ischaemic stroke (SWIFT): a randomised, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND The Solitaire Flow Restoration Device is a novel, self-expanding stent retriever designed to yield rapid flow restoration in acute cerebral ischaemia. We compared the efficacy and safety of Solitaire with the standard, predicate mechanical thrombectomy device, the Merci Retrieval System. METHODS In this randomised, parallel-group, non-inferiority trial, we enrolled patients from 18 sites (17 in the USA and one in France). Patients were eligible for inclusion if they had acute ischaemic stroke with moderate to severe neurological deficits and were treatable by thrombectomy within 8 h of stroke symptom onset. We used a computer-generated randomisation sequence to randomly allocate patients to receive thrombectomy treatment with either Solitaire or Merci (1:1; block sizes of four and stratified by centre and stroke severity). The primary endpoint was Thrombolysis In Myocardial Ischemia (TIMI) scale 2 or 3 flow in all treatable vessels without symptomatic intracranial haemorrhage, after up to three passes of the assigned device, as assessed by an independent core laboratory, which was masked to study assignment. Primary analysis was done by intention to treat. A prespecified efficacy stopping rule triggered an early halt to the trial. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT 01054560. RESULTS Between February, 2010, and February, 2011, we randomly allocated 58 patients to the Solitaire group and 55 patients to the Merci group. The primary efficacy outcome was achieved more often in the Solitaire group than it was in the Merci group (61%vs 24%; difference 37% [95% CI 19-53], odds ratio [OR] 4·87 [95% CI 2·14-11·10]; p(non-inferiority)<0·0001, p(superiority)=0·0001). More patients had good 3-month neurological outcome with Solitaire than with Merci (58%vs 33%; difference 25% [6-43], OR 2·78 [1·25-6·22]; p(non-inferiority)=0·0001, p(superiority)=0·02). 90-day mortality was lower in the Solitaire group than it was in the Merci group (17 vs 38; difference -21% [-39 to -3], OR 0·34 [0·14-0·81]; p(non-inferiority)=0·0001, p(superiority)=0·02). INTERPRETATION The Solitaire Flow Restoration Device achieved substantially better angiographic, safety, and clinical outcomes than did the Merci Retrieval System. The Solitaire device might be a future treatment of choice for endovascular recanalisation in acute ischaemic stroke. FUNDING Covidien/ev3.

Combined Intravenous and Intra-Arterial r-TPA Versus Intra-Arterial Therapy of Acute Ischemic Stroke: Emergency Management of Stroke (EMS) Bridging Trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The purpose of this study was to test the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of combined intravenous (IV) and local intra-arterial (IA) recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (r-TPA) therapy for stroke within 3 hours of onset of symptoms. METHODS This was a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled multi-center Phase I study of IV r-TPA or IV placebo followed by immediate cerebral arteriography and local IA administration of r-TPA by means of a microcatheter. Treatment activity was assessed by improvement on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale Score (NIHSSS) at 7 to 10 days. The Barthel Index, modified Rankin Scale, and the Glasgow Outcome Scale measured 3-month functional outcome. Arterial recanalization rates and their relation to total r-TPA dose and time to lysis were measured. Rates of life-threatening bleeding, intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH), or other bleeding complications assessed safety. RESULTS Thirty-five patients were randomly assigned, 17 into the IV/IA group and 18 into the placebo/IA group. There was no difference in the 7- to 10-day or the 3-month outcomes, although there were more deaths in the IV/IA group. Clot was found in 22 of 34 patients. Recanalization was better (P=0. 03) in the IV/IA group with TIMI 3 flow in 6 of 11 IV/IA patients versus 1 of 10 placebo/IA patients and correlated to the total dose of r-TPA (P=0.05). There was no difference in the median treatment intervals from time of onset to IV treatment (2.6 vs 2.7 hours), arteriography (3.3 vs 3.0 hours), or clot lysis (6.3 vs 5.7 hours) between the IV/IA and placebo/IA groups, respectively. A direct relation between NIHSSS and the likelihood of the presence of a clot was identified. Eight ICHs occurred; all were hemorrhagic infarctions. There were no parenchymal hematomas. Symptomatic ICH within 24 hours occurred in 1 placebo/IA patient only. Beyond 24 hours, symptomatic ICH occurred in 2 IV/IA patients only. Life-threatening bleeding complications occurred in 2 patients, both in the IV/IA group. Moderate to severe bleeding complications occurred in 2 IV/IA patients and 1 placebo/IA patient. CONCLUSIONS This pilot study demonstrates combined IV/IA treatment is feasible and provides better recanalization, although it was not associated with improved clinical outcomes. The presence of thrombus on initial arteriography was directly related to the baseline NIHSSS. This approach is technically feasible. The numbers of symptomatic ICH were similar between the 2 groups, which suggests that this approach may be safe. Further study is needed to determine the safety and effectiveness of this new method of treatment. Such studies should address not only efficacy and safety but also the cost-benefit ratio and quality of life, given the major investment in time, personnel, and equipment required by combined IV and IA techniques.

The rtPA (Alteplase) 0- to 6-Hour Acute Stroke Trial, Part A (A0276g) Results of a Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The Thrombolytic Therapy in Acute Ischemic Stroke Study, which started in August of 1991, was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous rtPA (alteplase) in patients with acute (0 to 6 hours) ischemic stroke. In October 1993 enrollment was halted because of Safety Committee (DMSB) concerns. In December 1993 the time window was changed to 0 to 5 hours, and it was decided to restart enrollment as a separate study (part B). We report here the results of the original study (part A), focusing on evaluating the safety and efficacy of rtPA given between 0 and 6 hours after stroke onset. METHODS This investigation was a phase II, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized study utilizing 0.9 mg/kg IV rtPA or placebo over 1 hour, which was conducted at university and community sites in North America. Except for time to treatment, enrollment criteria were very similar to those of the NINDS rtPA stroke study. Primary efficacy end points were the number of patients with a decrease of 4 or more points on the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) at 24 hours and day 30, along with infarct volume at day 30. Secondary end points included mortality and functional recoveries on the Barthel Index and Modified Rankin scale at days 30 and 90. RESULTS A total of 142 patients were enrolled at 42 sites in North America, including 22 <3 hours (15%) and 46 between 5 and 6 hours (32%). The groups were well matched on baseline characteristics, including NIHSS (mean of 13 for both). For the primary end points, a higher percentage of rtPA patients had a 4-point improvement at 24 hours (placebo 21%, rtPA 40%; P=0.02); however, this early effect was reversed by 30 days, with more placebo patients having a 4-point improvement (75%) than patients treated with rtPA (60%, P=0.05). Treatment with rtPA significantly increased the rate of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage within 10 days (11% versus 0%, P<0.01) and mortality at 90 days (23% versus 7%, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS This study found no significant rtPA benefit on any of the planned efficacy end points at 30 and 90 days in patients treated between 0 and 6 hours after stroke onset. These negative results apply to patients treated after 3 hours, because only 15% of the patients were enrolled before 3 hours. The risk of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage was increased with rtPA treatment, particularly in patients treated between 5 and 6 hours after onset. These results do not support the use of intravenous rtPA for stroke treatment >3 hours after onset.

Safety and efficacy of NA-1 in patients with iatrogenic stroke after endovascular aneurysm repair (ENACT): a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND Neuroprotection with NA-1 (Tat-NR2B9c), an inhibitor of postsynaptic density-95 protein, has been shown in a primate model of stroke. We assessed whether NA-1 could reduce ischaemic brain damage in human beings. METHODS For this double-blind, randomised, controlled study, we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older who had a ruptured or unruptured intracranial aneurysm amenable to endovascular repair from 14 hospitals in Canada and the USA. We used a computer-generated randomisation sequence to allocate patients to receive an intravenous infusion of either NA-1 or saline control at the end of their endovascular procedure (1:1; stratified by site, age, and aneurysm status). Both patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was safety and primary clinical outcomes were the number and volume of new ischaemic strokes defined by MRI at 12-95 h after infusion. We used a modified intention-to-treat (mITT) analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00728182. FINDINGS Between Sept 16, 2008, and March 30, 2011, we randomly allocated 197 patients to treatment-12 individuals did not receive treatment because they were found to be ineligible after randomisation, so the mITT population consisted of 185 individuals, 92 in the NA-1 group and 93 in the placebo group. Two minor adverse events were adjudged to be associated with NA-1; no serious adverse events were attributable to NA-1. We recorded no difference between groups in the volume of lesions by either diffusion-weighted MRI (adjusted p value=0·120) or fluid-attenuated inversion recovery MRI (adjusted p value=0·236). Patients in the NA-1 group sustained fewer ischaemic infarcts than did patients in the placebo group, as gauged by diffusion-weighted MRI (adjusted incidence rate ratio 0·53, 95% CI 0·38-0·74) and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery MRI (0·59, 0·42-0·83). INTERPRETATION Our findings suggest that neuroprotection in human ischaemic stroke is possible and that it should be investigated in larger trials. FUNDING NoNO Inc and Arbor Vita Corp.

Oral citicoline in acute ischemic stroke: an individual patient data pooling analysis of clinical trials.

Background and Purpose— No single neuroprotective agent has been shown to influence outcome after acute stroke. Citicoline has been studied worldwide in many clinical trials with positive findings, but only 1 trial has obtained significant results in the primary efficacy variables. Our objective was to evaluate the effects of oral citicoline in patients with acute ischemic stroke by a data pooling analysis of clinical trials. The primary efficacy end point chosen was the common evaluation of recovery, combining National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale ≤1, modified Rankin Scale score ≤1, and Barthel Index ≥95 at 3 months using the generalized estimating equations analysis. Methods— A systematic search of all prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trials with oral citicoline (MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Ferrer Group bibliographic databases) was undertaken. Individual patient data were extracted from each study and pooled in a single data file. The main inclusion criteria included compatible neuroimaging with ischemic stroke, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale ≥8, and prior modified Rankin Scale score ≤1. Four clinical trials using various doses of oral citicoline (500, 1000, and 2000 mg) were identified. Results— Of 1652 randomized patients, 1372 fulfilled the inclusion criteria (583 received placebo, 789 received citicoline). Recovery at 3 months was 25.2% in citicoline-treated patients and 20.2% in placebo-treated patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.33; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.62;P =0.0034). The dose showing the largest difference with placebo was 2000 mg, with 27.9% of patients achieving recovery (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.10 to 1.72;P =0.0043). The overall safety of citicoline was similar to placebo. Conclusions— Treatment with oral citicoline within the first 24 hours after onset in patients with moderate to severe stroke increases the probability of complete recovery at 3 months.

Reduction of central nervous system ischemic injury in rabbits using leukocyte adhesion antibody treatment.

Activated leukocytes appear to be directly involved in ischemic central nervous system injury. A surface glycoprotein (CD18) on the leukocyte is required for endothelial adherence and subsequent function and can be blocked with leukocyte adhesion antibody treatment. We used two animal models to determine the efficacy of anti-CD18 antibody treatment in preserving neurologic function after central nervous system ischemia. We gave a dose of 1 mg/kg anti-CD18 to treatment rabbits 30 minutes before inducing irreversible ischemia in the brain with intraarterial microspheres or in the spinal cord using reversible aortic occlusion. Treatment with anti-CD18 produced a significant reduction in neurologic deficits in the reversible spinal cord model, but not in the irreversible microsphere model. This protective effect supports the active role of leukocytes in central nervous system reperfusion ischemic injury and offers potential for future therapy.

Safety and Tolerability of the Glutamate Antagonist CGS 19755 (Selfotel) in Patients With Acute Ischemic Stroke Results of a Phase IIa Randomized Trial

Background and Purpose CGS 19755 is a competitive N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist that limits neuronal damage in animal stroke models. The objectives of this multicenter (7 centers), randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, ascending-dose phase IIa study were to evaluate the safety and tolerability of CGS 19755 and obtain pharmacokinetic and preliminary data on its efficacious dose range in patients treated within 12 hours of hemispheric ischemic stroke. Methods At each dose level, 6 patients were randomized to one or two intravenous bolus doses of CGS 19755, and 2 patients were randomized to placebo. An unblinded safety and monitoring committee evaluated results at each dose before ascending to the next level. All patients at the first level (1 mg/kg) received two doses separated by 12 hours. The first 2 patients at 2 mg/kg received two doses, but adverse experiences occurred in both; subsequent patient groups received single doses of 2.0, 1.75, or 1.5 mg/kg. Results Adverse experien...

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.).