1-Year Results From a Prospective Experience on CAS Using the CGuard Stent System: The IRONGUARD 2 Study

The Efficacy of Dual-layer Stent Compared to Single-layer Stent in Carotid Revascularization: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Prior studies have demonstrated the dual-layer stent (DLS) was associated with encouraging results in carotid revascularization. This meta-analysis aimed to study the comparative efficacy between DLS and single-layer stent (SLS).

METHODS

The studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Scopus up to June 2023. The methodological evaluation was performed using the corresponding scale. Pooled analysis was conducted using R Studio to calculate the effects, including odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD). Heterogeneity among results was assessed using the I2 statistic. Sensitivity analysis and subanalysis were also performed.

RESULTS

In this meta-analysis, nine articles comprising 1,127 patients who underwent carotid stenting (606 with DLS) were studied. No significant difference between DLS and SLS was found in stroke (at 30 days DLS: 4/555 vs. SLS: 11/496; OR 0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.14-1.03; at 12 months DLS: 1/249 vs. SLS: 4/152; OR 0.21, 95% CI 0.03-1.36), death (at 30 days DLS: 3/526 vs. SLS: 0/467; OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.20-3.11; at 12 months DLS: 5/249 vs. SLS: 3/152; OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.25-5.03), stroke/death (at 30 days DLS: 6/526 vs. SLS: 11/467; OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.16-1.17; at 12 months DLS: 6/249 vs. SLS: 7/152; OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.17-1.61), new lesions (DLS: 56/202 vs. SLS: 96/254; OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.28-1.40), lesion count (MD = -0.24, 95% CI -0.82-0.34), lesion diameter (MD = -0.03, 95% CI -1.21-1.15), in-stent restenosis (ISR; DLS: 5/204 vs. SLS: 8/190; OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.21-0.74) and acute thrombosis (DLS: 4/146 vs. SLS: 1/122; OR 2.03, 95% CI 0.31-13.26). Subgroup analysis indicated that CGuard and Casper had shown similar efficacy in preventing stroke, death, and new brain lesions.

CONCLUSION

DLS has shown comparable prognoses to the first-generation stent concerning stroke, stroke/death, new magnetic resonance imaging lesion incidence, lesion count, lesion diameter, ISR and acute thrombosis. Further randomized trials are warranted to demonstrate whether patients with high-risk carotid plaques can benefit significantly from DLS.

The Dual-layer CGuard Stent Is Safe and Effective in Emergent Carotid Artery Stenting and in Tandem Occlusions: a Multi-centric Study

BACKGROUND

Dual-layer stents have fallen into disrepute after several studies reported high rates of in-stent occlusions in acute stroke treatments. The CGuard stent is a new-generation hybrid dual-layer stent that has been designed to provide less thrombogenicity and to prevent peri- and postinterventional emboli. The aim of the study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the CGuard stent for the acute treatment of occlusion or high-grade stenosis of the extracranial internal carotid artery (ICA) in patients with acute ischemic stroke (AIS) with and without concomitant intracranial large vessel occlusion (LVO).

METHODS

All patients who underwent emergent carotid artery stenting (CAS) with the CGuard stent were identified and analyzed from the stroke registries from four tertiary German stroke centers. Clinical, procedural, and imaging data were evaluated. Stent patency within 72 h, intracranial hemorrhage, and modified Rankin score (mRS) at discharge were the safety and efficacy end points.

RESULTS

Overall, ninety-six patients were included (mean age 70.2 ± 11.8, 66 males (68.8%), median NIHSS score at admission 11 (7-17), IV lysis: n = 44 (45.8%)). Stent placement was successful in all patients. Eighty-three (86.4%) patients had tandem occlusions. In-stent occlusion occurred in 5 patients (5.2%) and 3 patients developed early in-stent stenosis (3.1%). Median mRS at discharge was 2 (1-4).

CONCLUSION

In this multicenter study, the use of the dual-layer CGuard stent for emergent CAS, particularly in tandem occlusions, was safe and resulted in low rates of in-stent occlusions.

[Stenting of the extracranial internal carotid artery]

The treatment of patients with stenosis of the internal carotid artery (ICA) is based on established guidelines, which includes both surgical and endovascular treatment options; however, the most recent advances, including the emergence of new endovascular treatment methods and techniques, combined with more recent clinical results, throw a new light on the optimal selection and treatment of patients in the current practice. This article deals with the most recent advances in the field of stenting of the extracranial internal carotid artery.

Stenting with dual-layer CGuard stent in acute sub-occlusive carotid artery stenosis and in tandem occlusions: a monocentric study

PURPOSE

Double-layer design carotid stents have been cast in a negative light since several investigations reported high rates of in-stent occlusions, at least in the acute setting of tandem occlusions. CGuard is a new generation double-layered stent that was designed to prevent periinterventional embolic events. The aim of this study was to analyze the safety and efficacy of the CGuard in emergent CAS and for the acute treatment of tandem occlusions in comparison with the single-layer Carotid Wallstent (CWS) system.

METHODS

All patients who underwent CAS with CGuard or CWS after intracranial mechanical thrombectomy (MT) between 11/2018 and 12/2022 were identified from our local thrombectomy registry. Clinical, interventional and neuroimaging data were analyzed. Patency of the stent was assessed within 72 h. Intracranial hemorrhage and modified Rankin score (mRS) at discharge were the main endpoints.

RESULTS

In total, 86 stent procedures in 86 patients were included (CWS: 44, CGuard: 42). CGuard had a lower, but not statistically significant rate (p = 0.431) of in-stent occlusions (n = 2, 4.8%) when compared to the CWS (n = 4, 9.1%). Significant in-stent stenosis was found in one case in each group. There was no statistically significant difference in functional outcome at discharge between the two groups with a median mRS for CGuard of 2 (IQR:1-5) vs. CWS 3 (IQR:2-4).

CONCLUSION

In our series, the rate of in-stent occlusions after emergent CAS was lower with the dual-layer CGuard when compared to the monolayer CWS. Further data are needed to evaluate the potential benefit of the design in more detail.

Sex as a Predictor of Outcomes for Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis: A Comparative Analysis between CAS and CEA

PURPOSE

Reporting gender-related outcomes for symptomatic carotid lesion revascularization after both endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) procedures in an unselected group of patients treated by Italian Vascular Specialists.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted on patients presenting with recently symptomatic carotid stenosis treated by CAS and by CEA. The primary endpoint was the 30 days any stroke occurrence rate; secondary endpoints were technical success, occurrence of transient ischemic attack (TIA), acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and death. Demographic, clinical and procedural data were all noted in order to identify the outcome's determining factor.

RESULTS

A total of 265 patients (193 males and 72 females) were enrolled, and of these 134 (50.5%) underwent CEA and 131 CAS (49.5%). At 30 days, the overall new stroke rate was 3.4% (one fatal), and no TIA, AMI or deaths were observed. Among strokes, seven major and two minor strokes were reported, with six after CEA and three after CAS (p = 0.32; OR: 2; CI95%: 0.48-8.17). The timing of revascularization has been found to be slightly associated with new stroke occurrence: seven out nine strokes were observed in patients treated within 14 days from symptom onset (5.5% vs. 1.4%; p = 0.08, OR: 3.8, CI95%: 0.77-18.56). Lastly, female patients presented a significantly higher risk of post-operative stroke compared to male patients: 6.9% vs. 2.1% (p: 0.05; OR: 3.52; CI95%: 0.91-13.52).

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience seems to suggest that both CEA and CAS provide safe and effective results in treating patients presenting with symptomatic carotid stenosis. Regardless of the type of revascularization, female sex is an independent risk factor for stroke recurrence after treatment.

Carotid artery stenting with flow inversion cerebral protection and MicroNet-covered stent

BACKGROUND

The study aims to evaluate the association of proximal flow-inversion cerebral protection and MicroNet-covered CGuard stents in reducing early and late embolic events in carotid artery stenting procedures.

METHODS

From 2018 to 2023, we performed 204 procedures in 180 patients with flow inversion cerebral protection and CGuard stents at the Vascular Surgery Unit of Sant'Eugenio Hospital in Rome. Cerebral protection was achieved with a Flow-Gate2 catheter connected to a peripheral vein. The tip balloon is inflated in the CCA to obtain an effective endoclamping, the pressure difference between the carotid bifurcation and the venous compartment ensures a constant back flow with wash-out in the venous compartment. Inclusion criteria were: life expectancy of >12 months, target lesions indicating treatment according to ESVS Guidelines, increased surgical risk due to comorbidities or anatomic issues. ECD follow-up was performed immediately postoperatively, at 30 days, 6 and 12 months, and subsequently annually.

RESULTS

The treatment protocol was successfully implemented in 99% of cases. No major strokes occurred, while one minor stroke (0.5%) occurred within 8 hours of the procedure, regressing in the following months. One perioperative death (0.5%) due to cerebral hemorrhage occurred three hours after the procedure. All patients remained asymptomatic, with no short or medium-term neurological score deterioration. One hemodynamically significant restenosis (0.5%) was detected at the 6-month follow-up. All patients completed the 6 months follow-up, though 6 (3%) were lost at the 12-month appointment.

CONCLUSIONS

Our prospective monocentric study has demonstrated the effectiveness and safety of the FlowGate2 flow inversion cerebral protection system in association with MicroNet covered CGuard stent.

Dual-layered micromesh stent technology for embolic prevention in carotid revascularization: technical experience and clinical outcomes from a high-volume interventional radiology center

BACKGROUND

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has become a cornerstone of carotid revascularization for stroke prevention. Despite the advantages of CAS, large-scale randomized trials involving prior (single-layer) first generation stents (FGS) demonstrated a higher risk of periprocedural cerebrovascular events compared to surgery. Dual-layer mesh-covered stents (DLSs) showed promising results in terms of 30-day embolic events in initial studies; larger-scale evidence is accumulating. This study aims to evaluate 30-day clinical efficacy of DLS against a closed-cell stent, based on large-volume data.

METHODS

The study center is part of the Italian National Outcomes Evaluation Program (PNE). CAS procedures performed between November 2017 and September 2023 were eneterd into a prospectively collected database. Our The primary endpoint was survival free of death, stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI) at 30 days. In addition, technical success and periprocedural major adverse clinical event rate (with a focus on stroke) were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Over a total of 1101 CAS procedures (745 males; mean age 79±7.8 years), 48.6% were symptomatic. Majority (80.2%) were treated with DLSs. Technical success was achieved in 98.9%. The FGSs group showed a significantly higher peri-procedural stroke rate when compared with CGuard and Roadsaver DLS: 4.59% vs. 1.18% vs. 2.63% (P=0.008); minor stroke rates were 4.13% vs. 0.83% and 0% P=0.01). The cumulative stroke, MI and death - free survival at 30 days was 97.46%. A statistically significant higher cumulative 30-day death/stroke/MI rate occurred in FGSs-treated patients compared to the CGuard and Roadsaver DLS-treated (6.42% vs. 1.42% and 2.63%, P=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of DLS in patients undergoing CAS in our large-volume center showed a high technical success rate and minimal cerebral embolic complications by 30 days. High volumes and an experienced interventional team may contribute to these favorable outcomes.

Next-generation transcarotid artery revascularization: TransCarotid flOw Reversal Cerebral Protection And CGUARD MicroNET-Covered Embolic Prevention Stent System To Reduce Strokes - TOPGUARD Study

BACKGROUND

Stent-assisted carotid artery revascularization employing surgical cutdown for transcervical access and dynamic flow reversal (TCAR) is gaining popularity. TCAR, despite maximized intra-procedural cerebral protection, shows a marked excess of 30-day neurologic complications in symptomatic vs. asymptomatic stenoses. The TCAR conventional single-layer stent (free-cell area 5.89mm2) inability to seal embologenic lesions may be particularly relevant after the flow reversal neuroprotection is terminated.

METHODS

We evaluated peri-procedural and 30-day major adverse cerebral and cardiac events (MACCE) of TCAR (ENROUTE, SilkRoad Medical) paired with MicroNET-covered neuroprotective stent (CGuard, InspireMD) in consecutive patients at elevated risk of complications with transfemoral/transradial filter-protected stenting (increased lesion-related and/or access-related risk). CGuard (MicroNET free cell area ≈0.02-0.03 mm2) has level-1 evidence for reducing intra- and abolishing post-procedural lesion-related cerebral embolism.

RESULTS

One hundred and six increased-risk patients (age 72 [61-76] years, median [Q1-Q3]; 60.4% symptomatic, 49.1% diabetic, 36.8% women, 61.3% left-sided index lesion) were enrolled in three vascular surgery centers. Angiographic stenosis severity was 81 (75-91)%, lesion length 21 (15-26)mm, increased-risk lesional characteristics 87.7%. Study stent use was 100% (no other stent types). 74.5% lesions were predilated; post-dilatation rate was 90.6%. Flow reversal duration was 8 (5-11)min. One stroke (0.9%) occurred in an asymptomatic patient prior to establishing neuroprotection (index lesion disruption with the sheath insertion wire); there were no other peri-procedural MACCE. No further adverse events occurred by 30-days. 30-day stent patency was 100% with normal velocities and absence of any in-stent material by Duplex Doppler.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a high proportion of increased-risk lesions and clinically symptomatic patients in this study, TCAR employing the MicroNET-covered anti-embolic stent showed 30-day MACCE rate <1%. This suggests a clinical role for combining maximized intra-procedural prevention of cerebral embolism by dynamic flow reversal with anti-embolic stent prevention of peri- and post-procedural cerebral embolism (TOPGUARD NCT04547387).

One-Year Outcomes of CGuard Double Mesh Stent in Carotid Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Prospective single and multicenter studies have shown improved outcomes of patients who underwent carotid artery stenting with the novel CGuard dual-layer mesh stent at 1 year. Objectives: The aim of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published studies to assess 1-year efficacy and outcomes of CGuard in patients with carotid stenting. Methods: A systematic search was performed. All studies enrolling at least 20 patients were included in our analysis. The primary endpoints were death (all-cause, cardiovascular and ipsilateral stroke-related death) and stroke rate at 1 year. The secondary endpoint was in-stent restenosis at 1 year. Results: The final analysis included 1709 patients. The one-year all-cause mortality rate was 2.97% (39/1699, 95% CI: 1.26-6.86%, I2 = 67%, t2 = 0.3442, p < 0.01), cardiovascular-related death was 0.92% (10/1616, 95% CI: 0.35-2.39%, I2 = 34%, t2 = 0.2302, p = 0.18), and ipsilateral stroke-related death was 0.3% (1/1649, 95% CI: 0.1-0.87%, I2 = 0%, t2 = 0, p = 0.69). The one-year ipsilateral stroke rate was 1.21% (16/1649, 95% CI: 0.58-2.5%, I2 = 28%, t2 = 0.1433, p = 0.23), transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) rate was 1.78% (19/1149, 95% CI: 1.11-2.84%, I2 = 0%, t2 = 0, p = 0.69), and total composite 1-year stroke/TIA rate was 2.97% (32/1149, 95% CI: 1.84-4.77%, I2 = 0%, t2 = 0, p = 0.41). The in-stent restenosis rate at 1 year was 1.06% (13/1653, 95% CI: 0.48-2.34%, I2 = 28%, t2 = 0.2308, p = 0.22). Conclusions: This meta-analysis shows that CAS with CGuard is safe with minimal neurological adverse events and in-stent restenosis rate at 1 year.

Dual- vs single-layer stents for endovascular treatment of symptomatic and asymptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis

BACKGROUNDS

Plaque protrusion is a common event among carotid artery stenting (CAS) patients and increases ischemic complication risk. Dual-layer stents (DLS) with micromesh technology may offer greater plaque protection compared to single-layer stents (SLS), but few data are available. The aim of the study is to compare clinical outcomes at 12 months for asymptomatic and symptomatic patients treated for primary CAS with DLS or SLS in a high-volume center.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of consecutive symptomatic and asymptomatic patients treated with primary CAS for internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis, with either DLS or SLS between 2015 and 2019, was performed. Primary endpoints included rates of ipsilateral transient ischemic attacks (TIA)/stroke and death within 1-year from CAS. Secondary endpoints included patency rates and survival according to stent type.

RESULTS

Of the 301 patients who met inclusion criteria (74.8 % male; 73.6 mean age ± 8.7 years), most patients were asymptomatic (77.4 %). Among all patients DLS was most frequently deployed (66 %); also, among asymptomatic (62 %) and symptomatic patients (81 %), p < 0.01. Symptomatic patients had less comorbidities and severe disease than asymptomatic patients. Six peri-operative strokes were recorded and, within 1 year, 2 additional strokes were registered among symptomatic patients treated with SLS. No post-operative strokes were encountered in the DLS group (p = 0.04) among symptomatic patients. Higher rates of TIA were observed among asymptomatic patients treated with DLS compared to SLS while rates of TIA were reduced among symptomatic patients treated with DLS. There were no differences in patency rates for DLS and SLS in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Primary patency was similar among DLS stent types but differed among SLS stent types (p = 0.01). At a mean follow-up of 27 months ±17.6, survival was comparable between DLS and SLS groups (p = 0.98).

CONCLUSION

CAS with DLS seems to reduce the risk of post-procedural stroke for symptomatic patients compared to SLS whilst the choice of stent did not influence ipsilateral TIA, survival or patency rates. These data require confirmation from larger, randomized, prospective studies.

Carotid artery revascularization using second generation stents versus surgery: a meta-analysis of clinical outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Meta-analyses and emerging randomized data indicate that second-generation ('mesh') carotid stents (SGS) may improve outcomes versus conventional (single-layer) stents but clinically-relevant differences in individual SGS-type performance have been identified. No comparisons exist for SGS versus carotid endarterectomy (CEA).

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Thirty-day death (D), stroke (S), myocardial infarction (M), and 12-month ipsilateral stroke and restenosis in SGS studies were meta-analyzed (random effect model) against CEA outcomes. Eligible studies were identified through PubMed/EMBASE/COCHRANE. Forest plots were formed for absolute adverse evet risk in individual studies and for relative outcomes with each SGS deign versus contemporary CEA outcomes as reference. Meta-regression was performed to identify potential modifiers of treatment modality effect.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Data were extracted from 103,642 patients in 25 studies (14 SGS-treated, 41% symptomatic; nine randomized controlled trial (RCT)-CEA-treated, 37% symptomatic; and two Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI)-CEA-treated, 23% symptomatic). Casper/Roadsaver and CGuard significantly reduced DSM versus RCT-CEA (-2.70% and -2.95%, P<0.001 for both) and versus VQI-CEA (-1.11% and -1.36%, P<0.001 for both). Gore stent 30-day DSM was similar to RCT-CEA (P=0.581) but increased against VQI-CEA (+2.38%, P=0.033). At 12 months, Casper/Roadsaver ipsilateral stroke rate was lower than RCT-CEA (-0.75%, P=0.026) and similar to VQI-CEA (P=0.584). Restenosis with Casper/Roadsaver was +4.18% vs. RCT-CEA and +4.83% vs. VQI-CEA (P=0.005, P<0.001). CGuard 12-month ipsilateral stroke rate was similar to VQI-CEA (P=0.850) and reduced versus RCT-CEA (-0.63%, P=0.030); restenosis was reduced respectively by -0.26% and -0.63% (P=0.033, P<0.001). Twelve-month Gore stent outcomes were overall inferior to surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analytic integration of available clinical data indicates: 1) reduction in stroke but increased restenosis rate with Casper/Roadsaver, and 2) reduction in both stroke and restenosis with CGuard MicroNET-covered stent against contemporary CEA outcomes at 30 days and 12 months used as a reference. This may inform clinical practice in anticipation of large-scale randomized trials powered for low clinical event rates (PROSPERO-CRD42022339789).

12-Month Outcomes of Carotid Artery Stenting With CGuard MicroNET-Covered Stent: A Single-Center Study in 113 Patients

Dual layer mesh stents constitute a novel treatment option for patients who undergo carotid artery stenting (CAS). The aim of this prospective study is to report 12 month outcomes of patients who underwent CAS with CGuard (Inspire MD, Tel Aviv, Israel) microNET self-expanding stent with embolic protection system in a tertiary center from October 2018 to March 2022. Primary endpoints included in-stent restenosis >70% verified by ultrasound (DUS), ipsilateral transient ischemic attack (TIA), and stroke at 12 months. Secondary endpoints included cardiovascular-related mortality (stroke, myocardial infarction, heart failure) and all-cause mortality during follow-up. One hundred thirteen patients were included in the study (male 72.5%), symptomatic 47.8%. Median follow-up was 25 months (2-48). By 12 months, there was one in-stent occlusion that manifested as stroke (1/113, 0.8%) but no other forms of in-stent restenosis. Two patients experienced contralateral TIA (1.7%). CVRM was 3.5% (4 MI) and all-cause mortality was 6% at follow-up. This prospective study shows that CAS with CGuard MicroNET-covered stent is safe with minimal neurological adverse events at 12 months follow-up. Larger, and longer-term studies are necessary to define CGuard long-term safety and protection against carotid-related stroke.

Carotid artery interventions - endarterectomy versus stenting

Current management of patients with carotid artery stenosis is based on well-established guidelines, including surgical procedures - carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and endovascular carotid artery stenting (CAS) - and optimal medical treatment alone. Outcomes in the postprocedural period after CAS and CEA are similar, suggesting strong clinical durability for both treatments. Recent advances, which include the emergence of novel endovascular treatment tools and techniques, combined with more recent randomised trial data shed new light on optimal patient selection and treatment in contemporary practice. Improved, modern technologies including enhanced embolic protection devices and dual-layered micromesh stents yield better outcomes and should result in further improvements in CAS. In centres of excellence, nowadays, the majority of patients with severe carotid artery stenosis can be successfully treated with either CEA or CAS.

In-stent restenosis after vertebral artery origin stenosis stenting: a nomogram for risk assessment

OBJECTIVE

To propose a nomogram for individual risk assessment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) after vertebral artery origin stenosis (VAOS) stenting.

METHODS

We included 793 patients with VAOS treated with stenting from October 2006 to May 2013, with a median follow-up of 27.8 months. Cox regression and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression were adopted for variable selection. The nomogram was formulated and validated by concordance indexes (C-indexes) and calibration curves. An in-stent restenosis risk table (ISR-RT) was subsequently generated for risk stratification. Differences between low-, intermediate-, and high-risk levels were shown by Kaplan-Meier curves and compared by log-rank test.

RESULTS

The training and validation set included 594 and 199 patients, with a mean ISR rate of 37.2% and 35.2%, respectively. Stent type (HR=1.64, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.14), stent diameter (HR=2.48, 95% CI 1.77 to 3.48), history of peripheral vascular disease (HR=2.17, 95% CI 1.17 to 4.00), history of transit ischemic attack (HR=1.45, 95% CI 1.05 to 2.14), and left-side involvement (HR=1.33, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.69) were included in the nomogram. The C-indexes at 6 and 12 months were 0.650 and 0.611 in the training set, and 0.713 and 0.603 in the validation set, respectively. Compared with low-risk patients, the intermediate- and high-level group had 1.46 (95% CI 1.05 to 2.04; p=0.0235) and 2.28 (95% CI 1.64 to 3.17; p<0.0001) higher chances of developing ISR in 2 years, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

A nomogram and a risk evaluation table were developed with good predictive ability for in-stent restenosis among patients with VAOS, which could serve as a practical approach for individualized risk evaluation.

Procedural embolic protection strategies for carotid artery stenting: current status and future prospects

INTRODUCTION

Carotid artery angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is an established procedure to treat carotid artery stenosis for either primary or secondary prevention of stroke. Randomized clinical trials have shown an increased risk of periprocedural cerebrovascular events with CAS compared with carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Several strategies have been proposed to mitigate this risk, including alternative vascular access site, proximal/distal embolic protection devices, and dual-layer stents, among others.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides a general overview of current embolic protection strategies for CAS. The phases of the procedure which can affect the early risk of stroke and how to reduce it with novel techniques and devices have been discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Innovations in device technologies have dramatically improved the safety and efficacy of CAS. To minimize the gap with surgery, a thorough, patient-oriented approach should be pursued. Endovascular technologies and techniques should be selected on an individual basis to address unique lesion characteristics and vascular anatomies. Meticulous pre-procedural planning, both clinical and anatomical, is needed to assess the embolic risk of each procedure. Only by having an in-depth understanding of the wide range of available endovascular devices and techniques, the operator will choose the most appropriate strategy to optimize CAS results.

Clinical Outcomes of Second- versus First-Generation Carotid Stents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Single-cohort studies suggest that second-generation stents (SGS; “mesh stents”) may improve carotid artery stenting (CAS) outcomes by limiting peri- and postprocedural cerebral embolism. SGS differ in the stent frame construction, mesh material, and design, as well as in mesh-to-frame position (inside/outside). Objectives: To compare clinical outcomes of SGS in relation to first-generation stents (FGSs; single-layer) in CAS. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies with FGSs and SGS (PRISMA methodology, 3302 records). Endpoints were 30-day death, stroke, myocardial infarction (DSM), and 12-month ipsilateral stroke (IS) and restenosis (ISR). A random-effect model was applied. Results: Data of 68,422 patients from 112 eligible studies (68.2% men, 44.9% symptomatic) were meta-analyzed. Thirty-day DSM was 1.30% vs. 4.11% (p < 0.01, data for SGS vs. FGS). Among SGS, both Casper/Roadsaver and CGuard reduced 30-day DSM (by 2.78 and 3.03 absolute percent, p = 0.02 and p < 0.001), whereas the Gore stent was neutral. SGSs significantly improved outcomes compared with closed-cell FGS (30-day stroke 0.6% vs. 2.32%, p = 0.014; DSM 1.3% vs. 3.15%, p < 0.01). At 12 months, in relation to FGS, Casper/Roadsaver reduced IS (−3.25%, p < 0.05) but increased ISR (+3.19%, p = 0.04), CGuard showed a reduction in both IS and ISR (−3.13%, −3.63%; p = 0.01, p < 0.01), whereas the Gore stent was neutral. Conclusions: Pooled SGS use was associated with improved short- and long-term clinical results of CAS. Individual SGS types, however, differed significantly in their outcomes, indicating a lack of a “mesh stent” class effect. Findings from this meta-analysis may provide clinically relevant information in anticipation of large-scale randomized trials.

Diabetes Mellitus and Clinical Outcomes in Carotid Artery Revascularization Using Second-Generation, MicroNet-Covered Stents: Analysis from the PARADIGM Study

INTRODUCTION

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) using conventional (single-layer) stents is associated with worse clinical outcomes in diabetes mellitus (DM) vs. non-DM patients: an effect driven largely by lesion-related adverse events. CAS outcomes with MicroNet-covered stents (MCS) in diabetic patients have not been evaluated.

AIM

To compare short- and long-term clinical outcomes and restenosis rate in DM vs. non-DM patients with carotid stenosis treated using MCS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a prospective study in all-comer symptomatic and increased-stroke-risk asymptomatic carotid stenosis, 101 consecutive patients (age 51-86 years, 41% diabetics) underwent 106 MCS-CAS. Clinical outcomes and duplex ultrasound velocities were assessed periprocedurally and at 30 days/12 months.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics of DM vs. non-DM patients were similar except for a higher prevalence of recent cerebral symptoms in DM. Type 1 and type 1+2 plaques were more prevalent in DM patients (26.7% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.02; 62.2% vs. 37.7%, p = 0.01). Proximal embolic protection was more prevalent in DM (60% vs. 36%; p = 0.015). 30-day clinical complications were limited to a single periprocedural minor stroke in DM (2.4% vs. 0%, p = 0.22). 12-month in-stent velocities and clinical outcomes were not different (death rate 4.8% vs. 3.3%; p = 0.69; no new strokes). Restenosis rate was not different (0% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.22).

CONCLUSIONS

MCS may offset the adverse impact of DM on periprocedural, 30-day, and 12-month clinical complications of CAS and minimize the risk of in-stent restenosis. In this increased-stroke-risk cohort, adverse event rate was low both in DM and non-DM. Further larger-scale clinical datasets including extended follow-ups are warranted.