Comparison of Perioperative Safety of Carotid Artery Stenting and Endarterectomy in the Treatment of Carotid Artery Stenosis: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Current management guidelines for the treatment of carotid stenosis are controversial. We performed this meta-analysis to evaluate the perioperative safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) and endarterectomy.

METHODS

We systematically searched EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to November 10, 2022, for randomized controlled trials that compared CAS with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) among patients with carotid stenosis. The analyzed outcomes mainly included stroke, death, myocardial infarction (MI), cranial nerve palsy, the cumulative incidence of mortality, stroke, or MI and the cumulative incidence of death or stroke in the perioperative periods. The risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated and pooled. Subgroup analyses were based on whether patients were symptomatic or asymptomatic. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework.

RESULTS

Seventeen randomized controlled trials with 12,277 participants (6514 and 5763 in the CAS and CEA groups, respectively) were included. Pooled analysis demonstrated that compared with CEA, CAS was associated with decreased risks of perioperative MI (RR = 0.47, 95% CI = 0.29∼0.77) and perioperative cranial nerve palsy (RR = 0.02, 95% CI = 0.01∼0.06) but higher risks of perioperative stroke (RR = 1.48, 95% CI = 1.18∼1.87) and cumulative incidence of death or stroke (RR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.20∼1.93).

CONCLUSIONS

The perioperative safety was equivalent between CAS and CEA. However, CEA may be preferred when considering both procedural safety and long-term efficacy in preventing recurrent stroke.

Dual-layered stents reduce cerebral embolism compared with first-generation stents during carotid stenting of high lipid core plaque lesions

BACKGROUND

Periprocedural lipid core plaque (LCP) has been detected in carotid arteries assessed by catheter-based near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS). High LCP is associated with cerebral embolism after carotid artery stenting (CAS) using a first-generation stent. We aimed to evaluate whether dual-layered stents reduce embolic infarcts in patients with high LCP and change of lipid signal as assessed by NIRS during CAS.

METHODS

Participants comprised 210 consecutive patients undergoing CAS. The study was divided into two distinct periods, with first-generation closed-cell stents used in the earlier period and dual-layered stents used in the later period. NIRS was performed at baseline, after stent implantation, and after balloon post-dilatation to analyze maximal lipid core burden index at minimal luminal area (max-LCBIMLA).

RESULTS

The ipsilateral cerebral embolism rate was significantly lower with dual-layered stents (9%) than with first-generation stents (33%, p<0.001), particularly with highly lipidic lesions (12% vs 60%, p<0.001). On multivariate logistic regression analysis, high LCP and first-generation stent usage were factors related to ipsilateral cerebral embolism (both p<0.001; OR 8.28 (95% CI 3.49 to 19.64) and OR 8.07 (95% CI 2.33 to 27.93), respectively). Max-LCBIMLA decreased significantly after stenting in both groups (both p<0.01) and max-LCBIMLA after balloon post-dilatation was significantly lower with dual-layered stents (22.4±65.6) than with first-generation stents (124.2±208.2; p=0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Dual-layered stents reduce embolic infarcts in patients with highly lipidic plaque lesions as assessed by NIRS who undergo CAS. Dual-layered stents significantly reduced NIRS-derived lipid signals after stenting.

Vascular surgery study of the CGuard MicroNet-covered stent in patients with indication to carotid revascularization: POLGUARD

BACKGROUND

In a recent randomized study, MicroNet-covered stent (CGuard) significantly reduced procedural and post-procedural cerebral embolism in relation to a single-layer CREST study carotid stent, but real-life clinical practice data are limited. The aim is to prospectively assess clinical outcomes of CGuard as a routine revascularization tool for patients with indication to carotid revascularization.

METHODS

From April 2019 to November 2021, 204 elective patients (age 71.0±7.1years, 69.6% males, 21.7% symptomatic) were enrolled.

RESULTS

Mean basal peak-systolic velocity was 251.41±91.85 cm/s with angiographic diameter stenosis 89.7±8.46%. About 34.4% lesions were severely calcified, 6.8% were angulated, and 4.4% showed significant access tortuosity. Access was femoral, with 100% protection device (filter) use. Two hundred and three lesions in 203 patients were treated (1 cross-over to surgery for lack of effective access, no cross-over to other devices); in most cases (66.9%) the stent was placed directly. For pre-dilated lesions, mean balloon diameter was 3.36±0.34mm. Mean nominal stent diameter was 7.64±0.5 mm; length was 37.19±4.5 mm. All stents were post-dilated (balloon diameter 5.2±0.25 mm). Residual stenosis was <30% in all (3.77±6.91%). By discharge, there were 2 minor strokes (0.9%) and one transient ischemic attack. By 30-days, one other minor stroke occurred in relation to de-novo atrial fibrillation. With no deaths or myocardial infarctions, 30-day total death/stroke/myocardial infarction rate was 1.48%. No in-stent thrombosis or patency loss occurred by 30-days. In-stent peak-systolic velocity was 55.49±22.73 cm/s.

CONCLUSIONS

Thirty-day results from POLGUARD study indicate safety and a low complication rate of the MicroNet-covered carotid stent use in every-day vascular surgery practice of carotid revascularization. Long-term observation is underway.

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.

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.

Relationship of pharmacotherapy and the incidence of embolic complications of carotid reconstructive surgery

Aim. To evaluate the relationship between lipid-lowering and antiplatelet therapy and the incidence of cerebral microembolism and related complications in open and endovascular revascularization of the carotid arteries (CA).

Material and methods. This single-center study involved patients with internal CA stenosis. The patients were divided into 2 groups depending on the surgery type performed: carotid endarterectomy (CEA)  — 163 patients; CA stenting (CAS)  — 71 patients. All patients underwent intraoperative transcranial Doppler monitoring to register cerebral embolism during CAS and CE.

Results. In CAS, microembolism episodes were observed in 66,2% vs 22,1% of patients in the CEA group (p=0,04), the largest number of which was recorded during catheterization of the internal CA and embolic filter installation (p=0,000). There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of the stroke incidence. In 8 patients in the CAS group and 1 patient in the CEA group, a transient ischemic attack was observed within 30 days after surgery (p=4x10-4 ). Intraoperative embolism was a predictor of a neurological event in the early postoperative period (odds ratio (OR), 33,08; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3,49-56,37 (p6 months before surgery reduces the likelihood of embolism by 4 times (OR 0,25; 95% CI: 0,11-0,58 (p=0,001), while lipid-lowering and antiplatelet therapy combination — by 12,5 times (OR, 0,08; 95% CI: 0,01-0,40 (p=0,001)).

Conclusion. Preoperative antiplatelet and statin therapy reduces the likelihood of embolism during the CA revascularization procedure.

Contemporary Results of Carotid Artery Stenting Using Low-Profile Dual-Metal Layer Nitinol Micromesh Stents in Relation to Single-Layer Carotid Stents

PURPOSE

To evaluate patients characteristics, procedural details, perioperative outcomes, and midterm results of carotid artery stenting (CAS) performed with the Roadsaver/Casper stent (Terumo Corp, Tokyo, Japan) as compared to concurrent patients treated with other commercially available carotid stents.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a single-center, retrospective, nonrandomized study including 200 consecutive patients who underwent a total of 205 elective CAS procedures due to severe internal carotid artery stenosis between April 2015 and December 2018. Procedural data and outcomes for patients treated with the Roadsaver/Casper stent implantation (100 procedures, in 97 patients) vs first-generation carotid stents implantations (90 procedures, in 88 patients) were compared. Fifteen patients were treated with CGuard carotid stent (InspireMD, Tel Aviv, Israel), and outcomes were reported separately. Primary endpoints were the occurrence of major adverse cerebrovascular events (MACE), including death, ipsilateral stroke, and transitory ischemic attack (TIA). Secondary endpoints were the rate of intrastent stenosis, the need for reintervention, and the occurrence of adverse cardiovascular events, including myocardial infarction, arrhythmias, and need for inotropic support.

RESULTS

No difference in demographics and preoperative risk factors were observed between patients treated with and without the Roadsaver/Casper stent. The mean procedure time was shorter in the Roadsaver/Casper group (40.7±16.9 vs 49.4±27.3 minutes; p=0.008), while radial percutaneous access was more frequent (24% vs 5%; p<0.001). The rate of stroke/TIA/death at 30 days was 3% in the Roadsaver group vs 1% in the first-generation stent group (p=0.623). The primary patencyrate was 100% and 93.4% at 1- and 3-year of follow-up in the Roadsaver/Casper groupand 99% and 94.3% in the other stent group, respectively (p=0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world cohort of patients undergoing CAS, the Roadsaver/Casper stent was used to treat more symptomatic and vulnerable carotid plaques as compared to other carotid stents. Nevertheless, patients treated with this low-profile dual-layer micromesh stent showed low events rates at both 30 days and follow-up, similar to that observed for other stents.

Thirty-Day Results of the Novel CGuard-Covered Stent in Patients Undergoing Carotid Artery Stenting

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to provide early-term evaluation, safety, and efficacy of the novel CGuard (Inspire MD, Tel Aviv, Israel) micromesh self-expanding stent with embolic protection system (EPS) during carotid artery stenting (CAS) procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients who underwent CAS with CGuard carotid stent system from January 2018 to September 2020 in a tertiary center were prospectively evaluated. Primary endpoints included technical success and perioperative neurological events (0-48 hours). Secondary endpoint was the rate of neurologic, cardiac events, and death (major adverse event or MAE) at 30 days. Patency of CGuard, peak systolic velocity (PSV), and end diastolic velocity (EDV) were evaluated at 30 days with duplex ultrasound.

RESULTS

A total of 103 patients underwent CAS procedure. Forty patients were symptomatic, and 63 patients were asymptomatic with stenosis greater than 70%. Technical success was 100%. Local anesthesia was applied in 94 patients (93%). Embolic protection devices were used in 6 patients (5.8%). Access site complications were 1.9%. Mean internal carotid artery stenosis diameter reduced from 79.47% to 14.68%. Two patients had transient ischemic attack (1.9%) and 1 patient experienced a cerebral hyperperfusion syndrome (CHS) perioperatively. External carotid artery (ECA) occlusion occurred in 1.9%. Four patients experienced jaw claudication (3.8%) postoperatively. Mean time of operation was 41 minutes. Mean duration of hospitalization was 3.1 days. The 30-day rate of MAE was 0%. CGuard patency was 100%, mean internal carotid PSV was reduced from 251.57 to 77.29 cm/s, and mean internal carotid EDV was reduced from 154.62 to 24.63 cm/s at 30 days.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that CGuard stent with EPS is an effective and safe device for treatment of carotid artery stenosis with acceptable low perioperative neurologic events, even with low embolic protection device usage. Larger multicenter and randomized studies are necessary to confirm its long-term efficacy.

Effectiveness and safety of dual-layer stents in carotid artery disease: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in atherosclerotic carotid artery disease, even though the risk for procedural stroke after CAS remains significantly higher. Recently, in order to reduce embolic cerebral events after CAS, a new generation of dual-layer stents (DLS) has been developed. This review aimed to perform a detailed analysis of the available evidence on safety and efficacy of DLS in both symptomatic and asymptomatic atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review was conducted according to the recommendations of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. The primary endpoint was the 30-day rate of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and death. Secondary outcomes included rate and timing of stent occlusion/restenosis.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

A total of 20 articles with 1193 patients were included. Thirty-day MI ranged from 0-5%, 30-day stroke ranged from 0-10.5% and 30-day mortality ranged from 0-10%. Stent occlusion rate ranged from 0-52.4%, the majority of which occurred intraprocedurally (N.=50; 61.7%), in emergency treated patients. The incidence of new ipsilateral cerebral ischemic lesions after CAS with DLS was reported in five studies, ranging from 5.5-37%.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the theoretic advantage of reducing the risk for procedural embolic events when compared to conventional stents, high quality evidence is scarce. Also, safety issues regarding DLS in the emergency setting have been raised, particularly for thrombotic complications. Additional data from well-designed Randomized Controlled Trials are needed to assert the true value of DLS.

Comparison of open- and closed-cell stent design outcomes after carotid artery stenting in the Vascular Quality Initiative

BACKGROUND

The association between stent design and outcomes after carotid artery stenting (CAS) has remained controversial. The available data are conflicting regarding the superiority of any specific stent design. The present study investigated the association between cell design and outcomes after carotid artery stenting (CAS) in a real world setting.

METHODS

Patients who had undergone CAS with distal embolic protection in the Society for Vascular Surgery Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) database from 2016 to 2018 were included in the present study. Patients undergoing CAS for trauma or dissection or more than two treated lesions were excluded. We also excluded lesions for which more than two carotid stents had been used and lesions confined to the common or external carotid artery. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to compare the outcomes after CAS between the open- and closed-cell stent designs.

RESULTS

Of the 2671 CAS procedures included in the present analysis, 1384 (51.8%) had used closed-cell stents and 1287 (48.2%) had used open-cell stents. On univariable analysis, no significant differences were noted between the closed- and open-cell stents in in-hospital mortality (1.8% vs 1.4%; P = .40), stroke (1.8% vs 2.4%; P = .28), and stroke/death (3.3% vs 3.5%; P = .81). After adjusting for potential confounders (ie, age, symptomatic status, previous major amputation, statin and antiplatelet use, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, elective procedures, approach, and post-stent dilatation), no difference was noted in in-hospital stroke/death between the two stent designs (odds ratio [OR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-1.74; P = .74). However, the interaction between stent design (open vs closed) and lesion location (bifurcation vs internal carotid artery [ICA]) was statistically significant (P = .02). Closed-cell stents were associated with five times the odds of in-hospital stroke/death when used in carotid artery bifurcation (OR, 5.5; 95% CI, 1.3-22.2; P = .02). However, when the stent was limited to the ICA, no differences were noted (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.51-1.45; P = .62). One-year follow-up data were available for 19% of patients. No differences in ipsilateral stroke or death at 1 year were noted between the open- and closed-cell stents, except when the lesion was located in the carotid bifurcation (hazard ratio, 6.7; 95% CI, 1.4-31.4; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Closed-cell stents were associated with an increased odds of in-hospital stroke/death for carotid bifurcation lesions, which might be related to the relatively lower conformability of closed-cell stents in the tortuous and diameter-mismatched bifurcation anatomy vs the relatively linear uniform diameter of the ICA. Improved follow-up and in-depth analysis of lesion-specific characteristics that might influence the outcomes of these two designs are needed to validate these results.

Is it possible to prevent cerebral embolization by improving the design and technology of carotid stent implantation?

INTRODUCTION

The prevention of atherosclerotic plaque fragmentation during carotid artery stenting is a fundamental problem in decreasing the risk of disability of patients. The goal of this review is to clarify whether the stent design can have a decisive impact on the rate of intraoperative and postoperative complications.

AREAS COVERED

Different designs of the carotid stents are briefed and the advantages and disadvantages of different stent designs are discussed as well as the results of their clinical use. Various solutions are presented to reduce cerebral embolism during carotid artery stenting.

EXPERT OPINION

There is no conclusive evidence for the benefits of closed cell and hybrid stents. The stent design cannot completely resolve the problem of cerebral embolism. Most of the events of cerebral microembolism occur at the stages of stent delivery rather than protrusion of an atherosclerotic plaque in the long-term follow-up. Most likely, minimization of the risks for periprocedural and postprocedural strokes requires not only the new solutions in stent design as well as the corresponding delivery systems and brain embolic protection systems, but also the new strategies of preprocedural drug stabilization of the atherosclerotic plaque in the carotid artery. Abbreviations: CAS, carotid artery stenting; CE, carotid endarterectomy; DW-MRI, diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging; ECA, external carotid artery; ICA, internal carotid artery; IVUS, intravascular ultrasound examination; OCT, optical coherence tomography.

A meta-analysis of the effect of stent design on clinical and radiologic outcomes of carotid artery stenting

OBJECTIVE

Procedural characteristics, including stent design, may influence the outcome of carotid artery stenting (CAS). A thorough comparison of the effect of stent design on outcome of CAS is thus warranted to allow for optimal evidence-based clinical decision making. This study sought to evaluate the effect of stent design on clinical and radiologic outcomes of CAS.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases in May 2018. Included were articles reporting on the occurrence of clinical short- and intermediate-term major adverse events (MAEs; any stroke or death) or radiologic adverse events (new ischemic lesions on postprocedural magnetic resonance diffusion-weighted imaging [MR-DWI], restenosis, or stent fracture) in different stent designs used to treat carotid artery stenosis. Random effects models were used to calculate combined overall effect sizes. Metaregression was performed to identify the effect of specific stents on MAE rates.

RESULTS

From 2654 unique identified articles, two randomized, controlled trials and 66 cohort studies were eligible for analysis (including 46,728 procedures). Short-term clinical MAE rates were similar for patients treated with open cell vs closed cell or hybrid stents. Use of an Acculink stent was associated with a higher risk of short-term MAE compared with a Wallstent (risk ratio [RR], 1.51; P = .03), as was true for use of Precise stent vs Xact stent (RR, 1.55; P < .001). Intermediate-term clinical MAE rates were similar for open vs closed cell stents. Use of open cell stents predisposed to a 25% higher chance (RR, 1.25; P = .03) of developing postprocedural new ischemic lesions on MR-DWI. No differences were observed in the incidence of restenosis, stent fracture, or intraprocedural hemodynamic depression with respect to different stent design.

CONCLUSIONS

Stent design is not associated with short- or intermediate-term clinical MAE rates in patients undergoing CAS. Furthermore, the division in open and closed cell stent design might conceal true differences in single stent efficacy. Nevertheless, open cell stenting resulted in a significantly higher number of subclinical postprocedural new ischemic lesions detected on MR-DWI compared with closed cell stenting. An individualized patient data meta-analysis, including future studies with prospective homogenous study design, is required to adequately correct for known risk factors and to provide definite conclusions with respect to carotid stent design for specific subgroups.

Thirty-day results from prospective multi-specialty evaluation of carotid artery stenting using the CGuard MicroNet-covered Embolic Prevention System in real-world multicentre clinical practice: the IRON-Guard study

AIMS

The aim of the present study was to evaluate periprocedural and 30-day outcomes in a prospective series of patients treated with the CGuard Embolic Prevention System (EPS).

METHODS AND RESULTS

From April 2015 to June 2016, a physician-initiated prospective multicentre study was performed in 200 consecutive patients admitted for protected carotid artery stenting (CAS) and treated using the CGuard EPS in twelve vascular centres. Outcome measures were: technical success, periprocedural (0-24 hours) and post-procedural (24 hours-30 days) major and minor strokes, death, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), transient ischaemic attack (TIA), and external carotid occlusion. In three centres, consecutive diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance cerebral imaging (DW-MRI) was performed ≤72 hours prior to and within 72 hours after the intervention. A distal embolic protection device was employed in 182 patients (91%). Technical success was 100%. No death, AMI or major stroke occurred periprocedurally. There were two TIAs and five periprocedural minor strokes (2.5%), including one thrombosis solved by surgery. In the remaining patients (199/200; 99.5%) one-month follow-up duplex ultrasound revealed optimal technical results. Post-procedural clinical follow-up was uneventful. No external carotid artery occlusion occurred. New post-procedural DW-MRI lesions were detected in 12 patients out of 61 (19.6%), including bilateral in five (8.2%) and isolated ipsilateral in six (9.8%), whereas one patient (1.6%) had contralateral only lesions.

CONCLUSIONS

Multicentre multi-specialty use of the CGuard EPS in routine clinical practice was associated with no major periprocedural neurologic complications and a total elimination of post-procedural neurologic complications by 30 days.

Effect of Open- vs Closed-Cell Stent Design on Periprocedural Outcomes and Restenosis After Carotid Artery Stenting: A Systematic Review and Comprehensive Meta-analysis

Purpose:To compare periprocedural complications and in-stent restenosis rates associated with open- vs closed-cell stent designs used in carotid artery stenting (CAS). Methods: A systematic search was conducted to identify all randomized and observational studies published in English up to October 31, 2017, that compared open- vs closed-cell stent designs in CAS. Identified studies were included if they reported the following outcomes: stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), myocardial infarction (MI), hemodynamic depression, new ischemic lesions detected on imaging, and death within 30 days, as well as the incidence of in-stent restenosis. A random-effects model meta-analysis was employed. Model results are reported as the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). The I2 statistic was used to assess heterogeneity. Results: Thirty-three studies (2 randomized trials) comprising 20, 291 patients (mean age 71.3±3.0 years; 74.6% men) were included. Patients in the open-cell stent group had a statistically significant lower risk of restenosis ⩾40% (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.92; I2=0%) and ⩾70% (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.52; I2=0%) at a mean follow-up of 24 months. No statistically significant differences were identified for periprocedural stroke, TIA, new ischemic lesions, MI, hemodynamic depression, or death within 30 days after CAS. Sensitivity analysis of the 2 randomized controlled trials only did not point to any significant differences either. Conclusion: Use of open-cell stent design in CAS is associated with a decreased risk for restenosis when compared to the closed-cell stent, without significant differences in periprocedural outcomes.

One swallow does not a summer make but many swallows do: accumulating clinical evidence for nearly-eliminated peri-procedural and 30-day complications with mesh-covered stents transforms the carotid revascularisation field

Atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis (CS) continues to be a common cause of acute ischaemic stroke. Optimised medical therapy (OMT), the first-line treatment modality in CS, may reduce or delay - but it does not abolish - CS-related strokes. As per current AHA/ASA and ESC/ESVS/ESO guidelines, carotid artery stenting (CAS) is a less-invasive alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for CS revascularisation in primary and secondary stroke prevention. Ten-year follow-up from the CREST trial in patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic CS confirmed equipoise of CAS and CEA in the primary endpoint. Nevertheless CAS - using a widely open-cell, first-generation stent and first-generation (distal/filter) neuroprotection - has been criticised for its relative excess of (mostly minor) strokes by 30 days, a significant proportion of which were post-procedural. Atherosclerotic plaque protrusion through conventional carotid stent struts, confirmed on intravascular imaging, has been implicated as a leading mechanism of the relative excess of strokes with CAS vs. CEA, including delayed strokes with CAS. Different designs of mesh-covered carotid stents have been developed to prevent plaque prolapse. Several multi-centre/multi-specialty clinical studies with CGurad MicroNet-Covered Embolic Prevention Stent System (EPS) and RoadSaver/Casper were recently published and included routine DW-MRI cerebral imaging peri-procedurally and at 30 days (CGuard EPS). Data from more than 550 patients in mesh-covered carotid stent clinical studies to-date show an overall 30-day complication rate of ~1% with near-elimination of post-procedural events. While more (and long-term) evidence is still anticipated, these results - taken together with optimised intra-procedural neuroprotection in CAS (increased use of proximal systems including trans-carotid dynamic flow reversal) and the positive 12-month mesh-covered stent data reports in 2017 - are transforming the carotid revascularisation field today. Establishing effective algorithms to identify the asymptomatic subjects at stroke risk despite OMT, and large-scale studies with mesh-covered stents including long-term clinical and duplex ultrasound outcomes, are the next major goals.

Nitinol Self-Expanding Stents for the Superficial Femoral Artery

The superficial femoral artery is a complex artery subject to a unique set of biomechanical loading conditions in its course through the leg. Plain balloon angioplasty and balloon-expandable stents had unacceptably high rates of restenosis, necessitating target vessel revascularization. Nitinol alloy is well suited to provide the strength and flexibility needed of stents to withstand the external forces posed by the environment of the superficial femoral artery. Advances in stent technology with the addition of a slow-releasing antiproliferative agent and changes in scaffold design have shown promise in reducing the rates of stent fracture and in-stent restenosis.