Safety of early endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis: an international multicenter study

Sex differences in outcome after carotid revascularization in symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis

OBJECTIVE

Sex differences regarding the safety and efficacy of carotid revascularization in carotid artery stenosis have been addressed in several studies with conflicting results. Moreover, women are underrepresented in clinical trials, leading to limited conclusions regarding the safety and efficacy of acute stroke treatments.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed by literature search including four databases from January 1985 to December 2021. Sex differences in the efficacy and safety of revascularization procedures, including carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS), for symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid artery stenoses were analyzed.

RESULTS

Regarding CEA in symptomatic carotid artery stenosis, the stroke risk in men (3.6%) and women (3.9%) based on 99,495 patients (30 studies) did not differ (P = .16). There was also no difference in the stroke risk by different time frames up to 10 years. Compared with men, women treated with CEA had a significantly higher stroke or death rate at 4 months (2 studies, 2565 patients; 7.2% vs 5.0%; odds ratio [OR], 1.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-2.12; I2 = 0%; P = .03), and a significantly higher rate of restenosis (1 study, 615; 17.2% vs 6.7%; OR, 2.81; 95% CI, 1.66-4.75; P = .0001). For CAS in symptomatic artery stenosis, data showed a non-significant tendency toward higher peri-procedural stroke in women, whereas for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis, data based on 332,344 patients showed that women (compared with men) after CEA had similar rates of stroke, stroke or death, and the composite outcome stroke/death/myocardial infarction. The rate of restenosis at 1 year was significantly higher in women compared with men (1 study, 372 patients; 10.8% vs 3.2%; OR, 3.71; 95% CI, 1.49-9.2; P = .005). Furthermore, CAS in asymptomatic patients was associated with low risk of a postprocedural stroke in both sexes, but a significantly higher risk of in-hospital myocardial infarction in women than men (8445 patients, 1.2% vs 0.6%; OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 1.23-3.28; I2 = 0%; P = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

A few sex-differences in short-term outcomes after carotid revascularization for symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis were found, although there were no significant differences in the overall stroke. This indicates a need for larger multicenter prospective studies to evaluate these sex-specific differences. More women, including those aged over 80 years, need to be enrolled in randomized controlled trials, to better understand if sex differences exist and to tailor carotid revascularization accordingly.

Management of ocular arterial ischemic diseases: a review

PURPOSE

To summarize the existing treatment options regarding central retinal artery occlusion (CRAO), branch retinal artery occlusion (BRAO), arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (AAION), non-arteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy (NAION), and ocular ischemic syndrome (OIS), proposing an approach to manage and treat these patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature search of articles published since 1st January 2010 until 31st December 2020 was conducted using MEDLINE (PubMed), Scopus, and Web of Science. Exclusion criteria included case reports, non-English references, articles not conducted in humans, and articles not including diagnostic or therapeutic options. Further references were gathered through citation tracking, by hand search of the reference lists of included studies, as well as topic-related European society guidelines.

RESULTS

Acute ocular ischemia, with consequent visual loss, has a variety of causes and clinical presentations, with prognosis depending on an accurate diagnosis and timely therapeutic implementation. Unfortunately, most of the addressed entities do not have a standardized management, especially regarding their treatment, which often lacks good quality evidence on whether it should or not be used to treat patients.

CONCLUSION

Ophthalmologic signs and symptoms may be a warning sign of cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events, namely stroke. Most causes of acute ocular ischemia do not have a standardized management, especially regarding their treatment. Timely intervention is essential to improve the visual, and possibly vital, prognosis. Awareness must be raised among non-ophthalmologist clinicians that might encounter these patients. Further research should focus on assessing the benefit of the management strategies already being employed .

Timing of Carotid Intervention in Symptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to analyse the timing of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) after the index event as well as 30 day outcomes at varying time periods within 14 days of symptom onset.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis statement, comprising an online search of the Medline and Cochrane databases. Methodical quality assessment of the included studies was performed. Endpoints included procedural stroke and/or death stratified by delay from the index event and surgical technique (CEA/CAS).

RESULTS

Seventy-one studies with 232 952 symptomatic patients were included. Overall, 34 retrospective analyses of prospective databases, nine prospective, three RCT, three case control, and 22 retrospective studies were included. Compared with CEA, CAS was associated with higher 30 day stroke (OR 0.70; 95% CI 0.58 - 0.85) and mortality rates (OR 0.41; 95% CI 0.31 - 0.53) when performed ≤ 2 days of symptom onset. Patients undergoing CEA/CAS were analysed in different time frames (≤ 2 vs. 3 - 14 and ≤ 7 vs. 8 - 14 days). Expedited CEA (vs. 3 - 14 days) presented a sampled 30 day stroke rate of 1.4%; 95% CI 0.9 - 1.8 vs. 1.8%; 95% CI 1.8 - 2.0, with no statistically significant difference. Expedited CAS (vs. 3 - 14 days) was associated with no difference in stroke rate but statistically significantly higher mortality rate (OR 2.76; 95% CI 1.39 - 5.50).

CONCLUSION

At present, CEA is safer than transfemoral CAS within 2/7 days of symptom onset. Also, considering absolute rates, expedited CEA complies with the accepted thresholds in international guidelines. The ideal timing for performing CAS (when indicated against CEA) is not yet defined. Additional granular data and standard reporting of timing of intervention will facilitate future monitoring.

FACTORS AFFECTING THE OUTCOME OF SYMPTOMATIC CAROTID STENOSIS SURGICAL TREATMENT IN A SINGLE CENTER SERIES

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to evaluate the role of preoperative ischemic brain lesion (IBL) volume, assessed by Diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance brain imaging (DW-MRI) with RAPID® processing, and surgery timing in predicting post-operative neurological outcomes in symptomatic carotid stenosis (SCS) patients treated with carotid endarterectomy (CEA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients with SCS who underwent CEA between January 2010 and June 2020 were considered. IBLs ipsilateral to the stenosis were identified in the preoperative magnetic resonance brain (MRI). The volume was quantified in mL and correlated with 30-day rates of stroke and stroke/death by χ2 and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

RESULTS

134 patients were surgically treated for SCS during the entire study period. CEA procedures were defined as emergent, urgent, or elective if performed within 48 hours, between 48 hours and 14 days, or after 14 days from symptoms onset, respectively. Cumulative new ipsilateral stroke rate was 4,5%, with a statistically higher neurological complications in emergent patients compared to urgent and elective patients (10,6%, 1,47% and 0% respectively, p 0,039). ROC curve analysis showed a volume of 10 mL was predictive of postoperative stroke with 100% sensitivity and 80% specificity. A IBL volume >10mL was an independent risk factor for postoperative stroke. Infact, the perioperative neurological complication rate was significantly different in high-IBL volume patients (>10 mL) compared with low-IBL volume patients (<10 mL) (p 0,003) CONCLUSIONS: : The present study suggest that the optimal timing for CEA is between 48 hours and 14 days. Furthermore, the present study suggests that the presence of the IBL, by itself, is not definitively related with an unsatisfactory neurological outcome. However, an IBL higher than 10 mL should be as a reliable threshold value adverse neurological result in SCS patients.

Ultrasound Assessment of Extracranial Carotids and Vertebral Arteries in Acute Cerebral Ischemia

Assessing ischemic etiology and mechanism during the acute phase of an ischemic stroke is crucial in order to tailor and monitor appropriate treatment and determine prognosis. Cervical Duplex Ultrasound (CDU) has evolved since many years as an excellent screening tool for the evaluation of extracranial vasculature. CDU has the advantages of a low cost, easily applicable, bed side examination with high temporal and spatial resolution and without exposing the patients to any significant complications. It represents an easily repeatable test that can be performed in the emergency room as a first-line examination of cervical artery pathology. CDU provides well validated estimates of the type of the atherosclerotic plaque, the degree of stenosis, as well as structural and hemodynamic information directly about extracranial vessels (e.g., subclavian steal syndrome) and indirectly about intracranial circulation. CDU may also aid the diagnosis of non-atherosclerotic lesions of vessel walls including dissections, arteritis, carotid-jugular fistulas and fibromuscular dysplasias. The present narrative review outlines all potential applications of CDU in acute stroke management and also highlights its potential therapeutic implications.

Timing of Carotid Endarterectomy for Symptomatic Carotid Stenosis: A Snapshot of Current Trends and Systematic Review of Literature on Changing Paradigm towards Early Surgery

Carotid revascularization has been recommended as the maximally beneficial treatment for stroke prevention in patients with recently symptomatic carotid stenosis (SCS). The appropriate timing for performing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) within the first 14 d after the occurrence of the index event remains controversial. We aim to provide a snapshot of the pertinent current literature related to the timing of CEA for patients with SCS. A systematic review of literature was conducted to study the timing of CEA for SCS. The guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) were followed. A total of 63 articles were identified as relevant to this topic. A summary of 15 articles favoring urgent CEA (within 48 h) for SCS within 48 h of index event and 9 articles not favoring urgent CEA is presented. A consensus is still to be achieved on the ideal timing of CEA for SCS within the 14-d window presently prescribed. The current literature suggests that patients who undergo urgent CEA (within 48 h) after nondisabling stroke as the index event have an increased periprocedural risk as compared to those who had transient ischemic attack (TIA) as the index event. Further prospective studies and clinical trials studying this question with separate groups classified as per the index event are required to shed more light on the subject. The current literature points to a changing paradigm towards early carotid surgery, specifically targeted within 48 h if the index event is TIA, and within 7 d if the index event is stroke.

Risk of emergent carotid endarterectomy varies by type of presenting symptoms

BACKGROUND

The timing of carotid revascularization in symptomatic patients is a matter of ongoing debate. Current evidence indicates that carotid endarterectomy (CEA) within 2 weeks of symptoms is superior to delayed treatment. However, there is little evidence on the outcomes of emergent CEA (eCEA). The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of emergency eCEA vs nonemergent CEA (non-eCEA), stratified by type of presenting symptoms.

METHODS

We analyzed the Vascular Targeted-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset from 2011 to 2016. Symptomatic patients were divided into two groups: eCEA and non-eCEA. Univariable and multivariable methods were used to compare patient characteristics and to evaluate stroke, death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke/death, and stroke/death/MI within 30 days of surgery adjusting for all potential confounders. A further subgroup analysis was done to compare the outcomes of eCEA vs non-eCEA stratified by the type of presenting symptoms (amaurosis, transient ischemic attack [TIA], and stroke).

RESULTS

A total of 9271 patients were identified, of which 10.7% were eCEA vs 89.3% non-eCEA. Comparing eCEA vs non-eCEA, the two groups were similar in age (70.8 vs 70.5), female gender (36.3% vs 36.9%), diabetes (26.2% vs 28.9%), and smoking status (31.9% vs 28.7%; all P > .05). Patients undergoing eCEA were less likely to be hypertensive (76.2% vs 80.2%; P = .025), but more likely to belong to non-white race (51.5% vs 20.5%; P < .001). The eCEA patients were less likely to be on preprocedural medication vs non-eCEA (antiplatelets, 76.8% vs 89.2%; statins, 74.2% vs 79.9%; beta-blockers, 44.6% vs 50.4%; all P < .05). The 30-day outcomes comparing eCEA vs non-eCEA were: stroke, 6.2% vs 3.1%; death, 2% vs 1%; and stroke/death, 6.9% vs 3.7% (all P < .05). After risk adjustment, perioperative stroke (odds ratio [OR], 2.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.36-3.0), stroke/death (OR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.13-2.45), and stroke/death/MI (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.18-2.23) were higher after eCEA (all P < .01). When stratified by the type of presenting symptom, eCEA vs non-eCEA stroke outcomes were similar in patients who presented with stroke or amaurosis fugax. However, in the subset of patients presenting with TIA, eCEA had much worse outcomes compared with non-eCEA (stroke, 8.3% vs 2.5%; stroke/death, 8.3% vs 3.2%) and had significantly higher odds of stroke (OR, 3.12; 95% CI, 1.71-5.68) and stroke/death (OR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.25-4.03) in the adjusted analysis (all P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients presenting with stroke, eCEA does not seem to add significant risk compared with non-eCEA. However, patients presenting with TIA might be better served with non-emergent surgery as their risk of stroke is tripled when CEA is performed emergently.

Early Carotid Endarterectomy after Acute Stroke Yields Excellent Outcomes: An Analysis of the Procedure-Targeted ACS-NSQIP

BACKGROUND

Recurrent ischemic events have been associated with delayed carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for patients who present with acute strokes. As such, earlier intervention has been advocated to preserve cerebral function and expedient rehabilitation. We sought to determine the differences in 30-day postoperative major adverse clinical events (MACEs) for patients who undergo early (≤7 days) and delayed (>7 days) CEA after acute stroke.

METHODS

Our sample consisted of patients captured in the CEA-targeted American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data set between 2011 and 2015. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative MACEs (death, stroke, or myocardial infarction [MI]). Differences in postoperative MACEs were determined between early and delayed CEA treatment. In addition, multivariable analyses were done to determine the association between various patient factors and postoperative complications after CEA for patients who presented with acute strokes.

RESULTS

A total of 3,427 patients were identified who underwent CEA for acute stroke in the CEA-targeted files between 2011 and 2015. Overall, perioperative rates of 30-day death, stroke, or MI were 1.30% (n = 43), 2.74% (n = 94), and 0.96% (n = 33), respectively. There were no differences in 30-day postoperative death, stroke, or MI for early or delayed CEA after acute strokes. On multivariable analysis, independent predictors for postoperative MACEs in patients with acute stroke were age ≥80 years (OR 2.41; 95% CI [1.15-5.06]), preoperative beta-blocker use (OR 2.11; 95% CI [1.13-3.93]), and operative time > 150 min (OR 2.39; 95% CI [0.82-4.98]).

CONCLUSIONS

There are no differences in postoperative 30-day death, stroke, or MI in early and delayed CEA after an acute stroke. These results substantiate the recommendation for early (<7 days) CEA after acute strokes.

Safety of urgent endarterectomy in acute non-disabling stroke patients with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis: an international multicenter study

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

International recommendations advocate that carotid endarterectomy (CEA) should be performed within 2 weeks from the index event in symptomatic carotid artery stenosis (sCAS) patients. However, there are controversial data regarding the safety of CEA performed during the first 2 days of ictus. The aim of this international, multicenter study was to prospectively evaluate the safety of urgent (0-2 days) in comparison to early (3-14 days) CEA in patients with sCAS.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with non-disabling (modified Rankin Scale scores ≤2) acute ischaemic stroke or transient ischaemic attack due to sCAS (≥70%) underwent urgent or early CEA at five tertiary-care stroke centers during a 6-year period. The primary outcome events included stroke, myocardial infarction or death during the 30-day follow-up period.

RESULTS

A total of 311 patients with sCAS underwent urgent (n = 63) or early (n = 248) CEA. The two groups did not differ in baseline characteristics with the exception of crescendo transient ischaemic attacks (21% in urgent vs. 7% in early CEA; P = 0.001). The 30-day rates of stroke did not differ (P = 0.333) between patients with urgent (7.9%; 95% confidence interval 3.1%-17.7%) and early (4.4%; 95% confidence interval 2.4%-7.9%) CEA. The mortality and myocardial infarction rates were similar between the two groups. The median length of hospitalization was shorter in urgent CEA [6 days (interquartile range 4-6) vs. 10 days (interquartile range 7-14); P < 0.001].

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight that urgent CEA performed within 2 days from the index event is related to a non-significant increase in the risk of peri-procedural stroke. The safety of urgent CEA requires further evaluation in larger datasets.

Safety of Early Carotid Artery Stenting for Symptomatic Stenosis in Daily Practice

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND

In 2006, the American Heart Association recommended that for preference carotid endarterectomy (CEA) or, alternatively, carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) for symptomatic carotid artery stenosis should ideally occur within 14 days of an ischaemic event. The aim was to determine the safety of CAS according to those recommendations in daily practice.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of all consecutive patients (2000-16), with ipsilateral carotid symptoms who underwent CAS for extracranial carotid stenosis ≥70%, who were previously included in a prospective database. Thirty day morbidity was assessed (any stroke without transient ischaemic attack [TIA]/amaurosis fugax), along with mortality of the procedure in the early (≤14 days after stroke onset) and delayed phases (15-180 days after stroke onset). Patients who received CAS and/or mechanical thrombectomy for acute ischaemic stroke treatment were not included.

RESULTS

In total, 1227 patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis who underwent CAS were identified. Early and delayed CAS was performed in 291 and 936 patients, respectively. Morbidity (any stroke) and mortality was 2.2% (n = 27) in the whole cohort (n = 8 [2.7%] in early vs. n = 19 [2%] in delayed CAS; p = .47). There were no differences in morbidity between early and delayed CAS regarding TIA (n = 15 vs. 36 [5.2% vs. 3.9%]; p = .33), minor stroke (n = 4 vs. 5 [1.4% vs. 0.5%]; p = .14), or major stroke (n = 2 vs. 6 [0.7% vs. 0.6%]; p = .59). Two patients (0.7%) died after early CAS and eight (0.9%) after delayed CAS (p = .56).

CONCLUSION

CAS may be safely performed in the early phase after an ischaemic stroke with low clinical complication rates. Further studies are needed to validate CAS safety conducted even earlier in the acute phase of ischaemic stroke.

Editor's Choice - Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Very Urgent Carotid Intervention for Symptomatic Carotid Disease

BACKGROUND

The optimum timing of carotid intervention for symptomatic carotid stenosis remains unclear. The objective was to investigate outcomes of very urgent (< 48 h from neurological event) in comparison to urgent (≥ 48 h from neurological event) carotid intervention for symptomatic carotid disease.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was carried out of randomised control trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting peri-procedural outcomes of carotid intervention in relation to the length of time since the neurological event (PROSPERO registration number: CRD 42017075766). Ipsilateral stroke and death were defined as the primary outcome endpoints. Transient ischaemic attack (TIA) and myocardial infarction (MI) were secondary outcome parameters. Comparative outcomes were calculated and reported as dichotomous outcome measures using the odds ratio (OR) and associated 95% confidence interval (CI) for very urgent (< 48 h since neurological event) versus urgent (≥ 48 h) intervention. The combined overall effect size was calculated using a random effects model.

RESULTS

Twelve observational studies and one RCT representing 5751 interventions, 5385 carotid endarterectomies (CEAs) and 366 carotid artery stenting (CAS) procedures, were included in quantitative synthesis. Very urgent carotid intervention was associated with increased risk of stroke within 30 days of treatment compared with urgent carotid intervention (OR 2.19, 95% CI 1.46-3.26, p < .001). No significant difference was found in mortality (OR 1.55, 95% CI 0.81-2.96, p = .19), TIA (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.55-3.19, p = .52) or MI (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.41-4.33, p = .64).

CONCLUSIONS

Very urgent carotid intervention was found to be associated with increased risk of stroke.

Clinical Comparison of Outcomes of Early versus Delayed Carotid Artery Stenting for Symptomatic Cerebral Watershed Infarction due to Stenosis of the Proximal Internal Carotid Artery

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of early versus delayed carotid artery stenting (CAS) for symptomatic cerebral watershed infarction (sCWI) patients due to stenosis of the proximal internal carotid artery. We retrospectively collected clinical data of those who underwent early or delayed CAS from March 2011 to April 2014. The time of early CAS and delayed CAS was within a week of symptom onset and after four weeks from symptom onset. Clinical data such as second stroke, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NHISS) score, and modified Rankin Scale (mRS) score and periprocedural complications were collected. The rate of second stroke in early CAS group is lower when compared to that of delayed CAS group. There was no significant difference regarding periprocedural complications in both groups. There was a significant difference regarding mean NHISS score 90 days after CAS in two groups. Early CAS group had a significant better good outcome (mRS score ≤ 2) than delayed CAS group. We suggest early CAS for sCWI due to severe proximal internal carotid artery stenosis as it provides lower rate of second stroke, comparable periprocedural complications, and better functional outcomes compared to that of delayed CAS.

A short time interval between the neurologic index event and carotid endarterectomy is not a risk factor for carotid surgery

OBJECTIVE

Current guidelines recommend that carotid endarterectomy (CEA) be performed as early as possible after the neurologic index event in patients with 50% to 99% carotid artery stenosis. However, recent registry data showed that patients treated ≤48 hours had a significantly increased perioperative risk. Therefore, the aim of this single-center study was to determine the effect of the time interval between the neurologic index event and CEA on the periprocedural complication rate at our institution.

METHODS

Prospectively collected data for 401 CEAs performed between 2004 and 2014 for symptomatic carotid stenosis were analyzed. Patients were divided into four groups according to the interval between the last neurologic event and surgery: group I, 0 to 2 days; group II, 3 to 7 days; group III, 8 to 14 days; and group IV, 15 to 180 days. The primary end point was the combined rate of in-hospital stroke or mortality. Data were analyzed by way of χ² tests and multivariable regression analysis.

RESULTS

The patients (68% men) had a median age of 70 years (interquartile range, 63-76 years). The index events included transient ischemic attack in 43.4%, amaurosis fugax in 25.4%, and an ipsilateral stroke in 31.2%. CEA was performed using the eversion technique in 61.1% of patients, and 50.1% were treated under locoregional anesthesia. The perioperative combined stroke and mortality rate was 2.5% (10 of 401), representing a perioperative mortality rate of 1.0% and stroke rate of 1.5%. Overall, myocardial infarction, cranial nerve injuries, and postoperative bleeding occurred in 0.7%, 2.2%, and 1.7%, respectively. We detected no significant differences for the combined stroke and mortality rate by time interval: 3% in group I, 3% in group II, 2% in group III, and 2% in group IV. Multivariable regression analysis showed no significant effect of the time interval on the primary end point.

CONCLUSIONS

The combined mortality and stroke rate was 2.5% and did not differ significantly between the four different time interval groups. CEA was safe in our cohort, even when performed as soon as possible after the index event.

Immediate versus delayed treatment for recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis

BACKGROUND

The timing of surgery for recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis remains controversial. Early cerebral revascularization may prevent a disabling or fatal ischemic recurrence, but it may also increase the risk of hemorrhagic transformation, or of dislodging a thrombus. This review examined the randomized controlled evidence that addressed whether the increased risk of recurrent events outweighed the increased benefit of an earlier intervention.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the risks and benefits of performing very early cerebral revascularization (within two days) compared with delayed treatment (after two days) for people with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Stroke Group Trials Register in January 2016, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library 2016, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1948 to 26 January 2016), EMBASE (1974 to 26 January 2016), LILACS (1982 to 26 January 2016), and trial registers (from inception to 26 January 2016). We also handsearched conference proceedings and journals, and searched reference lists. There were no language restrictions. We contacted colleagues and pharmaceutical companies to identify further studies and unpublished trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All completed, truly randomized trials (RCT) that compared very early cerebral revascularization (within two days) with delayed treatment (after two days) for people with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently selected trials for inclusion according to the above criteria, assessed risk of bias for each trial, and performed data extraction. We utilized an intention-to-treat analysis strategy.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified one RCT that involved 40 participants, and addressed the timing of surgery for people with recently symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. It compared very early surgery with surgery performed after 14 days of the last symptomatic event. The overall quality of the evidence was very low, due to the small number of participants from only one trial, and missing outcome data. We found no statistically significant difference between the effects of very early or delayed surgery in reducing the combined risk of stroke and death within 30 days of surgery (risk ratio (RR) 3.32; confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 29.23; very low-quality evidence), or the combined risk of perioperative death and stroke (RR 0.47; CI 0.14 to 1.58; very low-quality evidence). To date, no results are available to confirm the optimal timing for surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is currently no high-quality evidence available to support either very early or delayed cerebral revascularization after a recent ischemic stroke. Hence, further randomized trials to identify which patients should undergo very urgent revascularization are needed. Future studies should stratify participants by age group, sex, grade of ischemia, and degree of stenosis. Currently, there is one ongoing RCT that is examining the timing of cerebral revascularization.

Statin pretreatment is associated with better outcomes in large artery atherosclerotic stroke

OBJECTIVE

Even though statin pretreatment is associated with better functional outcomes and lower risk of mortality in acute ischemic stroke, there are limited data evaluating this association in acute ischemic stroke due to large artery atherosclerosis (LAA), which carries the highest risk of early stroke recurrence.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with acute LAA were prospectively evaluated from 7 tertiary-care stroke centers during a 3-year period. Statin pretreatment, demographics, vascular risk factors, and admission and discharge stroke severity were recorded. The outcome events of interest were neurologic improvement during hospitalization (quantified as the relative decrease in NIH Stroke Scale score at discharge in comparison to hospital admission), favorable functional outcome (FFO) (defined as modified Rankin Scale score of 0-1), recurrent stroke, and death at 1 month. Statistical analyses were performed using univariable and multivariable Cox regression models adjusting for potential confounders. All analyses were repeated following propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Statin pretreatment was documented in 192 (37.2%) of 516 consecutive patients with LAA (mean age: 65 ± 13 years; 60.8% men; median NIH Stroke Scale score: 9 points, interquartile range: 5-18). Statin pretreatment was associated with greater neurologic improvement during hospitalization and higher rates of 30-day FFO in unmatched and matched (odds ratio for FFO: 2.44; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-5.53) analyses. It was also related to lower risk of 1-month mortality and stroke recurrence in unmatched and matched analyses (hazard ratio for recurrent stroke: 0.11, 95% CI: 0.02-0.46; hazard ratio for death: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.08-0.75).

CONCLUSION

Statin pretreatment in patients with acute LAA appears to be associated with better early outcomes regarding neurologic improvement, disability, survival, and stroke recurrence.

Summary of Evidence on Early Carotid Intervention for Recently Symptomatic Stenosis Based on Meta-Analysis of Current Risks

Background and Purpose—

This study aimed to assess the evidence on the periprocedural (<30 days) risks of carotid intervention in relation to timing of procedure in patients with recently symptomatic carotid stenosis.

Methods—

A systematic literature review of studies published in the past 8 years reporting periprocedural stroke/death after carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) related to the time between qualifying neurological symptoms and intervention was performed. Pooled estimates of periprocedural risk for patients treated within 0 to 48 hours, 0 to 7 days, and 0 to 15 days were derived with proportional meta-analyses and reported separately for patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack as index events.

Results—

Of 47 studies included, 35 were on CEA, 7 on CAS, and 5 included both procedures. The pooled risk of periprocedural stroke was 3.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.6–4.3) after CEA and 4.8% (95% CI, 2.5–7.8) after CAS performed <15 days; stroke/death rates were 3.8% and 6.9% after CEA and CAS, respectively. Pooled periprocedural stroke risk was 3.3% (95% CI, 2.1–4.6) after CEA and 4.8% (95% CI, 2.5–7.8) after CAS when performed within 0 to 7 days. In hyperacute surgery (<48 hours), periprocedural stroke risk after CEA was 5.3% (95% CI, 2.8–8.4) but with relevant risk differences among patients treated after transient ischemic attack (2.7%; 95% CI, 0.5–6.9) or stroke (8.0%; 95% CI, 4.6–12.2) as index.

Conclusions—

CEA within 15 days from stroke/transient ischemic attack can be performed with periprocedural stroke risk <3.5%. CAS within the same period may carry a stroke risk of 4.8%. Similar periprocedural risks occur after CEA and CAS performed earlier, within 0 to 7 days. Carotid revascularization can be safely performed within the first week (0–7 days) after symptom onset.

Thirty-day outcome of delayed versus early management of symptomatic carotid stenosis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of early (<15 days) versus delayed carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in symptomatic patients.

METHODS

All CEA procedures performed for symptomatic carotid stenosis between January 2006 and May 2010 were retrospectively reviewed. Postoperative mortality (within 30 days), stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI) rates were analyzed in the early and delayed CEA groups.

RESULTS

During the study period, 149 patients were included. Carotid revascularization was performed within 15 days after symptom onset in 62 (41.6%) patients and longer than 15 days after symptom onset in 87 (58.4%) patients. The mean time lapse between onset of neurological symptoms and surgery was 9.3 days (range 1-15) in the early surgery group and 47.9 days (range 16-157) in the delayed surgery group. Thirty-day combined stroke and death rates were, respectively, 1.7% and 3.5% in the early and the delayed surgery groups. Thirty-day combined stroke, death, and MI rates were, respectively, 1.7% and 5.9% in the early and the delayed surgery groups.

CONCLUSION

During the study period, the reduction of the symptom-to-knife time in application to the carotid revascularization guidelines did not impact our outcomes suggesting that early CEA achieves 30-day mortality and morbidity rates at least equivalent to those of delayed CEA.

Very urgent carotid endarterectomy does not increase the procedural risk

OBJECTIVES

The timing of CEA for symptomatic internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis remains a matter of controversy. Recent registry data showed a significantly increased risk, especially in the very early days after the onset of symptoms. In this study the outcome of CEA in the hyperacute phase has been investigated.

METHODS

The outcome of CEA for symptomatic ICA stenosis between January 2004 and December 2013 has been retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into four timing groups: surgery within 0 and 2 days, between 3 and 7 days, 8 and 14 days, and thereafter. The post-operative 30 day stroke and death rates were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 761 symptomatic patients (40.1% with transient ischemic attack [TIA], 21.3% with amaurosis fugax, and 38.6% with ischemic stroke) were included, with an overall peri-operative stroke and death rate of 3.3%. A stroke and death rate of 4.4% (9/206) for surgery within 0 and 2 days, 1.8% (4/219) between 3 and 7 days, 4.4% (6/136) between 8 and 14 days, and 2.5% (5/200) in the period thereafter (p = .25 for the difference between the groups) was observed. The timing of surgery did not influence the peri-operative outcome in a multivariate regression analysis (OR 0.93 [0.63-1.36], p = .71).

CONCLUSIONS

These data show that very urgent surgery in symptomatic patients can be performed without increased procedural risk. Given the fact that ruptured plaques with neurological symptoms carry the highest risk of a recurrent ischemic event in the first 2 days, treating patients as soon as possible to offer the highest benefit in stroke prevention is recommended.