Zeitschrift für Kardiologie

, Volume 94, Issue 12, pp 836–843

Stent-supported angioplasty versus endarterectomy for carotid artery stenosis

Evidence from current randomized trials
REVIEW

Summary

Background

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) for carotid artery stenoses is evolving as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA). However, the value of CAS is still a matter of debate. Therefore, we performed a metaanalysis of the randomized controlled clinical trials (RCT) on this issue.

Methods

RCTs were identified through searching MEDLINE, textbooks and by personal communication.

Results

Six finished RCTs on this issue could be identified, including 1263 patients, 628 randomized to CAS and 635 to CEA. The 30-day death or stroke rate was 8.0% (50/628) in patients treated with CAS compared to 6.1% (39/635) in CEA patients (OR=1.36, 95% CI: 0.88–2.11; p=0.17; p for heterogeneity=0.009). The rate of cranial nerve palsy was 7.1% in the CEA compared to 0% in the CAS group (p<0.0001). The rate of myocardial infarctions was reduced from 3.1 to 1% (OR=0.32, 95% CI: 0.12– 0.81; p=0.02; p for heterogeneity=0.49). The death or stroke rate during follow-up was 12.1% in patients treated with CAS compared to 12.2% in CEA patients (OR=0.99, 95% CI: 0.70–1.42; p=0.98; p for heterogeneity=0.02).

Conclusion

The available RCT data on CAS vs. CEA suggest that both methods seem to be equally effective concerning short- and medium-term results, while CAS is associated with lower minor complications than CEA. However, because of the significant heterogeneity between the study outcomes, the results of the large RCTs underway should be awaited before it can be advised to use CAS in a broader perspective.

Key words

Carotid arteries carotid artery stenting carotid endarterectomy angioplasty 

Stentgestützte Ballondilatation versus Endarterektomie zur Behandlung von Stenosen der Arteria carotis: Ergebnisse der randomisierten Studien

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Die meist stentgestützte Ballondilatation (CAS) von Stenosen der Arteria carotis entwickelt sich zunehmend zu einer Alternative der Carotisendarterektomie (CEA). Der Stellenwert der CAS im Vergleich zur CEA ist jedoch noch umstritten. Deswegen führten wir eine Meta-Analyse der randomisierten Studien (RCT) zu diesem Thema durch.

Methoden

Die RCTs wurden über eine MEDLINE Suche, Textbücher und durch persönliche Kontakte identifiziert.

Ergebnisse

Es fanden sich 6 abgeschlossene RCTs zu diesem Thema mit insgesamt 1263 Patienten, 628 randomisiert zu CAS und 635 zu CEA. Die 30 Tage Tod- oder Apoplexrate betrug bei den CAS-Patienten 8,0% (50/628) und bei den CEA-Patienten 6,1% (39/635) (OR=1,36, 95% CI: 0,88–2,11; p=0,17; p für Heterogenität= 0,009). Die Hirnnervenlähmungsrate betrug 7,1% in der CEA-Gruppe im Vergleich zu 0% in der CAS-Gruppe (p<0,0001). Die Myokardinfarktrate wurde von 3,1% auf 1% (OR=0,32, 95% CI: 0,12–0,81; p=0,02; p für Heterogenität=0,49) reduziert. Während der Nachbeobachtungszeit lag die Tod- oder Apoplexrate bei 12,1% bei den CAS-Patienten verglichen mit 12,2% bei den CEA-Patienten (OR=0,99, 95% CI: 0,70–1,42; p=0,98; p für Heterogenität=0,02).

Schlussfolgerung

Die verfügbaren Daten aus den RCT zum Vergleich des CAS versus der CEA zeigen eine gleiche Effektivität bezüglich akuter und mittelfristiger Ergebnisse (Tod/Apoplex) beider Methoden. Das CAS ist jedoch mit weniger sonstigen Komplikationen behaftet. Da jedoch eine signifikante Heterogenität bei den Studienergebnissen vorlag, sollten die Ergebnisse der großen RCTs zum Vergleich beider Methoden abgewartet werden, bevor das CAS als Standartverfahren zur Behandlung von Carotisstenosen propagiert wird.

Schlüsselwörter

Carotisstenosen Ballondilatation Stents Endarterektomie randomisierte Studien 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Al-Mubarak N, Roubin GS, Liu MW, Dean LS, Gomez CR, Iyer SS, Vitek JJ (1999) Early results of percutaneous intervention for severe coexisting carotid and coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol 84:600–602PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alberts MJ (2001) Results of a multicenter propective randomized trial of carotid artery stenting vs. carotid endarterectomy. Stroke 32:325–dCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bockenheimer SA, Mathias K (1983) Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in arteriosclerotic internal carotid artery stenosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 4:791–792PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brooks WH, McClure RR, Jones MR, Coleman TC, Breathitt L (2001) Carotid angioplasty and stenting versus carotid endarterectomy: randomized trial in a community hospital. J Am Coll Cardiol 38:1589–1595PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brooks WH, McClure RR, Jones MR, Coleman TL, Breathitt L (2004) Carotid angioplasty and stenting versus carotid endarterectomy for treatment of asymptomatic carotid stenosis: a randomized trial in a community hospital. Neurosurgery 54:318–324PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cao P, Giordano G, De Rango P, Zannetti S, Chiesa R, Coppi G, Palombo D, Peinetti F, Spartera C, Stancanelli V et al (2000) Eversion versus conventional carotid endarterectomy: late results of a prospective multicenter randomized trial. J Vasc Surg 31:19–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    CAVATAS Investigators (2001) Endovascular versus surgical treatment in patients with carotid stenosis in the Carotid and Vertebral Artery Transluminal Angioplasty Study (CAVATAS): a randomised trial. Lancet 357:1729–1737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cebul RD, Snow RJ, Pine R, Hertzer NR, Norris DG (1998) Indications, outcomes, and provider volumes for carotid endarterectomy. JAMA 279:1282–1287PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Coward LJ, Featherstone RL, Brown MM (2005) Safety and efficacy of endovascular treatment of carotid artery stenosis compared with carotid endarterectomy: a Cochrane systematic review of the randomized evidence. Stroke 36:905–911PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Deeks JJ (2002) Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for metaanalysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes. Stat Med 21:1575–1600PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    European Carotid Surgery Trialists’ Collaborative Group (1991) MRC European Carotid Surgery Trial: interim results for symptomatic patients with severe (70–99%) or with mild (0–29%) carotid stenosis. European Carotid Surgery Trialists‘ Collaborative Group. Lancet 337:1235–1243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    European Carotid Surgery Trialists’ Collaborative Group (1998) Randomised trial of endarterectomy for recently symptomatic carotid stenosis: final results of the MRC European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST). Lancet 351:1379–1387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    EVA-3S Investigators (2004) Endarterectomy vs. angioplasty in patients with symptomatic severe carotid stenosis (EVA-3S) trial. Cerebrovasc Dis 18:62–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Executive Committee for the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study (1995) Endarterectomy for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. Executive Committee for the Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study. JAMA 273:1421–1428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Featherstone RL, Brown MM, Coward LJ (2004) International carotid stenting study: protocol for a randomised clinical trial comparing carotid stenting with endarterectomy in symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. Cerebrovasc Dis 18:69–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Halliday A, Mansfield A, Marro J, Peto C, Peto R, Potter J, Thomas D (2004) Prevention of disabling and fatal strokes by successful carotid endarterectomy in patients without recent neurological symptoms: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 363:1491–1502PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Henry M, Amor M, Henry I, Klonaris C, Chati Z, Masson I, Kownator S, Luizy F, Hugel M (1999) Carotid stenting with cerebral protection: first clinical experience using the PercuSurge GuardWire system. J Endovasc Surg 6:321–331PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Higashida RT, Meyers PM, Phatouros CC, Connors JJ, III, Barr JD, Sacks D (2004) Reporting standards for carotid artery angioplasty and stent placement. Stroke 35:e112–e134PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hobson RW, Brott T, Ferguson R, Roubin G, Moore W, Kuntz R, Howard G, Ferguson J (1997) CREST: carotid revascularization endarterectomy versus stent trial [editorial]. Cardiovasc Surg 5:457–458PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    L’Abbe KA, Detsky AS, O’Rourke K (1987) Meta-analysis in clinical research. Ann Intern Med 107:224–233PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Martin JB, Pache JC, Treggiari-Venzi M, Murphy KJ, Gailloud P, Puget E, Pizzolato G, Sugiu K, Guimaraens L, Theron J et al (2001) Role of the distal balloon protection technique in the prevention of cerebral embolic events during carotid stent placement. Stroke 32:479–484PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Mathias K, Gospos C, Thron A, Ahmadi A, Mittermayer C (1980) Percutaneous transluminal treatment of supraaortic artery obstruction. Ann Radiol 23:281–282PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mathias K, Jager H, Hennigs S, Gissler HM (2001) Endoluminal treatment of internal carotid artery stenosis. World J Surg 25:328–34PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mathias K, Mittermayer C, Ensinger H, Neff W (1980) Percutaneous catheter dilatation of carotid stenoses—animal experiments. ROFO Fortschr Geb Rontgenstr Nuklearmed 133:258–261PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mathur A, Roubin GS, Yadav JS, Iyer SS, Vitek J (1997) Combined coronary and bilateral carotid stenting: a case report. Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 40:202–206PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Naylor AR, Bolia A, Abbott RJ, Pye IF, Smith J, Lennard N, Lloyd AJ, London NJ, Bell PR (1998) Randomized study of carotid angioplasty and stenting versus carotid endarterectomy: a stopped trial. J Vasc Surg 28:326–334PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators (1991) Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators. N Engl J Med 325:445–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ohki T, Veith FJ (2001) Carotid artery stenting: utility of cerebral protection devices. J Invasive Cardiol 13:47–55PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ringleb PA, Kunze A, Allenberg JR, Hennerici MG, Jansen O, Maurer PC, Zeumer H, Hacke W (2004) The Stent-Supported Percutaneous Angioplasty of the Carotid Artery vs. Endarterectomy Trial. Cerebrovasc Dis 18:66–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rothwell PM, Slattery J, Warlow CP (1996) A systematic review of the risks of stroke and death due to endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis. Stroke 27:260–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Roubin GS, Yadav S, Iyer SS, Vitek J (1996) Carotid stent-supported angioplasty: a neurovascular intervention to prevent stroke. Am J Cardiol 78:8–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Roubin GS, New G, Iyer SS, Vitek JJ, Al Mubarak N, Liu MW, Yadav J, Gomez C, Kuntz RE (2001) Immediate and Late Clinical Outcomes of Carotid Artery Stenting in Patients With Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Stenosis : A 5-Year Prospective Analysis. Circulation 103:532PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sweeting MJ, Sutton AJ, Lambert PC (2004) What to add to nothing? Use and avoidance of continuity corrections in meta-analysis of sparse data. Stat Med 23:1351–1375PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Szabo A, Brazda E, Dosa E, Apor A, Szabolcs Z, Entz L (2004) Long-term restenosis rate of eversion endarterectomy on the internal carotid artery. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 27:537–539PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    The CASANOVA Study Group (1991) Carotid surgery versus medical therapy in asymptomatic carotid stenosis. The CASANOVA Study Group. Stroke 22:1229–1235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Theiss W, Hermanek P, Mathias K, Ahmadi R, Heuser L, Hoffmann FJ, Kerner R, Leisch F, Sievert H, von Sommoggy S (2004) Pro-CAS: a prospective registry of carotid angioplasty and stenting. Stroke 35:2134–2139PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Tsai FY, Matovich V, Hieshima G, Shah DC, Mehringer CM, Tiu G, Higashida R, Pribram HF (1986) Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of the carotid artery. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 7:349–358PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wholey MH, Al Mubarek N, Wholey MH (2003) Updated review of the global carotid artery stent registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 60:259–266PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wiggli U, Gratzl O (1983) Transluminal angioplasty of stenotic carotid arteries: case reports and protocol. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 4:793–795PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Yadav JS, Wholey MH, Kuntz RE, Fayad P, Katzen BT, Mishkel GJ, Bajwa TK, Whitlow P, Strickman NE, Jaff MR et al (2004) Protected carotid-artery stenting versus endarterectomy in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 351:1493–1501PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Zahn R, Mark B, Niedermaier N, Zeymer U, Limbourg P, Ischinger T, Haerten K, Hauptmann KE, Leitner ER, Kasper W et al (2004) Embolic protection devices for carotid artery stenting: better results than stenting without protection? Eur Heart J 25:1550–1558PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Zahn R, Roth E, Ischinger T, Mark B, Hochadel M, Zeymer U, Haerten K, Hauptmann KE, von Leitner ER, Schramm A et al (2005) Carotid artery stenting in clinical practice Results from the Carotid Artery Stenting (CAS)-registry of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Leitende Kardiologische Krankenhausärzte (ALKK). Z Kardiol 94:163–172PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Steinkopff-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Herzzentrum Ludwigshafen, KardiologieLudwigshafenGermany
  2. 2.Städtisches Klinikum, NeurologieLudwigshafenGermany

Personalised recommendations