Stenting in Intracranial Stenosis: Current Controversies and Future Directions
- 296 Downloads
Angioplasty and stenting for intracranial atherosclerotic stenosis (ICAS) are a last resort for patients with high-grade intracranial stenosis with multiple ischemic events unresponsive to medical therapy. Medical management, consisting of aggressive risk factor control and dual antiplatelet therapy, is superior to angioplasty and stenting for the prevention of future stroke. Future studies of angioplasty and stenting in this population are important, as the stroke risk on medical therapy is 12 % at 1 year and post-procedure stroke rates are similar to rates with medical treatment. There are many issues that will need to be resolved for stenting to offer any benefit, however. Procedural risks of hemorrhagic and ischemic stroke are unacceptably high. High-risk subgroups, potentially based on hemodynamic factors, will need to be identified for future interventional trials. Nevertheless, it is still reasonable to consider angioplasty and stenting for selected patients with multiple recurrent events despite aggressive medical management, but benefits are unclear at this time.
KeywordsCerebral atherosclerosis Intracranial atherosclerotic disease Endovascular Stenosis Angioplasty Stenting Ischemic stroke Humans
Compliance with Ethics Guidelines
Conflict of Interest
AR Chatterjee declares no conflicts of interest. CP Derdeyn has received consultant fees from Microvention, Penumbra, and Silk Road.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
All studies by the authors involving animal and/or human subjects were performed after approval by the appropriate institutional review boards. When required, written informed consent was obtained from all participants.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance
- 2.Higashida RT, Meyers PM, Connors JJ, Sacks D, Strother CM, Barr JD, et al. Intracranial angioplasty & stenting for cerebral atherosclerosis: a position statement of the American Society of Interventional and Therapeutic Neuroradiology, Society of Interventional Radiology, and the American Society of Neuroradiology. J Vasc Intervent Radiol: JVIR. 2005;16(10):1281–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.••Qureshi AI, Caplan LR. Intracranial atherosclerosis. Lancet. 2014;383(9921):984–98. Review article covering the epidemiology, risk factors, pathologic appearance, clinical manifestations, diagnosis and characterization, natural history, and treatment strategies for intracranial atherosclerosis.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Zaidat OO, Fitzsimmons BF, Woodward BK, Wang Z, Killer-Oberpfalzer M, Wakhloo A, et al. Effect of a balloon-expandable intracranial stent vs medical therapy on risk of stroke in patients with symptomatic intracranial stenosis: the VISSIT randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;313(12):1240–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.•Ritz K, Denswil NP, Stam OC, van Lieshout JJ, Daemen MJ. Cause and mechanisms of intracranial atherosclerosis. Circulation. 2014;130(16):1407–14. Review of epidemiology, morphology, and risk factors leading to intracranial atherosclerosis. Proposal of a mechanism specifically for intracranial atherosclerosis based on the tissue characteristics of intracranial arterial vasculature.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.••Derdeyn CP, Chimowitz MI, Lynn MJ, Fiorella D, Turan TN, Janis LS, et al. Aggressive medical treatment with or without stenting in high-risk patients with intracranial artery stenosis (SAMMPRIS): the final results of a randomised trial. Lancet. 2014;383(9914):333–41. Largest prospective randomized trial showing both 30-day and long term benefit of aggressive medical management over stenting with the Wingspan stent for high-risk patients with ICAS.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.••Lutsep HL, Barnwell SL, Larsen DT, Lynn MJ, Hong M, Turan TN, et al. Outcome in Patients Previously on Antithrombotic Therapy in the SAMMPRIS Trial: Subgroup Analysis. Stroke. 2015. Subgroup analysis of SAMMPRIS showing no benefit for PTAS over AMM in patients who were either on or off antithrombotic therapy at the time of their qualifying event. This also showed that antithrombotic failure at the time of the qualifying event was not associated with a higher risk for a primary endpoint consisting of stroke or death within 30 days or ipsilateral stroke beyond 30 days.Google Scholar
- 33.•Connors 3rd JJ, Wojak JC, Hoppe BH. The technique of endovascular intracranial revascularization. Front Neurol. 2014;5:246. Detailed description of ICAS angioplasty procedural techniques used to mitigate complication risks with a description of changes implemented since the SAMMPRIS trial.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 35.Al-Ali F, Cree T, Hall S, Louis S, Major K, Smoker S, et al. Predictors of unfavorable outcome in intracranial angioplasty and stenting in a single-center comparison: results from the Borgess Medical Center-Intracranial Revascularization Registry. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011;32(7):1221–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 40.Durst CR, Geraghty SR, Southerland AM, Starke RM, Rembold K, Malik S, et al. Stenting of symptomatic intracranial stenosis using balloon mounted coronary stents: a single center experience. J Neurointerv Surg. 2014.Google Scholar
- 43.Kurre W, Brassel F, Bruning R, Buhk J, Eckert B, Horner S, et al. Complication rates using balloon-expandable and self-expanding stents for the treatment of intracranial atherosclerotic stenoses : analysis of the INTRASTENT multicentric registry. Neuroradiology. 2012;54(1):43–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 44.von Schoenfeldt P, Krutzelmann A, Bussmeyer M, Mpotsaris A, Rosenkranz M, Fiehler J, et al. Elective treatment of intracranial stenosis with the balloon-expandable Pharos Vitesse stent: 30-day stroke rate and complications. J Neurointerv Surg. 2015;7(3):188–93. A more recent retrospective study of 92 patients with high-grade ICAS and recurrent ischemic events despite AMM (including Apirin and clopidogrel for 90 days following stenting) treated with the balloon-expandable Pharos Vitesse stent demonstrated an overall 30-day complication rate of 7.6%.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 49.••Derdeyn CP, Fiorella D, Lynn MJ, Rumboldt Z, Cloft HJ, Gibson D, et al. Mechanisms of stroke after intracranial angioplasty and stenting in the SAMMPRIS trial. Neurosurgery. 2013;72(5):777–95; discussion 95. A review of the SAMMPRIS trial data to investigate the types and mechanism of periprocedural stroke following PTAS for ICAD. This data is critical for developing an understanding of the periprocedural events in the trial. This also provides insight to guide patient selection criteria and device development for future investigations of symptomatic ICAD.Google Scholar
- 54.Albuquerque FC, Levy EI, Turk AS, Niemann DB, Aagaard-Kienitz B, Pride Jr GL, et al. Angiographic patterns of Wingspan in-stent restenosis. Neurosurgery. 2008;63(1):23–7. discussion 7–8.Google Scholar
- 66.•Miao Z, Song L, Liebeskind DS, Liu L, Ma N, Wang Y, et al. Outcomes of tailored angioplasty and/or stenting for symptomatic intracranial atherosclerosis: a prospective cohort study after SAMMPRIS. J Neurointerv Surg. 2014. Single center prospective study with 158 patients presenting with symptomatic high-grade ICAS, hypoperfusion symptoms, and poor collaterals divided into endovascular treatment with balloon-mounted stent deployment, PTAS, and angioplasty alone based on technical access considerations and lesion morphology. 30 day stroke, myocardial infarction, or death rate was 4.4%.Google Scholar