-
Stroke Aug 2017There is no consensus on the comparative efficacy and safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) versus carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with asymptomatic carotid... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
There is no consensus on the comparative efficacy and safety of carotid artery stenting (CAS) versus carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in patients with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. To evaluate CAS versus CEA in asymptomatic patients, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
METHODS
We systematically searched EMBASE, PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library for randomized controlled trials comparing CAS to CEA in asymptomatic patients using a pre-specified protocol. Two independent reviewers identified randomized controlled trials meeting our inclusion/exclusion criteria, extracted relevant data, and assessed quality using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Random effects models with inverse-variance weighting were used to estimate pooled risk ratios (RRs) comparing the incidences of periprocedural and long-term outcomes between CAS and CEA.
RESULTS
We identified 11 reports of 5 randomized controlled trials for inclusion (n=3019) asymptomatic patients. The pooled incidences of any periprocedural stroke (RR, 1.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99-3.40), periprocedural nondisabling stroke (RR, 1.95; 95% CI, 0.98-3.89), and any periprocedural stroke or death (RR, 1.72; 95% CI, 0.95-3.11) trended toward an increased risk after CAS. We could not rule out clinically significant differences between treatments for long-term stroke (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.76-2.03) and the composite outcome of periprocedural stroke, death or myocardial infarction, or long-term ipsilateral stroke (RR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.70-1.21).
CONCLUSIONS
Although uncertainty surrounds the long-term outcomes of CAS versus CEA, the potential for increased risks of periprocedural stroke and periprocedural stroke or death with CAS suggests that CEA is the preferred option for the management of asymptomatic carotid stenosis.
Topics: Asymptomatic Diseases; Carotid Stenosis; Endarterectomy, Carotid; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Risk Factors; Stents; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28679848
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.016824 -
Catheterization and Cardiovascular... Apr 2021Despite of the wide evidence of use fractional flow reserve (FFR), isolated angiography evaluation is still the main tool to indicate percutaneous coronary intervention.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Despite of the wide evidence of use fractional flow reserve (FFR), isolated angiography evaluation is still the main tool to indicate percutaneous coronary intervention. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a new functional index to assess functional significance. Recently, few studies have showed the capacity of QFR to predict significance stenosis. The aim of this research has been to describe the evidence of QFR in this clinical setting, to analyze the global diagnosis accuracy of QFR versus FFR and to compare the difference in feasibility between retrospective and prospective analysis.
METHODS AND RESULTS
Systematic review of literature was performed. Eligible studies for the meta-analysis were considered those directly evaluating de QFR versus FFR. Pooled values of diagnosis test and summary receiver operator curve were calculated. Main causes of not-perform QFR analysis according to study design were also evaluated. Sixteen studies were included. Good correlation and agreement were showed. Global sensibility, specificity, PPV, and NPV were 0.84, 0.89, 0.80, and 0.92, respectively. Then, 18% of evaluated vessels could not be analyzed. Significant differences were found in the percentage of discarded vessels and the cause of nonperformed analysis between retrospective or prospective analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
Excellent correlation and agreement between QFR and FFR was demonstrated. QFR assessment could be improved by its prospective analysis with a dedicated protocol.
Topics: Coronary Angiography; Coronary Stenosis; Coronary Vessels; Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial; Humans; Imaging, Three-Dimensional; Predictive Value of Tests; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 32196932
DOI: 10.1002/ccd.28857 -
Kardiologia Polska 2021Ionizing radiation remains a well-known risk factor of carotid artery stenosis. The survival rates of head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy have risen... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Ionizing radiation remains a well-known risk factor of carotid artery stenosis. The survival rates of head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy have risen owing to medical advancements in the field. As a consequence, the incidence of carotid artery stenosis in these high-risk patients has increased.
AIMS
In this study we sought to compare the outcomes of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) vs carotid artery stenting (CAS) for radiation-induced carotid artery stenosis.
METHODS
This study was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Eligible studies were identified through a comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane Central until July 2020. A random-effects model meta-analysis was conducted, and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated. The I-square statistic was used to assess for heterogeneity.
RESULTS
Seven studies and 201 patients were included. Periprocedural stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and death rates were similar between the two revascularization approaches. However, the risk for cranial nerve (CN) injury was higher in the CEA group (OR, 7.40; 95% CI, 1.58-34.59; I2 = 0%). Analysis revealed no significant difference in terms of long-term mortality (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.14-1.16; I2 = 0%) and restenosis rates (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.29-1.66; I2 = 0%) between CEA and CAS after a mean follow-up of 40.5 months.
CONCLUSIONS
CAS and CEA appear to have a similar safety and efficacy profile in patients with radiation-induced carotid artery stenosis. Patients treated with CEA have a higher risk for periprocedural CN injuries. Future prospective studies are warranted to validate these results.
Topics: Carotid Stenosis; Endarterectomy, Carotid; Humans; Prospective Studies; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Stents; Stroke; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33885270
DOI: 10.33963/KP.15956 -
Clinical Anatomy (New York, N.Y.) Jul 2021Myocardial bridges are anatomical entities characterized by myocardium covering segments of coronary arteries. In some patients, the presence of a myocardial bridge is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Myocardial bridges are anatomical entities characterized by myocardium covering segments of coronary arteries. In some patients, the presence of a myocardial bridge is benign and is only incidentally found on autopsy. In other patients, however, myocardial bridges can lead to compression of the coronary artery during systolic contraction and delayed diastolic relaxation, resulting in myocardial ischemia. This ischemia in turn can lead to myocardial infarction, ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. Myocardial bridges have also been linked to an increased incidence of atherosclerosis, which has been attributed to increased shear stress and the presence of vasoactive factors. Other studies however, demonstrated the protective roles of myocardial bridges. In this study, using systematic review and a meta-analytical approach we investigate the prevalence and morphology of myocardial bridges in both clinical imaging and cadaveric dissections. We also discuss the pathophysiology, clinical significance, and management of these anatomical entities.
Topics: Animals; Cadaver; Humans; Myocardial Bridging; Prevalence
PubMed: 33078444
DOI: 10.1002/ca.23697 -
CVIR Endovascular Aug 2019Angioplasty is a fundamental treatment for atherosclerotic disease and may be performed as the sole therapy in small vessel disease. However, the ideal duration of... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Angioplasty is a fundamental treatment for atherosclerotic disease and may be performed as the sole therapy in small vessel disease. However, the ideal duration of balloon inflation has not yet been identified. Our study investigated whether prolonged inflation of at least 1-min duration, when compared with brief inflation, affects residual stenosis after arterial angioplasty.
DATA SOURCES AND METHODS
Two independent reviewers conducted a systematic review of EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, trial registries and grey literature, using pre-specified search syntax. Data abstraction and quantitative analysis was performed independently, according to pre-specified criteria. The primary outcome was residual stenosis after initial angioplasty, in addition to other pre-specific clinical and radiographic outcomes. All analyses were stratified by coronary, cerebrovascular, and peripheral territory. The study protocol is published and registered on PROSPERO (CRD42018092702).
RESULTS
Six relevant articles were identified, of which one investigated peripheral vascular angioplasty and five investigated coronary artery angioplasty, encompassing 1496 procedures. The studies were at moderate risk of bias. Minimal heterogeneity within coronary studies allowed for subgroup meta-analysis. Prolonged inflation was significantly associated with lower risk of residual stenosis post-inflation in the pooled coronary trials (RR 1.76 [95% CI 1.46-2.12], I = 0%, p < 0.001) in addition to approaching significance in the peripheral vascular trial (RR 2.40 [95% CI 0.94-6.13], p = 0.07). Prolonged inflation was associated with less risk of arterial dissection and need for adjunctive procedures such as stenting. Following adjunctive procedures, less residual stenosis was still observed in the prolonged angioplasty group in the reported coronary studies. Follow-up data did not reveal a significant difference in the presence of restenosis, however there was a long-term benefit of prolonged inflation in reducing overall severity of stenosis.
DISCUSSION
This is the first review investigating outcomes related to duration of balloon inflation. Both coronary and peripheral vascular evidence are in agreement that prolonged angioplasty balloon inflation greater than 60 s appears to be associated with improved immediate post-inflation results. However, long-term data is heterogeneous and inconsistently reported. We propose further investigation to address outstanding long-term outcomes, particularly in small vessel territories such as tibial vessels where angioplasty is often used as the only endovascular therapy.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This protocol has been registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42018092702 ) prior to conduct of the review.
PubMed: 32026993
DOI: 10.1186/s42155-019-0072-2 -
Stroke Feb 2005Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) has emerged as a potential alternative to endarterectomy (CEA) for the treatment of carotid artery disease. Aside from the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) has emerged as a potential alternative to endarterectomy (CEA) for the treatment of carotid artery disease. Aside from the periprocedural complication rates, the benefits of CAS will be affected by the incidence of recurrent carotid stenosis.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic analysis of all peer-reviewed studies reporting on the rate of restenosis (> or =50%) after CAS based on duplex ultrasound or angiography that were published between January 1990 and July 2004. We identified 34 studies that reported on a total of 4185 patients with a follow-up of 3814 arteries over a median of 13 months (range, 6 to 31 months). The ultrasound criteria and the lower thresholds for defining a recurrent stenosis were very heterogeneous.
RESULTS
The cumulative restenosis rates after 1 and 2 years were approximately 6% and 7.5% in those studies, which used a lower restenosis threshold > or =50% to 70% and approximately 4% in the first 2 years after CAS in those studies, which used a lower restenosis threshold >70% to 80%.
CONCLUSIONS
In reviewing the current literature, the early restenosis rates after CAS compare well with those reported for CEA. However, this analysis of the peer-reviewed literature also indicates that the early restenosis rates after CAS might be higher than previously suggested in observational surveys. Therefore, an active follow-up of all stented arteries seems to be warranted. Moreover, the bulk of endovascular data are derived from small studies with short follow-up periods so that the long-term durability of CAS still needs to be established in large trials. Ideally, these studies should use a clear and uniform definition of restenosis and identical follow-up schedules.
Topics: Aged; Angiography; Angioplasty; Angioplasty, Balloon; Carotid Artery, Internal; Carotid Stenosis; Constriction, Pathologic; Disease Progression; Endarterectomy, Carotid; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; PubMed; Recurrence; Risk Factors; Stents; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Ultrasonography, Doppler, Duplex
PubMed: 15625299
DOI: 10.1161/01.STR.0000152357.82843.9f -
Annals of Internal Medicine Sep 2014Approximately 10% of ischemic strokes are caused by carotid artery stenosis (CAS). Estimated prevalence of asymptomatic CAS is 1%. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Approximately 10% of ischemic strokes are caused by carotid artery stenosis (CAS). Estimated prevalence of asymptomatic CAS is 1%.
PURPOSE
To evaluate evidence on screening and treating asymptomatic adults for CAS.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and trial registries through September 2013; MEDLINE through March 2014 for trials.
STUDY SELECTION
Good- or fair-quality trials of screening, carotid endarterectomy (CEA), or stenting compared with medical therapy or of intensification of medical therapy; systematic reviews; multi-institution studies reporting harms; and externally validated risk-stratification tools.
DATA EXTRACTION
Dual extraction and quality assessment.
DATA SYNTHESIS
No trials compared screening with no screening or stenting with medical therapy or assessed intensification of medical therapy, and no externally validated, reliable risk-stratification tools were found. Given the specificity of ultrasonography (range, 88% to 94% for CAS ≥ 50% to ≥ 70%), its use in low-prevalence populations would yield many false-positive results. Absolute reduction of nonperioperative strokes was 5.5% (95% CI, 3.9% to 7.0%; 3 trials; 5223 participants) over approximately 5 years for CEA compared with medical therapy. The 30-day rates of stroke or death after CEA in trials and cohort studies were 2.4% (CI, 1.7% to 3.1%; 6 trials; 3435 participants) and 3.3% (CI, 2.7% to 3.9%; 7 studies; 17474 participants), respectively. Other harms of interventions included myocardial infarction, nerve injury, and hematoma.
LIMITATIONS
Trials may have overestimated benefits and used highly selected surgeons. Medical therapy used in trials was outdated, and stroke rates have declined in recent decades. Harms may have been underreported.
CONCLUSION
Current evidence does not establish incremental overall benefit of CEA, stenting, or intensification of medical therapy. Potential for overall benefit is limited by low prevalence and harms.
PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
Topics: Angioplasty; Asymptomatic Diseases; Carotid Arteries; Carotid Stenosis; Endarterectomy, Carotid; Humans; Mass Screening; Postoperative Complications; Risk Assessment; Stents; Stroke; Ultrasonography, Doppler, Duplex
PubMed: 25004169
DOI: 10.7326/M14-0530 -
Systematic Reviews May 2021Patch angioplasty in conventional carotid endarterectomy is suggested to reduce the risk of restenosis and recurrent ipsilateral stroke compared with primary closure. A... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty versus primary closure in patients with symptomatic and significant stenosis: a systematic review with meta-analyses and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials.
BACKGROUND
Patch angioplasty in conventional carotid endarterectomy is suggested to reduce the risk of restenosis and recurrent ipsilateral stroke compared with primary closure. A systematic review of randomized clinical trials is needed to compare outcomes (benefits and harms) of both techniques.
METHODS
Searches (CENTRAL, PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and other databases) were last updated 3rd of January 2021. We included randomized clinical trials comparing carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty versus primary closure of the arterial wall in patients with a symptomatic and significant (> 50%) carotid stenosis. Primary outcomes are defined as all-cause mortality and serious adverse events.
RESULTS
We included 12 randomized clinical trials including 2187 participants who underwent 2335 operations for carotid stenosis comparing carotid endarterectomy with patch closure (1280 operations) versus carotid endarterectomy with primary closure (1055 operations). Meta-analysis comparing carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty versus carotid endarterectomy with primary closure may potentially decrease the number of patients with all-cause mortality (RR 0.53; 95% CI 0.26 to 1.08; p = 0.08, best-case scenario for patch), serious adverse events (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.56 to 0.96; p = 0.02, best-case scenario for patch), and the number of restenosis (RR 0.41; 95% CI 0.23 to 0.71; p < 0.01). Trial sequential analysis demonstrated that the required information sizes were far from being reached for these patient-important outcomes. All the patient-relevant outcomes were at low certainty of evidence according to The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review showed no conclusive evidence of a difference between carotid endarterectomy with patch angioplasty versus primary closure of the arterial wall on all-cause mortality, < 30 days mortality, < 30 days stroke, or any other serious adverse events. These conclusions are based on data from 15 to 35 years ago, obtained in trials with very low certainty according to GRADE, and should be interpreted cautiously. Therefore, we suggest conducting new randomized clinical trials patch angioplasty versus primary closure in carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with an internal carotid artery stenosis of 50% or more. Such trials ought to be designed according to the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials statement (Chan et al., Ann Intern Med 1:200-7, 2013) and reported according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement (Schulz et al., 7, 2010). Until conclusive evidence is obtained, the standard of care according to guidelines should not be abandoned.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42014013416 . Review protocol publication 2019 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026419 .
Topics: Angioplasty; Carotid Stenosis; Constriction, Pathologic; Endarterectomy, Carotid; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stroke; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33957978
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-021-01692-8 -
Stroke Feb 2023Over the last decades, several individual studies on sex differences in carotid atherosclerosis have been performed covering a wide range of plaque characteristics and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Over the last decades, several individual studies on sex differences in carotid atherosclerosis have been performed covering a wide range of plaque characteristics and including different populations. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to summarize previously reported results on sex differences in carotid atherosclerosis and present a roadmap explaining next steps needed for implementing this knowledge in clinical practice.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, and Google Scholar for eligible studies including both male and female participants reporting prevalence of imaging characteristics of carotid atherosclerosis and meta-analyzed these studies. Studies had to report at least the following: (1) calcifications; (2) lipid-rich necrotic core; (3) intraplaque hemorrhage; (4) thin-or-ruptured fibrous cap; (5) plaque ulceration; (6) degree of stenosis; (7) plaque size; or (8) plaque inflammation. We prespecified which imaging modalities had to be used per plaque characteristic and excluded ultrasonography.
RESULTS
We included 42 articles in our meta-analyses (ranging from 2 through 23 articles per plaque characteristic). Men had more frequently a larger plaque compared to women and, moreover, had more often plaques with calcifications (odds ratio=1.57 [95% CI, 1.23-2.02]), lipid-rich necrotic core (odds ratio=1.87 [95% CI, 1.36-2.57]), and intraplaque hemorrhage (odds ratio=2.52 [95% CI, 1.74-3.66]), or an ulcerated plaque (1.81 [95% CI, 1.30-2.51]). Furthermore, we found more pronounced sex differences for lipid-rich necrotic core in symptomatic opposed to asymptomatic participants.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we demonstrate convincing evidence for sex differences in carotid atherosclerosis. All kinds of plaque features-plaque size, composition, and morphology-were more common or larger in men compared to women. Our results highlight that sex is an important variable to include in both study design and clinical-decision making. Further investigation of sex-specific stroke risks with regard to plaque composition is warranted.
Topics: Female; Male; Humans; Carotid Stenosis; Sex Characteristics; Magnetic Resonance Imaging; Carotid Artery Diseases; Plaque, Atherosclerotic; Hemorrhage; Calcinosis; Necrosis; Lipids; Carotid Arteries; Risk Factors
PubMed: 36444718
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.122.041046 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Dec 2022The optimal endovascular therapy for vein graft stenosis (VGS) following infrainguinal arterial bypass is yet to be established. Drug-coated balloons (DCB) have rapidly... (Review)
Review
The optimal endovascular therapy for vein graft stenosis (VGS) following infrainguinal arterial bypass is yet to be established. Drug-coated balloons (DCB) have rapidly improved the inferior patency outcomes of angioplasty using a conventional plain balloon (PB). This study compares the efficacy of DCBs and PBs for the treatment of infrainguinal VGS. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the PRISMA statement. Multiple electronic searches were conducted in consultation with a health science librarian in September 2022. Studies describing the comparative outcomes of angioplasty using DCBs and PBs in the treatment of infrainguinal VGS were eligible. Datasets from one randomized controlled trial and two cohort studies with a total of 179 patients were identified. The results indicated no significant difference in target lesion revascularization between DCBs and PBs (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.32-1.28; = 0.21), with no significant heterogeneity between studies. Additionally, differences in primary patency, assisted primary patency, secondary patency, and graft occlusion were not significant. Subgroup analysis showed similar effects for different DCB devices. In conclusion, DCBs showed no significant benefit in the treatment of VGS compared to PBs. Given the small population size of this meta-analysis, future trials with a larger population are desired.
PubMed: 36614884
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12010087