Management of Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis Medical v. Surgical Friedlander v. Wechsler
Management of Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis
Medical v. Surgical
Friedlander v. Wechsler
Management of Asymptomatic Carotid Stenosis
Medical
Friedlander v. Wechsler
Making an Asymptomatic Patient Better
“The physician must be able to tell the antecedents, know the present, and foretell the future — must mediate these things, and have two special objects in view with regard to disease, namely, to do good or to do no harm.” Hippocrates: Of the Epidemics
CEA for Symptomatic Stenosis - NASCET
Barnett et al. NEJM 1998
Surgical
Medical
Years
CEA for Asymptomatic Stenosis - ACST
1 2 3 4 50Years
ACST Lancet 2004
Asymptomatic Stenosis RCTs:CEA v. Medical Therapy
Years Pts F/UStr-Dth/Yr
MedStr-Dth/Yr
Surg ARR / Yr
VACS 1983-1987 444 4 yrs 2.4%* 1.2%* 1.2%*
ACAS 1987-1993 1659 5 yrs 2.2% 1% 1.2%
ACST 1993-2003 3120 5 yrs 2.4% 1.3 1.1%
* ipsilateral nonfatal and fatal stroke
Hobson et al. NEJM 1993; ACAS JAMA 1995; ACST Lancet 2004
Stent v. CEA Randomized Trials
Study Year Pts Stenosis Endpoint CEA Stent
SAPPHIRE 2004 334 Sx >50% and Asx >80%
MACE 30d + Ips str 1yr 9.8% 4.8%
EVA-3S 2006 527 Sx 60-99% Str/Dth 30 d 3.9% 9.6%
SPACE 2006 1183 Sx 70-99% Ips Str/Dth 30 d 6.3% 6.8%
ICSS 2010 1713 Sx 50-99% Str/Dth/MI 120 d 5.2% 8.5%
CREST Study Design Prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial
with blinded endpoint adjudication
Comparing CEA and CAS in conventional risk patients with > 50% symptomatic or > 70% asymptomatic stenosis (> 70% by US or CTA)
108 US and 9 Canadian sites
Primary endpoint: Periprocedural stroke, MI, death and any ipsilateral stroke up to 4 years
Surgeons and interventionalists carefully screened by expert committee
CREST Results
CAS CEA HR 95% CI P Value
Primary Endpoint < 4 yrs* 7.2% 6.8% 1.11 0.81-1.51 0.51
Periprocedural Stroke 4.1% 2.3% 1.79 1.14-2.82 0.01
Periprocedural MI 1.1% 2.3% 0.50 0.26-0.94 0.03
Major Stroke 0.9% 0.6% 1.35 0.54-3.36 0.52
Ipsilateral Stroke up to 4 yrs 2.0% 2.4% 0.94 0.50-1.76 0.85
* Any periprocedural stroke, MI, death plus ipsilateral stroke thereafter
Brott et al. NEJM 2010
CREST Results:Symptomatic v. Asymptomatic
CAS CEA HR 95% CI P Value
Primary Endpoint < 4 yrs*
Symptomatic 8.6% 8.4% 1.08 0.74-1.59 0.69
Asymptomatic 5.6% 4.9% 1.17 0.69-1.98 0.56
Periprocedural Stroke/Death
Symptomatic 6.0% 3.2% 1.89 1.11-3.21 0.02
Asymptomatic 2.5% 1.4% 1.88 0.79-4.42 0.15
Periprocedural Stroke
Symptomatic 5.5% 3.2% 1.74 1.02-2.98 0.04
Asymptomatic 2.5% 1.4% 1.88 0.79-4.42 0.15
Periprocedural MI
Symptomatic 1.0% 2.3% 0.45 0.18-1.11 0.08
Asymptomatic 1.2% 2.2% 0.55 0.22-1.38 0.20
* Any periprocedural stroke, MI, death plus ipsilateral stroke thereafter
Brott et al. NEJM 2010
CREST CEA v. Stent by Age
0
1
2
3
4
40 50 60 70 80 90
Haza
rd R
atio
Age (Years)
Pinteraction = 0.020
CEA Superior
CAS Superior
Primary outcome – 4 year
Improved Outcomes with Medical Therapy
Old Results New Results
Asymptomatic stenosisACAS - 1995 2.2% stroke / yrACST - 2004: 2.2% stroke / yr
Goessens - 2007: 0.8% stroke / yrAbbott - 2005: 1% stroke / yr
Intracranial stenosisHistorical controls before 2005: 10.7% stroke and death in first 30 days
SAMMPRIS - 20115.8% stroke and death at 30 days with intensive medical therapy
DesmoteplaseDIAS I – 200522% favorable outcome
DIAS II – 200946% favorable outcome
Intracerebral hemorrhagerFVIIa phase IIb - 2005Poor outcome (mRS 5,6) 45%
FAST – 2008Poor outcome (mRS 5,6) 24%
IV tPA > 3 hrsATLANTIS – 1999mRS < 1 40%
ECASS III – 2008mRS < 1 45%
Should we revascularize any patients with asymptomatic stenosis?
ACST – Medical Therapy
Halliday et al. Lancet 2010
20
60
80
40
100
Stroke Risk in Medically Treated PatientsACAS and ACST
Trial Yrs Followup Yr Published Any Stroke (%) Ipsil Stroke (%)
ACAS 1-5 1995 17.5 (3.5%) 11.0 (2.2%)
ACST 1-5 2004 11.8 (2.4%) 5.3 (1.1%)
ACST 6-10 2009 7.2 (1.4%) 3.6 (0.7%)
ACAS. JAMA 1995; Haliday et al. Lancet 2004; Halliday et al Lancet 2010
Oxford Vascular StudyStroke Risk with > 50% Carotid Stenosis
Event Number % / yr
Ipsilateral minor stroke 1 0.34%
Ipsilateral major stroke 0 0%
TIA 5 1.78%
• Population based study of 1153 pts with stroke or TIA recruited between 2002 – 2009• All pts treated with intensive medical therapy – AP, statins, BP reduction, lifestyle changes• 101 (8.8%) with > 50% asymptomatic stenosis• Mean followup 3 years
Marquardt et al. Stroke 2010
Subgroup Stroke Risk in ACAS and ACST
No benefit of CEA in females No benefit in patients > 75 yrs
(ACST) No relationship between
severity of stenosis and stroke risk
No increased risk with contralateral occlusion
A.R. Naylor. Nat Rev. Cardiol 2012
CREST 2
Randomized trial of IMT + carotid revascularization v. IMT alone
Asymptomatic, conventional risk patients with > 60% stenosis by angio or > 70% by US
2 parallel trials: CEA + IMT v. IMT and CAS +IMT v. IMT
IMT similar to SAMMPRIS NIH funded
(n = 1,240 in each trial)
S = ScreenedR = Randomized
Intensive Medical Therapy: Antiplatelets
Patients in both trials will take 325 mg ASA daily
CAS patients will also take clopidogrel at least 30 days and per protocol
Preoperative ASA + statin load
(CEA) Dual antiplatelets +
statin load (CAS)
Risk Factor Goal Measurement
Primary Risk Factors
LDL < 70 mg/dL Local lab
Systolic BP < 140 mm Hg Measured each visit
Secondary Risk Factors
Non-HDL < 100 mg/dL Local lab
HgA1c < 7.0% Local lab
Smoking Cessation Self
Weight management BMI <25 kg/mm2 or 10% Weight at each visit
Exercise > 30 min 3 X per week Self
Intensive Medical Therapy
Lifestyle management and cardiovascular disease risk reduction program.
Incorporates SAMMPRIS targets and national guidelines.
Provides individualized risk factor counseling telephone sessions at regular intervals: twice a month for 12 weeks. monthly thereafter.
Case Managers at INTERVENT call center, Savannah, GA.
INTERVENT – Lifestyle Coaching
Design Patients Stenosis Endpoint Results
ACT 1 CEA v. CAS 1454 Asx 70-99%MACE 30 days + Ips str 1 yr
CAS noninferior to
CEA
ACST 2 CEA v. CAS 3600 (1915) Asx 60-99%MACE 30 days + Ips str 5 yrs
3424/3600
SPACE 2CEA or CAS v.
BMT3272 (500) Asx 70-99%
Str/Dth 30 days + Ips str 5
yrsHalted
ECST 2
CEA+OMT v. OMT
CAS+OMT v. OMT
2000Non high risk Sx or Asx 50-
99%
Str/Dth 30 days + any
stroke 5 yrsOngoing
CEA / CAS RCTs
CAS CEA p
ACT I – Primary Endpoint(Str, MI, Dth 30d, ipsil str 1yr) 3.8% 3.4% 0.011
CREST – Primary Endpoint (Str, MI, Dth 30d, ipsil str 4yrs) 5.6% 4.9% 0.562
ACT I – 30 d Stroke, MI, Death 3.3% 2.6% 0.60
CREST – 30 d Stroke, MI, Death 3.5% 3.6% 0.96
ACT I – 30 d Stroke, Death 2.9% 1.7% 0.33
CREST – 30 d Stroke, Death 2.5% 1.4% 0.15
Are Procedures Getting Better?ACT I (2016) v. CREST Asymptomatic (2010)
1 1-sided non-inferiority test2 2-sided superiority test
CREST – 1181 Asx pts: 594 CAS, 587 CEAACT I – 1453 Asx pts: 1089 CAS, 364 CEA
Rosenfield et al. NEJM 2016; Brott et al NEJM 2010
Are there “High Risk” Asymptomatic Lesions?
Stenosis severity Progression Silent infarcts Clinical features Ultrasound Plaque morphology MRI CT
Spence et al. Arch Neurol 2010; Saba et al. Lancet Neurol 2019; Naylor. Nat Rev. Cardiol 2012
MRI
CT
Summary Benefit of CEA for
asymptomatic carotid stenosis in prior RCTs marginal
Stenting and CEA equally effective or ineffective
Medical therapy has changed since RCTs and recent reports suggest lower stroke rates with medical therapy
CREST 2 addressing question of benefit of revascularization v. medical therapy in asymptomatic stenosis with modern medical management