Diese Seite wurde automatisch übersetzt und die Genauigkeit der Übersetzung wird nicht garantiert. Bitte wende dich an die englische Version für einen Quelltext.

Stenting Versus Best Medical Treatment of Asymptomatic High Grade Carotid Artery Stenosis

27. Februar 2013 aktualisiert von: Petra Dick, Vienna General Hospital

Stenting vs. Best Medical Treatment of Asymptomatic High Grade Carotid Artery Stenosis - a Randomized Controlled Trial

Background. Carotid artery stenting (CAS) recently has become an accepted method for treatment of patients with high-grade carotid artery stenosis, who are at an increased risk for surgical carotid endarterectomy (CEA). The reported rates of neurological complications of CAS substantially decreased during the past years, and the routine use of cerebral protection devices and low profile catheter systems have further increased the procedure´s safety. In the early 90's large surgical trials in North America and Europe (NASCET, ECST and ACAS) demonstrated superiority of CEA compared to best medical treatment for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Provided that the ongoing randomized controlled trials comparing CAS and CEA confirm equivalence between the these methods, CAS similar to CEA is applicable to symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with high grade carotid stenosis. However, particularly in asymptomatic patients, the indication for revascularisation remains debatable. Protected CAS is associated with a very low rate of neurological complications, which are below the AHA recommendation for treating asymptomatic patients (3%). However, the introduction of new vascular protective medications like statins and clopidogrel during the recent years substantially improved the spectrum of best medical treatment, and the findings of NASCET, ECST and ACAS with respect to best medical treatment may therefore not be applicable any more.

Study hypothesis and aims. Given the low frequency of spontaneous neurological complications, the preferable therapeutic approach to patients with asymptomatic high grade ( > 80%) carotid artery stenoses is currently unknown. Modern best medical treatment may manage to stabilize the atherosclerotic plaque, while CAS has the potential of resolving the carotid stenosis. Comparative data, however, are not available as yet. We hypothesized that protected CAS has a beneficial effect on occurrence of ipsilateral neurological complications and major adverse cardiac events in high-risk patients with asymptomatic > 80% internal carotid artery stenosis. Therefore, the aim of the present randomized controlled trial was to analyze neurological and cardiovascular outcome of patients treated with elective CAS plus best medical treatment compared to best medical treatment only.

Studienübersicht

Status

Abgeschlossen

Bedingungen

Intervention / Behandlung

Detaillierte Beschreibung

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) recently has become an accepted method for treatment of patients with high-grade carotid artery stenosis, who are at an increased risk for surgical carotid endarterectomy (CEA). The reported rates of neurological complications of CAS substantially decreased during the past years, and the routine use of cerebral protection devices and low profile catheter systems have further increased the procedure´s safety. In the early 90ies large surgical trials in North America and Europe (NASCET, ECST and ACAS) demonstrated superiority of CEA compared to best medical treatment for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. Provided that the ongoing randomized controlled trials comparing CAS and CEA confirm equivalence between the these methods, CAS similar to CEA is applicable to symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with high grade carotid stenosis. However, particularly in asymptomatic patients, the indication for revascularisation remains debatable. Protected CAS is associated with a very low rate of neurological complications, which are below the AHA recommendation for treating asymptomatic patients (3%). However, the introduction of new vascular protective medications like statins and clopidogrel during the recent years substantially improved the spectrum of best medical treatment, and the findings of NASCET, ECST and ACAS with respect to best medical treatment may therefore not be applicable any more.

Given the low frequency of spontaneous neurological complications, the preferable therapeutic approach to patients with asymptomatic high grade ( > 80%) carotid artery stenoses is currently unknown. Modern best medical treatment may manage to stabilize the atherosclerotic plaque, while CAS has the potential of resolving the carotid stenosis. Comparative data, however, are not available as yet. We hypothesized that protected CAS has a beneficial effect on occurrence of ipsilateral neurological complications and major adverse cardiac events in high-risk patients with asymptomatic > 80% internal carotid artery stenosis. Therefore, the aim of the present randomized controlled trial was to analyze neurological and cardiovascular outcome of patients treated with elective CAS plus best medical treatment compared to best medical treatment only.

SYNOPSIS

BACKGROUND:

The preferable treatment - whether revascularization or conservative - of asymptomatic high-risk patients with > 80% internal carotid artery stenosis (NASCET criteria) is currently unknown.

STUDY HYPOTHESIS:

We hypothesized that protected carotid artery stenting (CAS) plus best medical treatment is associated with reduced rates of ipsilateral neurological complications and major adverse cardiac events in high-risk patients with asymptomatic > 80% internal carotid artery stenosis compared to best medical treatment only.

STUDY DESIGN:

The study is designed as a randomized controlled trial with 1:1 random assignment between two treatment modalities including 300 patients within an scheduled inclusion period of 18 months. The primary and secondary study endpoints are evaluated for an initial two year follow-up period after randomization. Secondary follow-up will be performed for 1, 1.5, 3, 5 and 10 years post randomization.

Studientyp

Interventionell

Einschreibung (Tatsächlich)

148

Phase

  • Unzutreffend

Kontakte und Standorte

Dieser Abschnitt enthält die Kontaktdaten derjenigen, die die Studie durchführen, und Informationen darüber, wo diese Studie durchgeführt wird.

Studienorte

      • Vienna, Österreich
        • General Hospital of Vienna

Teilnahmekriterien

Forscher suchen nach Personen, die einer bestimmten Beschreibung entsprechen, die als Auswahlkriterien bezeichnet werden. Einige Beispiele für diese Kriterien sind der allgemeine Gesundheitszustand einer Person oder frühere Behandlungen.

Zulassungskriterien

Studienberechtigtes Alter

  • Kind
  • Erwachsene
  • Älterer Erwachsener

Akzeptiert gesunde Freiwillige

Nein

Studienberechtigte Geschlechter

Alle

Beschreibung

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Atherosclerosis is the underlying disease
  • Patients with an asymptomatic stenosis >80% (NASCET) with a documented progression of the degree of stenosis to >80% within 6 months with a very tight stenosis ≥90% at initial presentation with a >80% stenosis plus silent ipsilateral ischemia documented by CCT or MRI with ipsilateral >80% stenosis plus contralateral >80% stenosis or occlusion with >80% stenosis plus planned major surgery
  • Neurologist´s explicit consent to potentially perform CAS

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Inability to provide informed consent
  • Underlying disease other than atherosclerosis (inflammatory or autoimmune disease)
  • Traumatic or spontaneous carotid dissections
  • Life expectancy <6 months
  • Advanced dementia
  • Advanced renal failure (serum creatinine >2.5 mg/dL)
  • Unstable severe cardiovascular comorbidities (e.g. unstable angina, heart failure)
  • Restenosis after prior CAS or CEA
  • Allergy or contraindications to study medications (clopidogrel, statins, ASA)

Studienplan

Dieser Abschnitt enthält Einzelheiten zum Studienplan, einschließlich des Studiendesigns und der Messung der Studieninhalte.

Wie ist die Studie aufgebaut?

Designdetails

  • Hauptzweck: Versorgungsforschung
  • Zuteilung: Zufällig
  • Interventionsmodell: Parallele Zuordnung
  • Maskierung: Keine (Offenes Etikett)

Waffen und Interventionen

Teilnehmergruppe / Arm
Intervention / Behandlung
Aktiver Komparator: 1
Patients receive medical treatment including medical therapy with statins (at least 40mg simvastatin irrespective of the baseline cholesterol level) and clopidogrel (75mg daily). Further conservative medical treatment includes modification of cardiovascular risk factors according to current recommendations. Additionally patients will undergo carotid artery stenting using a filter wire protection device.
Using retrograde transfemoral access an overview aortic angiogram is established. A stiff wire is then placed in the external carotid or distal common carotid artery to introduce a long hydrophilic sheath into the common carotid artery. The stenosis is then crossed with a Filter wire. For stent implantation Monorail Carotid Wallstents or the Monorail Nitinol Stent of Boston Scientific are used. Road map or overlay technique with a magnification of 20 to 28 inch is used to localize the stenosis during the procedure. Finally a control angiogram is performed to ensure correct placement of the stent. After successful completion of the procedure, the arterial access site is closed using a standard closure device.
Kein Eingriff: 2
Patients receive medical treatment including medical therapy with statins (at least 40mg simvastatin daily irrespective of the baseline cholesterol level) and clopidogrel (75mg daily). Further conservative medical treatment includes modification of cardiovascular risk factors according to current recommendations

Was misst die Studie?

Primäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Zeitfenster
Primary study endpoints: neurological events (ipsilateral and contralateral), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: composite of myocardial infarction, stroke and cardiovascular death) and any death
Zeitfenster: 24 months
24 months

Sekundäre Ergebnismessungen

Ergebnis Maßnahme
Zeitfenster
in-stent restenosis after CAS, neuropsychological function, patient satisfaction, quality of life during follow up.
Zeitfenster: 24 months
24 months

Mitarbeiter und Ermittler

Hier finden Sie Personen und Organisationen, die an dieser Studie beteiligt sind.

Ermittler

  • Hauptermittler: Martin Schillinger, Prof. Dr., General Hospital of Vienna

Studienaufzeichnungsdaten

Diese Daten verfolgen den Fortschritt der Übermittlung von Studienaufzeichnungen und zusammenfassenden Ergebnissen an ClinicalTrials.gov. Studienaufzeichnungen und gemeldete Ergebnisse werden von der National Library of Medicine (NLM) überprüft, um sicherzustellen, dass sie bestimmten Qualitätskontrollstandards entsprechen, bevor sie auf der öffentlichen Website veröffentlicht werden.

Haupttermine studieren

Studienbeginn

1. März 2004

Primärer Abschluss (Tatsächlich)

1. Juni 2010

Studienabschluss (Tatsächlich)

1. Oktober 2011

Studienanmeldedaten

Zuerst eingereicht

5. Juli 2007

Zuerst eingereicht, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt hat

5. Juli 2007

Zuerst gepostet (Schätzen)

6. Juli 2007

Studienaufzeichnungsaktualisierungen

Letztes Update gepostet (Schätzen)

28. Februar 2013

Letztes eingereichtes Update, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt

27. Februar 2013

Zuletzt verifiziert

1. Februar 2013

Mehr Informationen

Diese Informationen wurden ohne Änderungen direkt von der Website clinicaltrials.gov abgerufen. Wenn Sie Ihre Studiendaten ändern, entfernen oder aktualisieren möchten, wenden Sie sich bitte an register@clinicaltrials.gov. Sobald eine Änderung auf clinicaltrials.gov implementiert wird, wird diese automatisch auch auf unserer Website aktualisiert .

Abonnieren