Cargando…

Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: The Vertebral Artery Ischaemia Stenting Trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare in the Vertebral Artery Ischaemia Stenting Trial (VIST) the risks and benefits of vertebral angioplasty and stenting with best medical treatment (BMT) alone for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis. METHODS: VIST was a prospective, randomized, open-blinded endpoint clinical tr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Markus, Hugh S., Larsson, Susanna C., Kuker, Wilhelm, Schulz, Ursula G., Ford, Ian, Rothwell, Peter M., Clifton, Andrew
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5606920/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28835400
http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000004385
_version_ 1783265209342754816
author Markus, Hugh S.
Larsson, Susanna C.
Kuker, Wilhelm
Schulz, Ursula G.
Ford, Ian
Rothwell, Peter M.
Clifton, Andrew
author_facet Markus, Hugh S.
Larsson, Susanna C.
Kuker, Wilhelm
Schulz, Ursula G.
Ford, Ian
Rothwell, Peter M.
Clifton, Andrew
author_sort Markus, Hugh S.
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To compare in the Vertebral Artery Ischaemia Stenting Trial (VIST) the risks and benefits of vertebral angioplasty and stenting with best medical treatment (BMT) alone for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis. METHODS: VIST was a prospective, randomized, open-blinded endpoint clinical trial performed in 14 hospitals in the United Kingdom. Participants with symptomatic vertebral stenosis ≥50% were randomly assigned (1:1) to vertebral angioplasty/stenting plus BMT or to BMT alone with randomization stratified by site of stenosis (extracranial vs intracranial). Because of slow recruitment and cessation of funding, recruitment was stopped after 182 participants. Follow-up was a minimum of ≥1 year for each participant. RESULTS: Three patients did not contribute any follow-up data and were excluded, leaving 91 patients in the stent group and 88 in the medical group. Mean follow-up was 3.5 (interquartile range 2.1–4.7) years. Of 61 patients who were stented, stenosis was extracranial in 48 (78.7%) and intracranial in 13 (21.3%). No periprocedural complications occurred with extracranial stenting; 2 strokes occurred during intracranial stenting. The primary endpoint of fatal or nonfatal stroke occurred in 5 patients in the stent group vs 12 in the medical group (hazard ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.14–1.13, p = 0.08), with an absolute risk reduction of 25 strokes per 1,000 person-years. The hazard ratio for stroke or TIA was 0.50 (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Stenting in extracranial stenosis appears safe with low complication rates. Large phase 3 trials are required to determine whether stenting reduces stroke risk. ISRCTN.COM IDENTIFIER: ISRCTN95212240. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class I evidence that for patients with symptomatic vertebral stenosis, angioplasty with stenting does not reduce the risk of stroke. However, the study lacked the precision to exclude a benefit from stenting.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5606920
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56069202017-09-26 Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: The Vertebral Artery Ischaemia Stenting Trial Markus, Hugh S. Larsson, Susanna C. Kuker, Wilhelm Schulz, Ursula G. Ford, Ian Rothwell, Peter M. Clifton, Andrew Neurology Article OBJECTIVE: To compare in the Vertebral Artery Ischaemia Stenting Trial (VIST) the risks and benefits of vertebral angioplasty and stenting with best medical treatment (BMT) alone for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis. METHODS: VIST was a prospective, randomized, open-blinded endpoint clinical trial performed in 14 hospitals in the United Kingdom. Participants with symptomatic vertebral stenosis ≥50% were randomly assigned (1:1) to vertebral angioplasty/stenting plus BMT or to BMT alone with randomization stratified by site of stenosis (extracranial vs intracranial). Because of slow recruitment and cessation of funding, recruitment was stopped after 182 participants. Follow-up was a minimum of ≥1 year for each participant. RESULTS: Three patients did not contribute any follow-up data and were excluded, leaving 91 patients in the stent group and 88 in the medical group. Mean follow-up was 3.5 (interquartile range 2.1–4.7) years. Of 61 patients who were stented, stenosis was extracranial in 48 (78.7%) and intracranial in 13 (21.3%). No periprocedural complications occurred with extracranial stenting; 2 strokes occurred during intracranial stenting. The primary endpoint of fatal or nonfatal stroke occurred in 5 patients in the stent group vs 12 in the medical group (hazard ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.14–1.13, p = 0.08), with an absolute risk reduction of 25 strokes per 1,000 person-years. The hazard ratio for stroke or TIA was 0.50 (p = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Stenting in extracranial stenosis appears safe with low complication rates. Large phase 3 trials are required to determine whether stenting reduces stroke risk. ISRCTN.COM IDENTIFIER: ISRCTN95212240. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class I evidence that for patients with symptomatic vertebral stenosis, angioplasty with stenting does not reduce the risk of stroke. However, the study lacked the precision to exclude a benefit from stenting. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2017-09-19 /pmc/articles/PMC5606920/ /pubmed/28835400 http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000004385 Text en Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Neurology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC BY) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Article
Markus, Hugh S.
Larsson, Susanna C.
Kuker, Wilhelm
Schulz, Ursula G.
Ford, Ian
Rothwell, Peter M.
Clifton, Andrew
Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: The Vertebral Artery Ischaemia Stenting Trial
title Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: The Vertebral Artery Ischaemia Stenting Trial
title_full Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: The Vertebral Artery Ischaemia Stenting Trial
title_fullStr Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: The Vertebral Artery Ischaemia Stenting Trial
title_full_unstemmed Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: The Vertebral Artery Ischaemia Stenting Trial
title_short Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: The Vertebral Artery Ischaemia Stenting Trial
title_sort stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: the vertebral artery ischaemia stenting trial
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5606920/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28835400
http://dx.doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000004385
work_keys_str_mv AT markushughs stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisthevertebralarteryischaemiastentingtrial
AT larssonsusannac stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisthevertebralarteryischaemiastentingtrial
AT kukerwilhelm stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisthevertebralarteryischaemiastentingtrial
AT schulzursulag stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisthevertebralarteryischaemiastentingtrial
AT fordian stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisthevertebralarteryischaemiastentingtrial
AT rothwellpeterm stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisthevertebralarteryischaemiastentingtrial
AT cliftonandrew stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisthevertebralarteryischaemiastentingtrial