Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty with Stent Placement versus Best Medical Therapy Alone in Symptomatic Intracranial Arterial Stenosis: A Best Evidence Review

Intracranial arterial stenosis (ICAS) is a common cause of stroke, and the risk of ischemic stroke from a stenotic intracranial artery remains high despite best medical therapy (BMT). As a result, clinicians have increasingly turned to percutaneous transluminal angioplasty and stenting (PTAS) over the last decade as an alternative therapy in high-risk patients with symptomatic ICAS. In this review, we will critically analyze multiple clinical trials to assess the safety and efficacy of PTAS with BMT versus BMT alone. The Stenting and Aggressive Medical Management for Preventing Recurrent Stroke in Intracranial Stenosis (SAMMPRIS) trial reported a higher rate of stroke or death within 30 days in the PTAS plus BMT group (14.7%) than the BMT only group (5.8%, p = 0.002). The rate of any stroke during the follow-up period (mean = 32 months) was higher in the PTAS plus BMT group (22.3%) than the BMT only group (14.1%, p = 0.03). The Vitesse Intracranial Stent Study for Ischemic Stroke Therapy (VISSIT) trial reported a higher rate of stroke or death within 30 days in the PTAS plus BMT cohort (24.1%) than the BMT only cohort (9.4%, p = 0.05). There was also a higher rate of hard transient ischemic attack (TIA) or stroke within one year in the PTAS plus BMT group (36.2%) than the BMT only group (15.1%, p = 0.02). The Vertebral Artery Ischaemia Stenting (VIST) trial reported the rate of any stroke during the follow-up period to be two events in 50 person-years in the PTAS plus BMT cohort versus four events in 45 person-years in the BMT only cohort, with a calculated hazard ratio of 0.47 (p = 0.39). Vertebral Artery Stenting Trial (VAST) reported a higher incidence of stroke, MI, or vascular death in the PTAS with BMT cohort (22%) than the BMT only cohort (0%). Tang et al. reported no significant difference in the incidence of vascular events at one year and three years between the PTAS plus BMT and BMT only cohorts. However, the distribution of vascular events was more concentrated in the first postoperative week in the PTAS plus BMT cohort (75% of all vascular events) versus the BMT only cohort (17%). Feng et al. reported a lower periprocedural complication rate (9.1%) with the Enterprise stent in comparison to the Wingspan and balloon-expandable stents used in the SAMMPRIS and VISSIT trials. We conclude that PTAS should not be employed as first-line treatment in patients with symptomatic ICAS. However, PTAS should be considered in symptomatic ICAS patients that are hemodynamically unstable or have repeatedly failed BMT, especially at sites with lower rates of perioperative complications than those reported here.