Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: a preplanned pooled individual patient data analysis

<p><strong>Background</strong> Symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis is associated with a high risk of recurrent stroke, with higher risks for intracranial than for extracranial stenosis. Vertebral artery stenosis can be treated with stenting with good technical results, but whethe...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Main Authors: Markus, H, Harshfield, E, Compter, A, Kuker, W, Kappelle, L, Clifton, A, Van Der Worp, H, Rothwell, P, Algra, A, Vertebral Stenosis Trialists' Collaboration
Formato: Journal article
Idioma:English
Publicado em: Elsevier 2019
_version_ 1826301617636376576
author Markus, H
Harshfield, E
Compter, A
Kuker, W
Kappelle, L
Clifton, A
Van Der Worp, H
Rothwell, P
Algra, A
Vertebral Stenosis Trialists' Collaboration
author_facet Markus, H
Harshfield, E
Compter, A
Kuker, W
Kappelle, L
Clifton, A
Van Der Worp, H
Rothwell, P
Algra, A
Vertebral Stenosis Trialists' Collaboration
author_sort Markus, H
collection OXFORD
description <p><strong>Background</strong> Symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis is associated with a high risk of recurrent stroke, with higher risks for intracranial than for extracranial stenosis. Vertebral artery stenosis can be treated with stenting with good technical results, but whether it results in improved clinical outcome is uncertain. We aimed to compare vertebral stenting with medical treatment for symptomatic vertebral stenosis.</p> <p><strong>Methods</strong> We did a preplanned pooled individual patient data analysis of three completed randomised controlled trials comparing stenting with medical treatment in patients with symptomatic vertebral stenosis. The primary outcome was any fatal or non-fatal stroke. Analyses were performed for vertebral stenosis at any location and separately for extracranial and intracranial stenoses. Data from the intention-to-treat analysis were used for all studies. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs using Cox proportional-hazards regression models stratified by trial.</p> <p><strong>Findings</strong> Data were from 354 individuals from three trials, including 179 patients from VIST (148 with extracranial stenosis and 31 with intracranial stenosis), 115 patients from VAST (96 with extracranial stenosis and 19 with intracranial stenosis), and 60 patients with intracranial stenosis from SAMMPRIS (no patients had extracranial stenosis). Across all trials, 168 participants (46 with intracranial stenosis and 122 with extracranial stenosis) were randomly assigned to medical treatment and 186 to stenting (64 with intracranial stenosis and 122 with extracranial stenosis). In the stenting group, the frequency of periprocedural stroke or death was higher for intracranial stenosis than for extracranial stenosis (ten (16%) of 64 patients <em>vs</em> one (1%) of 121 patients; p&lt;0·0001). During 1036 person-years of follow-up, the hazard ratio (HR) for any stroke in the stenting group compared with the medical treatment group was 0·81% CI 0·45–1·44; p=0·47). For extracranial stenosis alone the HR was 0·63 (95% CI 0·27–1·46) and for intracranial stenosis alone it was 1·06 (0·46–2·42; p<sub>interaction</sub>=0·395).</p> <p><strong>Interpretation</strong> Stenting for vertebral stenosis has a much higher risk for intracranial, compared with extracranial, stenosis. This pooled analysis did not show evidence of a benefit for stroke prevention for either treatment. There was no evidence of benefit of stenting for intracranial stenosis. Stenting for extracranial stenosis might be beneficial, but further larger trials are required to determine the treatment effect in this subgroup.</p> <p><strong>Funding</strong> None.</p>
first_indexed 2024-03-07T05:35:06Z
format Journal article
id oxford-uuid:e3a02d0b-5b6b-4902-a83d-bfed21223c42
institution University of Oxford
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-07T05:35:06Z
publishDate 2019
publisher Elsevier
record_format dspace
spelling oxford-uuid:e3a02d0b-5b6b-4902-a83d-bfed21223c422022-03-27T10:10:26ZStenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: a preplanned pooled individual patient data analysisJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:e3a02d0b-5b6b-4902-a83d-bfed21223c42EnglishSymplectic Elements at OxfordElsevier2019Markus, HHarshfield, ECompter, AKuker, WKappelle, LClifton, AVan Der Worp, HRothwell, PAlgra, AVertebral Stenosis Trialists' Collaboration<p><strong>Background</strong> Symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis is associated with a high risk of recurrent stroke, with higher risks for intracranial than for extracranial stenosis. Vertebral artery stenosis can be treated with stenting with good technical results, but whether it results in improved clinical outcome is uncertain. We aimed to compare vertebral stenting with medical treatment for symptomatic vertebral stenosis.</p> <p><strong>Methods</strong> We did a preplanned pooled individual patient data analysis of three completed randomised controlled trials comparing stenting with medical treatment in patients with symptomatic vertebral stenosis. The primary outcome was any fatal or non-fatal stroke. Analyses were performed for vertebral stenosis at any location and separately for extracranial and intracranial stenoses. Data from the intention-to-treat analysis were used for all studies. We estimated hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs using Cox proportional-hazards regression models stratified by trial.</p> <p><strong>Findings</strong> Data were from 354 individuals from three trials, including 179 patients from VIST (148 with extracranial stenosis and 31 with intracranial stenosis), 115 patients from VAST (96 with extracranial stenosis and 19 with intracranial stenosis), and 60 patients with intracranial stenosis from SAMMPRIS (no patients had extracranial stenosis). Across all trials, 168 participants (46 with intracranial stenosis and 122 with extracranial stenosis) were randomly assigned to medical treatment and 186 to stenting (64 with intracranial stenosis and 122 with extracranial stenosis). In the stenting group, the frequency of periprocedural stroke or death was higher for intracranial stenosis than for extracranial stenosis (ten (16%) of 64 patients <em>vs</em> one (1%) of 121 patients; p&lt;0·0001). During 1036 person-years of follow-up, the hazard ratio (HR) for any stroke in the stenting group compared with the medical treatment group was 0·81% CI 0·45–1·44; p=0·47). For extracranial stenosis alone the HR was 0·63 (95% CI 0·27–1·46) and for intracranial stenosis alone it was 1·06 (0·46–2·42; p<sub>interaction</sub>=0·395).</p> <p><strong>Interpretation</strong> Stenting for vertebral stenosis has a much higher risk for intracranial, compared with extracranial, stenosis. This pooled analysis did not show evidence of a benefit for stroke prevention for either treatment. There was no evidence of benefit of stenting for intracranial stenosis. Stenting for extracranial stenosis might be beneficial, but further larger trials are required to determine the treatment effect in this subgroup.</p> <p><strong>Funding</strong> None.</p>
spellingShingle Markus, H
Harshfield, E
Compter, A
Kuker, W
Kappelle, L
Clifton, A
Van Der Worp, H
Rothwell, P
Algra, A
Vertebral Stenosis Trialists' Collaboration
Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: a preplanned pooled individual patient data analysis
title Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: a preplanned pooled individual patient data analysis
title_full Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: a preplanned pooled individual patient data analysis
title_fullStr Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: a preplanned pooled individual patient data analysis
title_full_unstemmed Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: a preplanned pooled individual patient data analysis
title_short Stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis: a preplanned pooled individual patient data analysis
title_sort stenting for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis a preplanned pooled individual patient data analysis
work_keys_str_mv AT markush stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisapreplannedpooledindividualpatientdataanalysis
AT harshfielde stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisapreplannedpooledindividualpatientdataanalysis
AT comptera stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisapreplannedpooledindividualpatientdataanalysis
AT kukerw stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisapreplannedpooledindividualpatientdataanalysis
AT kappellel stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisapreplannedpooledindividualpatientdataanalysis
AT cliftona stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisapreplannedpooledindividualpatientdataanalysis
AT vanderworph stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisapreplannedpooledindividualpatientdataanalysis
AT rothwellp stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisapreplannedpooledindividualpatientdataanalysis
AT algraa stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisapreplannedpooledindividualpatientdataanalysis
AT vertebralstenosistrialistscollaboration stentingforsymptomaticvertebralarterystenosisapreplannedpooledindividualpatientdataanalysis