Stenting Versus Medical Therapy for Symptomatic Intracranial Artery Stenosis: Long-Term Follow-Up of a Randomized Trial.

IF 7.8 1区医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY

Stroke Pub Date : 2025-03-18 DOI:10.1161/STROKEAHA.124.049602

Peng Gao, Xiaoxin He, Haibo Wang, Tao Wang, Daming Wang, Huaizhang Shi, Tianxiao Li, Zhenwei Zhao, Yiling Cai, Wei Wu, Weiwen He, Jia Yu, Bingjie Zheng, Xuebing Feng, Colin P Derdeyn, Adam A Dmytriw, Yangfeng Wu, Guoguang Zhao, Liqun Jiao

{"title":"Stenting Versus Medical Therapy for Symptomatic Intracranial Artery Stenosis: Long-Term Follow-Up of a Randomized Trial.","authors":"Peng Gao, Xiaoxin He, Haibo Wang, Tao Wang, Daming Wang, Huaizhang Shi, Tianxiao Li, Zhenwei Zhao, Yiling Cai, Wei Wu, Weiwen He, Jia Yu, Bingjie Zheng, Xuebing Feng, Colin P Derdeyn, Adam A Dmytriw, Yangfeng Wu, Guoguang Zhao, Liqun Jiao","doi":"10.1161/STROKEAHA.124.049602","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Whether the long-term benefit of stroke prevention when stenting is added to medical therapy (MT) over MT alone for symptomatic severe intracranial artery stenosis offsets the perioperative risks of the stenting has not been directly evaluated in a randomized trial. We aimed to compare the long-term (>3 years) effect of stenting versus MT alone in patients with symptomatic severe intracranial artery stenosis in a randomized trial.Methods: We extended the follow-up of 358 subjects enrolled in a multicenter, open-label, randomized trial conducted at 8 centers in China. Patients with transient ischemic attack or stroke attributed to severe intracranial stenosis (70% to 99%) were recruited between March 5, 2014, and November 10, 2016. The primary outcome was a composite of stroke or death within 30 days or stroke in the territory of the qualifying artery beyond 30 days. Other secondary outcomes included stroke in the territory of the qualifying artery, as well as disabling stroke or death after enrollment.Results: A total of 358 patients (stenting 176 versus MT 182) were recruited from March 5, 2014, and followed up till January 22, 2024. The median duration of follow-up was 7.4 years (interquartile range, 6.0-8.0). The primary outcome was not significantly different (stenting 14.8% versus MT 14.3%; hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.58-1.77]; P=0.97). No significant difference was found between groups for the secondary outcomes: stroke in the territory of qualifying artery (14.8% versus 14.3%; hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.58-1.77]; P=0.97), disabling stroke or death (16.5% versus 14.3%; hazard ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.66-1.91]; P=0.70), and death (9.1% versus 7.1%; hazard ratio, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.58-2.58]; P=0.60).Conclusions: This study provides compelling evidence that, even over prolonged observed periods, the addition of stenting to MT does not confer additional benefits to MT alone in patients with symptomatic severe intracranial artery stenosis. These results underscore the importance of MT as the cornerstone of long-term stroke prevention in this patient population.Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01763320.","PeriodicalId":21989,"journal":{"name":"Stroke","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Stroke","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.124.049602","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Whether the long-term benefit of stroke prevention when stenting is added to medical therapy (MT) over MT alone for symptomatic severe intracranial artery stenosis offsets the perioperative risks of the stenting has not been directly evaluated in a randomized trial. We aimed to compare the long-term (>3 years) effect of stenting versus MT alone in patients with symptomatic severe intracranial artery stenosis in a randomized trial.

Methods: We extended the follow-up of 358 subjects enrolled in a multicenter, open-label, randomized trial conducted at 8 centers in China. Patients with transient ischemic attack or stroke attributed to severe intracranial stenosis (70% to 99%) were recruited between March 5, 2014, and November 10, 2016. The primary outcome was a composite of stroke or death within 30 days or stroke in the territory of the qualifying artery beyond 30 days. Other secondary outcomes included stroke in the territory of the qualifying artery, as well as disabling stroke or death after enrollment.

Results: A total of 358 patients (stenting 176 versus MT 182) were recruited from March 5, 2014, and followed up till January 22, 2024. The median duration of follow-up was 7.4 years (interquartile range, 6.0-8.0). The primary outcome was not significantly different (stenting 14.8% versus MT 14.3%; hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.58-1.77]; P=0.97). No significant difference was found between groups for the secondary outcomes: stroke in the territory of qualifying artery (14.8% versus 14.3%; hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.58-1.77]; P=0.97), disabling stroke or death (16.5% versus 14.3%; hazard ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.66-1.91]; P=0.70), and death (9.1% versus 7.1%; hazard ratio, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.58-2.58]; P=0.60).

Conclusions: This study provides compelling evidence that, even over prolonged observed periods, the addition of stenting to MT does not confer additional benefits to MT alone in patients with symptomatic severe intracranial artery stenosis. These results underscore the importance of MT as the cornerstone of long-term stroke prevention in this patient population.

Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01763320.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Stroke 医学-临床神经学

CiteScore

13.40

自引率

6.00%

发文量

2021

审稿时长

3 months

期刊介绍： Stroke is a monthly publication that collates reports of clinical and basic investigation of any aspect of the cerebral circulation and its diseases. The publication covers a wide range of disciplines including anesthesiology, critical care medicine, epidemiology, internal medicine, neurology, neuro-ophthalmology, neuropathology, neuropsychology, neurosurgery, nuclear medicine, nursing, radiology, rehabilitation, speech pathology, vascular physiology, and vascular surgery. The audience of Stroke includes neurologists, basic scientists, cardiologists, vascular surgeons, internists, interventionalists, neurosurgeons, nurses, and physiatrists. Stroke is indexed in Biological Abstracts, BIOSIS, CAB Abstracts, Chemical Abstracts, CINAHL, Current Contents, Embase, MEDLINE, and Science Citation Index Expanded.