Back to Authors

Mantese, Vito A.

Mayo Clinic

Mercy Clinic Neurology

Citations 2

Management of Vascular Risk Factors in the Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial (CREST)
Voeks, Jenifer H. , Leimgruber, Pierre P., Mantese, Vito A., Timaran, Carlos H. , Chiu, David, Howard, Virginia J. , Hughes, Susan , Longbottom, Mary, Brott, Thomas G. , Meschia, James F. , Demaerschalk, Bart M. , Howard, Annie Green , Howard, Virginia J

Journal of the American Heart Association | November 27, 2014 | Volume: 3 | Issue: 6 | Pages: No page available

10.1161/jaha.114.001180 Get It

Background The Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial ( CREST ) is a multicenter randomized trial of stenting versus endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid disease. This study assesses management of vascular risk factors. Methods and Results Management was provided by the patient's physician, with biannual monitoring results collected by the local site. Therapeutic targets were low‐density lipoprotein, cholesterol <100 mg/dL, systolic blood pressure <140 mm Hg, fasting blood glucose <126 mg/dL, and nonsmoking status. Optimal control was defined as achieving all 4 goals concurrently. Generalized estimating equations were used to compare risk factors at baseline with those observed in scheduled follow‐up visits for up to 48 months. In the analysis cohort of 2210, significant improvements in risk‐factor control were observed across risk factors for all follow‐up visits compared with baseline. At 48 months, achievement of the low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol goal improved from 59.1% to 73.6% ( P <0.001), achievement of the systolic blood pressure goal improved from 51.6% to 65.1% ( P <0.001), achievement of the glucose goal improved from 74.9% to 80.7% ( P =0.0101), and nonsmoking improved from 74.4% to 80.9% ( P <0.0001). The percentage with optimal risk‐factor control also improved significantly, from 16.7% to 36.2% ( P <0.001), but nearly 2 of 3 study participants did not achieve optimal control during the study. Conclusions Site‐based risk‐factor control improved significantly in the first 6 months and over the long term in CREST but was often suboptimal. Intensive medical management should be considered for future trials of carotid revascularization. Clinical Trial Registration URL: ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00004732.
The Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial (CREST)
Mantese, Vito A., Timaran, Carlos H. , Chiu, David, Begg, Richard J., Brott, Thomas G.

Stroke | September 27, 2010 | Volume: 41 | Issue: 10_suppl_1 | Pages: No page available

10.1161/strokeaha.110.595330 Get It

Background and Purpose— Carotid artery stenosis causes up to 10% of all ischemic strokes. Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) was introduced as a treatment to prevent stroke in the early 1950s. Carotid stenting (CAS) was introduced as a treatment to prevent stroke in 1994. Methods— The Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy versus Stenting Trial (CREST) is a randomized trial with blinded end point adjudication. Symptomatic and asymptomatic patients were randomized to CAS or CEA. The primary end point was the composite of any stroke, myocardial infarction, or death during the periprocedural period and ipsilateral stroke thereafter, up to 4 years. Results— There was no significant difference in the rates of the primary end point between CAS and CEA (7.2% versus 6.8%; hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.51; P =0.51). Symptomatic status and sex did not modify the treatment effect, but an interaction with age and treatment was detected ( P =0.02). Outcomes were slightly better after CAS for patients aged <70 years and better after CEA for patients aged >70 years. The periprocedural end point did not differ for CAS and CEA, but there were differences in the components, CAS versus CEA (stroke 4.1% versus 2.3%, P =0.012; and myocardial infarction 1.1% versus 2.3%, P =0.032). Conclusions— In CREST, CAS and CEA had similar short- and longer-term outcomes. During the periprocedural period, there was higher risk of stroke with CAS and higher risk of myocardial infarction with CEA. Clinical Trial Registration— www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00004732.