Brott, Thomas G.

Purpose: The safety of revascularization for asymptomatic carotid stenosis, and the efficacy of medical therapy for stroke prevention have improved. Therefore, results of prior randomized trials may not apply to current treatment decisions. The NINDS-funded CREST-2 will compare carotid endarterectomy and intensive medical therapy (IMT) versus IMT alone (n=1240), and carotid stenting and IMT versus IMT alone (n=1240) in asymptomatic patients with≥70% stenosis. Materials & Methods: CREST-2 consists of two parallel randomized clinical trials to be conducted at a target of ≈120 centers, including within NINDS StrokeNet. The composite primary outcome is stroke or death during the peri-procedural period or ipsilateral ischemic stroke thereafter up to 4 years. Blinded assessment of cognition will be done periodically. Centrally directed IMT includes tight control of blood pressure (systolic target <140 mm Hg) and cholesterol (LDL target <70 mg/dl) as well as lifestyle coaching. Results: As of June 12, 2015, 94 centers have been approved by the Site Selection Committee. Credentialing is ongoing, with 198 approved surgeons and 64 approved interventionists; 124 additional conditionally approved interventionists will be able to submit additional cases for review under the CREST-2 Registry. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid will offer CAS reimbursement for Registry enrollees. As of June 12, 2015, there are 39 actively enrolling centers, and 37 patients have been randomized. Conclusion: CREST-2 is designed to identify the best approach for asymptomatic carotid stenosis. The first patient was randomized in December, 2014. An update will be provided regarding the numbers of patients randomized, centers certified, as well as surgeons and interventionists fully approved. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02089217

Introduction: The relative performance of carotid artery stenting (CAS) and carotid endarterectomy (CEA) among Medicare beneficiaries in routine clinical practice has not been established. Objective: To compare the performance of CAS relative to CEA among Medicare beneficiaries. Methods: We linked Medicare data (2000-2009) to the Society for Vascular Surgery’s Vascular Registry (SVS-VR; 2005-2008) and to the NCDR® Carotid Artery Revascularization and Endarterectomy Registry (CARE; 2006-2008/9). Medicare patients aged ≥66 years undergoing CAS or CEA were followed from the procedure date for the outcomes of death, stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), peri-procedural myocardial infarction (MI) or a composite endpoint for these outcomes. We derived high-dimensional propensity scores using registry and Medicare data to control for patient-level factors and adjusted for provider-level factors including past-year CAS/CEA physician and hospital volume, hospital ownership, teaching affiliation, and hospital size in a Cox regression model comparing CAS to CEA. Results: Among 5,254 SVS-VR (1,999 CAS and 3,255 CEA) and 4,055 CARE (2,824 CAS and 1,231 CEA) patients, CAS patients were more often at higher surgical risk (SVS-VR: 96.7% vs. 44.5%; CARE: 71.3% vs. 44.7%) and had a higher comorbidity burden. Crude outcome risks for death and stroke/TIA were lower for CEA. Adjusting for patient-level factors drove estimates downwards for CAS relative to CEA but only after further adjustment for provider-level factors did the performance of CAS and CEA become comparable on all outcomes (figure 1). Conclusion: Performance of CAS and CEA among Medicare beneficiaries was comparable after accounting for patient- and provider-level factors, which is consistent with landmark trials. Further studies are needed to understand the role of heterogeneity in provider-level characteristics.

Introduction: Left ventricular assist device (LVAD) is known to extend survival in patients with advanced heart failure but it is associated with intracranial cranial hemorrhage (ICH). In the last decade, the use of LVAD substantially increased along with advances in LVAD technology, but there is limited data regarding the trends of ICH risk and predictors in patients with LVAD. Methods: We included the patients aged≥18 years with primary diagnosis of LVAD hospitalized in the US from 2005 to 2014 using the National Inpatient Sample. We computed the survey weighted percentages with ICH across the 10-year study period and assessed whether the proportions changed over time. Predictors of ICH were evaluated using the multivariable logistic regression model. All analyses were appropriately adjusted for the survey design variables to account for the complex survey design. Results: Of 33,246 hospitalizations, 568 (1.7%) had ICH. The number of LVAD placement has increased from 873 in year 2005 to 5,175 in year 2014. However, the risk of ICH remained largely unchanged from 1.7% to 2.3% (linear trend: p=0.604). The adjusted odds of ICH was increased with the presence one of the following variables: female sex (odds ratio [OR]: 1.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-2.43), history of ischemic stroke (OR: 3.13, 95% CI 1.86-5.28), and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) of ≥3 (OR: 77.40, 95% CI 10.03-597.60). Conclusions: Despite advances in LVAD technology and its increased use in patients with advanced heart failure, the risk of ICH has remained relatively unchanged. High CCI and history of ischemic stroke were associated with higher odds of ICH in patients with LVAD. With the advent of magnetically levitated centrifugal-flow LVAD, future trend of ICH may change and further research efforts are needed to prevent ICH in patients with LVAD.

Introduction: Robust leptomeningeal collaterals protect the brain from ischemia, yet the determinants of poor collaterals have not been established. We aimed to identify predictors of poor collaterals in patients with large vessel occlusive stroke. Methods: Consecutive patients with large vessel occlusive stroke who underwent thrombectomy at 2 academic medical centers (derivation cohort/validation cohort) from 2012-2017 were included. Poor collaterals were defined as ≤50% filling on CT angiogram. Pre-specified predictors of poor collaterals were analyzed with adjusted logistic regression models: demographics (age, sex, race), risk factors (hypertension, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, smoking), hemodynamics (blood pressure, cardiac output, troponin), metabolic (hyperglycemia, hyponatremia, uremia), hematologic (anemia, leukocytosis, thrombocytosis) and neuroimaging evidence of chronic cerebral small-vessel disease and chronic steno-occlusive arterial disease. Results: Of the 248 total patients, poor collaterals were detected in 107 (43%). Mean age was 71±14y vs. 63±16y in patients with poor vs good collaterals, respectively (p<.001). There were 136 patients in the derivation cohort; 54 (48%) patients with poor collaterals. Multivariable modeling identified that older age (OR 1.8, p<.001), hyperglycemia (OR 2.4, p=.029) and white matter hyperintensities (WMH) (OR 6.1, p=.003) were independent predictors of poor collaterals in the derivation cohort. The validation cohort consisted of 136 patients; 53 (39%) had poor collaterals, of which older age (OR 1.4, p=.015), thrombocytosis (OR 24.0, p=.012), and WMH (OR 6.7, p=.018) were significant predictors of poor collaterals. Age and WMH were the only significant predictors of poor collaterals across the derivation and validation cohorts. When pooled the cohorts, older age (OR=1.5, p<.001), thrombocytosis (OR=7.6, p=.001) and WMH (OR=6.4, p<.001) were significant predictors of poor collaterals. Conclusions: We have identified that advanced age, WMH, and thrombocytosis are predictors of poor collaterals. Future studies to explore the effect of vascular aging on collateral therapeutics are indicated.

Introduction: Cilostazol has promise as an alternative to aspirin for secondary stroke prevention given its vasodilatory and anti-inflammatory properties in addition to platelet aggregation inhibition. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the comparative effectiveness and safety of cilostazol compared to aspirin for stroke prevention in patients with previous stroke or TIA. Hypothesis: Cilostazol is more effective than aspirin in preventing recurrent ischemic stroke with lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage and bleeding. Methods: We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to 2019. Randomized clinical trials that compared cilostazol vs aspirin and reported the endpoints of ischemic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage and bleeding were included. A random-effects estimate was computed based on Mantel-Haenszel methods. The pooled estimates with 95% confidence intervals were compared between cilostazol and aspirin and displayed as forest plots (Figure). Results: The search identified 5 randomized clinical trials comparing cilostazol vs aspirin for secondary stroke prevention that enrolled 7,240 patients from primarily Asian countries (3,615 received cilostazol and 3,625 received aspirin). The pooled results from the random-effects model showed that cilostazol was associated with significantly lower risk of recurrent ischemic stroke (Hazard ratio [HR] 0.70; 95%CI, 0.54-0.89), intracranial hemorrhage (HR 0.41; 95%CI, 0.25-0.65) and bleeding (HR 0.71; 95%CI, 0.55-0.91). See forest plots. Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests cilostazol is more effective than aspirin in the prevention of recurrent ischemic stroke with lower risk of intracranial hemorrhage and bleeding. Confirmatory randomized trials of cilostazol for secondary stroke prevention to be performed in more generalizable populations are needed.

Introduction: Left atrial enlargement (LAE) is associated with atrial fibrillation, a frequent cause of large vessel occlusion (LVO) leading to ischemic stroke. Leptomeningeal collaterals protect tissue from ischemia, but the association between collaterals and structural heart disease is not well described. We aim to investigate the association between LAE and cerebral collaterals during acute LVO when microvasculature, vasodilation, and chronotropic competence are critically important. Hypothesis: Left atrial enlargement is associated with poor collaterals. Methods: We reviewed consecutive patients presenting with middle cerebral and internal carotid LVO who underwent thrombectomy from 2012 to 2017. Patients with CT angiogram of the head and echocardiogram were included. Poor collaterals were defined as ≤ 50% filling on CT angiogram. LAE was defined as left atrial volume index ≥ 35 mL/m 2 . Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between LAE and poor collaterals with adjustment for age and hypertension. Results: There were 128 eligible patients. The mean age was 68± 15 years, median NIHSS was 17, and 51 (39.8%) had LAE. Baseline characteristics are described in the table. Poor collaterals were observed in 50 (39%) patients. Patients with LAE were more likely to have poor collaterals compared to those with normal left atrial size (52.9% vs. 29.9%, p=0.009). After adjusting for age and hypertension, a trend towards association remained (OR 2.00, p=0.089). Conclusion: Our results indicate that patients with LVO and LAE were more likely to have poor collaterals. Further research is warranted to determine the cause of the association. One possibility is shared pathophysiology affecting both cardiac and cerebral vasculature such as microvascular disease or endothelial dysfunction. Alternatively, structural heart disease causing chronotropic incompetence may lead to poor collateral filling.

Background: Perfusion weighted imaging on MRI (MRP) and computerized tomography perfusion (CTP) are increasingly required to manage large vessel disease. Computerized algorithms can quantify perfusion data, but the programs are expensive and not widely used outside acute stroke evaluation. We aimed to determine how well human observers can identify asymmetries in cerebral perfusion images compared with an automated computer algorithm. Methods: Ten clinicians experienced in treating carotid artery disease (4 vascular neurologists, 3 neuroradiologists, 1 vascular surgeon, 1 neurosurgeon, 1 interventional radiologist) were given 28 post-processed, color-coded, axial-slice MRP scans from patients in the Carotid Revascularization Endovascular versus Stenting Trial - Hemodynamics (CREST-H) study. All patients had >70%, unilateral, asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis and had varying degrees of time-to-peak (TTP) delay on the side of stenosis, ranging from 0 to 2 secs, quantified by a semi-automated system that computes quantitative perfusion maps, using deconvolution of tissue and arterial signals (Olea, Cambridge, MA). A minimum volume of 10cc was required for a given TTP delay. Clinicians were asked to determine asymmetry (y/n) and side of occlusion for each case. Number of correct responses that matched the computer output were tallied. Results: We averaged correct responses by the 10 clinicians for cases at each increment of TTP delay; (Figure). At TTP delays ≥1.5 seconds, accuracy was ≥80%. At 1.25 sec accuracy fell to 60%, and at ≤ 1 sec, accuracy was ≤50%. For TTP=0 (no asymmetry), accuracy was 71%. Conclusions: Visual impression of hemodynamic asymmetry among experienced clinicians was reasonably accurate for TTP delays ≥1.5 seconds, but declined with more subtle asymmetries. Depending on the clinical impact of TTP delays (for CREST-H: correlation with cognitive decline), experienced clinicians may perform as well as an automated algorithm.

Background: Presence of atherosclerotic disease in more than one vascular bed (polyvascular disease) is associated with an increased risk of long-term vascular events. In the setting of asymptomatic carotid stenosis, the predictors of disease in other vascular beds is not well delineated. Objective: To identify the frequency and predictors of disease in other vascular beds the CREST 2 randomized trial population with hemodynamically significant stenosis. Methods: Recorded baseline characteristics among CREST 2 participants included: demographics, past medical history, lifestyle factors, and laboratory studies. Each variable was tested against three potential definitions of disease in other beds (cardiac, peripheral arterial disease (PAD) or disease in cardiac + PAD). Statistical analysis was done with Chi square and t tests as appropriate. Results: Data from 1447 patients were available for analysis. In these subjects with carotid disease, 51% also had cardiac disease, 24% also had PAD, and 16% had disease in in both cardiac and PAD. There was no relationship between age or race and presence of disease in other beds. Those with cardiac disease were more likely to be male. Diabetes, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, and former history of smoking were all more common in those with either cardiac and PAD (TABLE). Elevated triglyceride and low HDL levels were also associated with all three definitions of disease in other beds. Those with either PAD or cardiac + PAD were more likely to be current smokers. Conclusions: Among CREST 2 participants, several medical conditions and lifestyle factors were associated with an increased frequency of disease in other vascular beds. Smoking, in particular, appears to be more common in those with PAD. Future analyses will address whether those with disease in other beds have higher rates of stroke or death.

Baseline Differences in Risk Factor Control and Medication Use Between 2 Trials Employing Intensive Medical Management (SAMMPRIS & CREST2) Background: The CREST2 trial Intensive Medical Management (IMM) protocol was adapted from the SAMMPRIS trial. However, since the 2011 publication of initial results of SAMMPRIS, there has been a greater appreciation for the importance of risk factor control in patients at risk of stroke associated with atherosclerosis. Therefore, we sought to determine differences in baseline risk factor control and medication use between SAMMPRIS and CREST2. Methods: Baseline risk factor and medication use data from 451 patients enrolled in SAMMPRIS (2008-2011) with severe symptomatic intracranial atherosclerosis and 1473 patients enrolled in CREST2 (2014-2019) with severe asymptomatic carotid stenosis were compared using the Chi-square test and t-test. Results: The Table shows baseline risk factor values and medications. SAMMPRIS patients were younger but had significantly worse risk factor control than CREST2 patients for all measures. There was no significant difference in statin use at baseline, but the mean SAMMPRIS subjects’ LDL was 16.1 mg/dL higher than in CREST2. CREST2 patients had higher rates of use of angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), calcium channel blockers (CCB), and thiazides, but lower rates of use of angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. Conclusions: Despite being older, CREST2 patients have significantly better baseline risk factor profiles than SAMMPRIS patients. This could be due to greater appreciation of the importance of risk factor control and healthy lifestyle habits for stroke prevention or more aggressive treatment targets in guideline recommendations. Although risk factor control appears to be improving since SAMMPRIS, many CREST2 patients are still not meeting recommended risk factor goals at baseline and may benefit from IMM protocols.

Introduction: Using pooled data from randomized trials of symptomatic patients assigned to carotid artery stenting (CAS) versus carotid endarterectomy (CEA), we have previously shown age to be an effect modifier, with increasing risk at older ages for CAS but not for CEA. To extend assessment of age as an effect modifier to the asymptomatic population, we combined the asymptomatic patients from CREST with the patients from ACT I. Methods: We analyzed data from 2544 subjects with >= 70% carotid stenosis randomized to CAS or CEA in addition to standard management of cardiovascular risk factors. CREST enrolled 1091 (548 CAS, 543 CEA) and ACT I enrolled 1453 (1089 CAS, 364 CEA) asymptomatic patients less than 80 years old (upper age eligibility in ACT I). We examined the impact of age on risk within CAS-treated and CEA-treated patients using Kaplan-Meier methods. Age was considered in three strata (< 65, 65 to 74, and 75+). The pre-specified, primary composite endpoint was stroke, myocardial infarction, or death during the periprocedural period or any ipsilateral stroke within 4 years after randomization. Results: For patients assigned to CAS, risk differed between the age strata (p <0.0001) where relative to those under age 65, there was no difference in risk for those aged 65 to 74 (HR = 1.3 ; 95% CI: 0.7, 2.3, p=0.38), but those aged 75+ were at substantially higher risk (HR = 2.9; 95% CI: 1.5, 5.5, p=0.001). In contrast, risk did not differ by age strata (p = 0.80) for those assigned to CEA. Conclusions: Age-related risk factors, e.g. carotid anatomy and underlying cerebral pathology, should be considered before selecting patients aged 75+ for CAS.