Are Outcomes Better with Longer-Term Follow-Up After Intracranial Stenting for Atherosclerotic Disease?

With 7.4 years of follow-up, overall outcomes were no different between intracranial stenting and guideline-directed medical therapy.

Previous randomized, clinical trials that have evaluated stenting for intracranial atherosclerotic disease (ICAD) have not shown an overall benefit from stenting. However, most of these trials had follow-up periods ranging from 1 to 3 years. Whether results would be altered with extended follow-up is unknown. These investigators conducted long-term follow-up of the randomized CASSISS trial conducted in China, involving patients with previously symptomatic 70% to 99% stenosis of a major intracranial vessel. Patients with transient ischemic attack or stroke in the previous 3 weeks, those with perforator artery stroke only, or those with recent infarction on MRI were excluded. Medical therapy was based on 2014 guidelines and included blood pre…

Reviewing Author

Seemant Chaturvedi, MD

Disclosures

Consultant/Advisory BoardBayer Pharmaceuticals; Novartis

Grant/Research SupportNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke

Editorial BoardsNeurology; Stroke

Seemant Chaturvedi, MD

Disclosures

Consultant/Advisory BoardBayer Pharmaceuticals; Novartis

Grant/Research SupportNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke

Editorial BoardsNeurology; Stroke

Are Outcomes Better with Longer-Term Follow-Up After Intracranial Stenting for Atherosclerotic Disease?

Topics

Reviewing Author