Background Among asymptomatic patients with severe carotid artery stenosis but no recent stroke or transient cerebral ischaemia, either carotid artery stenting (CAS) or carotid endarterectomy (CEA) can restore patency and reduce long-term stroke risks. However, from recent national registry data, each option causes about 1% procedural risk of disabling stroke or death. Comparison of their long-term protective effects requires large-scale randomised evidence.Methods ACST-2 is an international multicentre randomised trial of CAS versus CEA among asymptomatic patients with severe stenosis thought to require intervention, interpreted with all other relevant trials. Patients were eligible if they had severe unilateral or bilateral carotid artery stenosis and both doctor and patient agreed that a carotid procedure should be undertaken, but they were substantially uncertain which one to choose. Patients were randomly allocated to CAS or CEA and followed up at 1 month and then annually, for a mean 5 years. Procedural events were those within 30 days of the intervention. Intention-to-treat analyses are provided. Analyses including procedural hazards use tabular methods. Analyses and meta-analyses of non-procedural strokes use Kaplan-Meier and log-rank methods. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN21144362.

This real-world study of femoropopliteal artery disease treatment with drug-coated balloons confirmed positive findings reported from more strictly designed randomized controlled trials and showed that outcomes are durable in this population up to 2 years after treatment. (IN.PACT Global Clinical Study; NCT01609296).

After Endurant stent grafting, the incidence of limb occlusion was low. Classifying patients as high risk vs low risk according to the algorithm used in this study may help define specific strategies to prevent limb occlusion and improve the overall results of endovascular aneurysm repair using the latest generation of stent grafts.

These results support the adequacy of this device in the face of adverse neck anatomy, and confirm neck length as the most relevant anatomical limitation for EVAR. Additionally, the study confirms the decline in early to mid-term intervention rates with a newer generation device in a large patient sample. Lastly, it suggests that neck related risk factors affect outcome and impact on prognosis in varying degrees.

No abstract