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.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

AimTo study the biomechanism, pattern of injury, management, and outcome of major vascular injuries treated at Mubarak Al-Kabeer Teaching Hospital, Kuwait during the Second Gulf War.MethodsThis is a descriptive retrospective study. War-related injured patients who had major vascular injuries and were treated at Mubarak Al-Kabeer Teaching Hospital from August 1990 to September 1991 were studied. Studied variables included age, gender, anatomical site of vascular injury, mechanism of injury, associated injuries, type of vascular repair, and clinical outcome.Results36 patients having a mean (SD) age of 29.8 (10.2) years were studied. 32 (89%) were males and 21 (58%) were civilians. Majority of injuries were caused by bullets (47.2%) and blast injuries (47.2%). Eight patients (22%) presented with shock.There were 31 arterial injuries, common and superficial femoral artery injuries were most common (10/31). Arterial repair included interposition saphenous vein graft in seven patients, thrombectomy with end-to-end / lateral repair in twelve patients, vein patch in two patients, and arterial ligation in four patients. Six patients had arterial ligation as part of primary amputation. 3/21 (14.3%) patients had secondary amputation after attempted arterial vascular repair of an extremity. There were a total of 17 venous injuries, 13 managed by lateral suture repair and 4 by ligation. The median (range) hospital stay was 8 (1–76) days. 5 patients died (14%).ConclusionsMajor vascular injuries occurred in 10% of hospitalized war-related injured patients. Our secondary amputation rate of extremities was 14%. The presence of a vascular surgeon within a military surgical team is highly recommended. Basic principles and techniques of vascular repair remain an essential part of training general surgeons because it may be needed in unexpected wars.