No abstract

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.

Background and purpose Recent observations linked coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) to thromboembolic complications possibly mediated by increased blood coagulability and inflammatory endothelial impairment. We aimed to define the risk of acute stroke in patients with severe and non‐severe COVID‐19. Methods We performed an observational, multicenter cohort study in four participating hospitals in Saxony, Germany to characterize consecutive patients with laboratory‐confirmed COVID‐19 who experienced acute stroke during hospitalization. Furthermore, we conducted a systematic review using PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library and bibliographies of identified papers following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses guidelines including data from observational studies of acute stroke in COVID‐19 patients. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers and pooled with multicenter data to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for acute stroke related to COVID‐19 severity using a random‐effects model. Between‐study heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran’s Q and I2 statistics. International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews registration number: CRD42020187194. Results Of 165 patients hospitalized for COVID‐19 (49.1% males, median age = 67 years [57–79 years], 72.1% severe or critical) included in the multicenter study, overall stroke rate was 4.2% (95% CI: 1.9–8.7). Systematic literature search identified two observational studies involving 576 patients that were eligible for meta‐analysis. Amongst 741 pooled COVID‐19 patients, overall stroke rate was 2.9% (95% CI: 1.9–4.5). Risk of acute stroke was increased for patients with severe compared to non‐severe COVID‐19 (RR = 4.18, 95% CI: 1.7–10.25; P = 0.002) with no evidence of heterogeneity (I2 = 0%, P = 0.82). Conclusions Synthesized analysis of data from our multicenter study and previously published cohorts indicates that severity of COVID‐19 is associated with an increased risk of acute stroke.

No abstract