China Angioplasty and Stenting for Symptomatic Intracranial Severe Stenosis (CASSISS): A new,prospective,multicenter,randomized controlled trial in China

Abstract

Background

Patients with symptomatic stenosis of intradural arteries are at high risk for subsequent stroke. Since the SAMMPRIS trial, stenting is no longer recommended as primary treatment; however, the results of this trial, its inclusion criteria and its center selection received significant criticism and did not appear to reflect our experience regarding natural history nor treatment complications rate. As intracranial atherosclerosis (ICAS) is the most common cause for stroke in Asian countries, we are hereby proposing a refined prospective, randomized, multicenter study in an Asian population with strictly defined patient and participating center inclusion criteria.

Methods

The China Angioplasty and Stenting for Symptomatic Intracranial Severe Stenosis (CASSISS) trial is an ongoing, government-funded, prospective, multicenter, randomized trial. It recruits patients with recent TIA or stroke caused by 70%–99% stenosis of a major intracranial artery. Patients with previous stroke related to perforator ischemia will not be included. Only high-volume centers with a proven track record will enroll patients as determined by a lead-in phase. Patients will be randomized (1:1) to best medical therapy alone or medical therapy plus stenting. Primary endpoints are any stroke or death within 30 days after enrollment or after any revascularization procedure of the qualifying lesion during follow-up, or stroke in the territory of the symptomatic intracranial artery beyond 30 days. The CASSISS trial will be conducted in eight sites in China with core imaging lab review at a North American site and aims to have a sample size of 380 participants (stenting, 190; medical therapy, 190). Recruitment is expected to be finished by December 2016. Patients will be followed for at least three years. The trial is scheduled to complete in 2019.

Conclusion

In the proposed trial, certain shortcomings of SAMMPRIS including patient and participating center selection will be addressed. The present manuscript outlines the rationale and design of the study. We estimate that this trial will allow for a critical reappraisal of the role of intracranial stenting for selected patients in high-volume centers.

Keywords

Atherosclerosis intracranial stenosis stroke angioplasty and stenting China

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Gorelick

Wong

Bae

. Large artery intracranial occlusive disease: A large worldwide burden but a relatively neglected frontier. Stroke 2008; 39: 2396–2399.

Arenillas

. Intracranial atherosclerosis: Current concepts. Stroke 2011; 42(1 Suppl): S20–S23.

Wong

. Long-term mortality and recurrent stroke risk among Chinese stroke patients with predominant intracranial atherosclerosis. Stroke 2003; 34: 2361–2366.

Wang

Zhao

Liu

. Prevalence and outcomes of symptomatic intracranial large artery stenoses and occlusions in China: The Chinese Intracranial Atherosclerosis (CICAS) study. Stroke 2014; 45: 663–669.

Chimowitz

Lynn

Howlett-Smith

. Comparison of warfarin and aspirin for symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis. N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 1305–1316.

Fiorella

Levy

Turk

. US multicenter experience with the wingspan stent system for the treatment of intracranial atheromatous disease: Periprocedural results. Stroke 2007; 38: 881–887.

Cruz-Flores

Diamond

. Angioplasty for intracranial artery stenosis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; 3: CD004133.

Gao

. Endovascular recanalization for chronic symptomatic middle cerebral artery total occlusion. J Neurointerv Surg 2013; 5: e15.

Aghaebrahim

Jovin

Jadhav

. Endovascular recanalization of complete subacute to chronic atherosclerotic occlusions of intracranial arteries. J Neurointerv Surg 2014; 6: 645–648.

10.

Chimowitz

Lynn

Derdeyn

. Stenting versus aggressive medical therapy for intracranial arterial stenosis. N Engl J Med 2011; 365: 993–1003.

11.

Derdeyn

Chimowitz

Lynn

. Aggressive medical treatment with or without stenting in high-risk patients with intracranial artery stenosis (SAMMPRIS): The final results of a randomised trial. Lancet 2014; 383: 333–341.

12.

Jiang

. High resolution MRI guided endovascular intervention of basilar artery disease. J Neurointerv Surg 2011; 3: 375–378.

13.

Chimowitz

Lynn

Turan

. Design of the stenting and aggressive medical management for preventing recurrent stroke in intracranial stenosis trial. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2011; 20: 357–368.

14.

Standards of medical care in diabetes—2014. Diabetes Care 2014; 37 (Suppl 1): S14--S80.

15.

Kernan

Ovbiagele

Black

. Guidelines for the prevention of stroke in patients with stroke and transient ischemic attack: A guideline for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association/American Stroke Association. Stroke 2014; 45: 2160–2236.

16.

Fiorella

Derdeyn

Lynn

. Detailed analysis of periprocedural strokes in patients undergoing intracranial stenting in Stenting and Aggressive Medical Management for Preventing Recurrent Stroke in Intracranial Stenosis (SAMMPRIS). Stroke 2012; 43: 2682–2688.

17.

Bose

Hartmann

Henkes

. A novel, self-expanding, nitinol stent in medically refractory intracranial atherosclerotic stenoses: The Wingspan study. Stroke 2007; 38: 1531–1537.

18.

Kurre

Berkefeld

Brassel

. In-hospital complication rates after stent treatment of 388 symptomatic intracranial stenoses: Results from the INTRASTENT multicentric registry. Stroke 2010; 41: 494–498.

19.

Fiorella

Turk

Levy

. U.S. Wingspan Registry: 12-month follow-up results. Stroke 2011; 42: 1976–1981.

20.

Zaidat

Klucznik

Alexander

. The NIH registry on use of the Wingspan stent for symptomatic 70–99% intracranial arterial stenosis. Neurology 2008; 70: 1518–1524.

21.

Ding

Starke

Crowley

. Role of stenting for intracranial atherosclerosis in the post-SAMMPRIS era. Biomed Res Int 2013; 2013: 304320.

22.

Zhang

Huang

Zhang

. A single-center study of Wingspan stents for symptomatic atherosclerotic stenosis of the middle cerebral artery. J Clin Neurosci 2013; 20: 362–366.

23.

Leung

Lee

. Angioplasty and stenting of intracranial atherosclerosis with the Wingspan system: 1-year clinical and radiological outcome in a single Asian center. J Neurointerv Surg 2014; 6: 96–102.

24.

Gandini

Chiaravalloti

Pampana

. Intracranial atheromatous disease treatment with the Wingspan stent system: Evaluation of clinical, procedural outcome and restenosis rate in a single-center series of 21 consecutive patients with acute and mid-term results. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2013; 115: 741–747.

25.

Zhang

Huang

Zhang

. Wingspan stents for the treatment of symptomatic atherosclerotic stenosis in small intracranial vessels: Safety and efficacy evaluation. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012; 33: 343–347.

26.

Jiang

. Outcome of patients with ≥70% symptomatic intracranial stenosis after Wingspan stenting. Stroke 2011; 42: 1971–1975.

27.

Jiang

Cheng-Ching

Abou-Chebl

. Multicenter analysis of stenting in symptomatic intracranial atherosclerosis. Neurosurgery 2012; 70: 25–30; discussion 31.

28.

Miao Z, Song L, Liebeskind DS, et al. Outcomes of tailored angioplasty and/or stenting for symptomatic intracranial atherosclerosis: A prospective cohort study after SAMMPRIS. J Neurointerv Surg. Epub ahead of print 23 April 2014. DOI: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011109.

29.

Abou-Chebl

Steinmetz

. Critique of “Stenting versus aggressive medical therapy for intracranial arterial stenosis” by Chimowitz et al in the New England Journal of Medicine. Stroke 2012; 43: 616–620.

30.

Kaufmann

Huston

3rd Mandrekar

. Complications of diagnostic cerebral angiography: Evaluation of 19,826 consecutive patients. Radiology 2007; 243: 812–819.

31.

Derdeyn

Fiorella

Lynn

. Impact of operator and site experience on outcomes after angioplasty and stenting in the SAMMPRIS trial. J Neurointerv Surg 2013; 5: 528–533.

32.

Brott

Hobson

2nd Howard

. Stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment of carotid-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 2010; 363: 11–23.

33.

Mas

Chatellier

Beyssen

. Endarterectomy versus stenting in patients with symptomatic severe carotid stenosis. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 1660–1671.

34.

Leung

Lee

. Learning curve of Wingspan stenting for intracranial atherosclerosis: Single-center experience of 95 consecutive patients. J Neurointerv Surg 2014; 6: 212–218.

35.

Alexander

. Intracranial stenting for intracranial atherosclerotic disease: Still much to learn. J Neurointerv Surg 2012; 4: 85–86.

36.

Lutsep

Barnwell

Larsen

. Outcome in patients previously on antithrombotic therapy in the SAMMPRIS trial: Subgroup analysis. Stroke 2015; 46: 775–779.

37.

Derdeyn

Fiorella

Lynn

. Mechanisms of stroke after intracranial angioplasty and stenting in the SAMMPRIS trial. Neurosurgery 2013; 72: 777–795. discussion 795.

38.

Krings

. Editorial—do not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Interv Neuroradiol 2011; 17: 409–410.

39.

Chen

Hanel

. The final SAMMPRIS results: A review. World Neurosurg 2014; 82: 5–6.

40.

Ding

. Effect of SAMMPRIS on endovascular interventions for intracranial atherosclerosis. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2014; 120: 145.

41.

Yang

Wang

Zeng

. Rapid health transition in China, 1990–2010: Findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 2013; 381: 1987–2015.

42.

Sun

Zou

Liu

. Epidemiological factors of stroke: A survey of the current status in China. J Stroke 2013; 15: 109–114.

43.

Nahab

Lynn

Kasner

. Risk factors associated with major cerebrovascular complications after intracranial stenting. Neurology 2009; 72: 2014–2019.

44.

Chaturvedi

Dumont

. The learning curve for neuroendovascular procedures: How important is it? Neurology 2009; 72: 1974–1975.

45.

Derdeyn

Fiorella

Lynn

. Intracranial stenting: SAMMPRIS. Stroke 2013; 44(6 Suppl 1): S41–S44.

46.

Liebeskind

Cotsonis

Saver

. Collaterals dramatically alter stroke risk in intracranial atherosclerosis. Ann Neurol 2011; 69: 963–974.

47.

Abou-Chebl

. Intracranial stenting with Wingspan: Still awaiting a safe landing. Stroke 2011; 42: 1809–1811.