TY - JOUR
T1 - Optimised medical therapy alone versus optimised medical therapy plus revascularisation for asymptomatic or low-to-intermediate risk symptomatic carotid stenosis (ECST-2)
T2 - 2-year interim results of a multicentre randomised trial
AU - Donners, Simone J.A.
AU - van Velzen, Twan J.
AU - Cheng, Suk Fun
AU - Gregson, John
AU - Hazewinkel, Audinga Dea
AU - Pizzini, Francesca B.
AU - Emmer, Bart J.
AU - Simister, Robert
AU - Richards, Toby
AU - Lyrer, Philippe A.
AU - Maurer, Marina
AU - Smith, Gemma
AU - Tervit, Gareth
AU - van der Steen, Laurine
AU - Pickett, Gwynedd E.
AU - Gubitz, Gordon
AU - Roozenbeek, Bob
AU - Scheele, Maaike
AU - Bamford, John M.
AU - Kooi, M. Eline
AU - de Borst, Gert J.
AU - Jäger, Hans Rolf
AU - Brown, Martin M.
AU - Nederkoorn, Paul J.
AU - Bonati, Leo H.
AU - ECST 2 investigators
N1 - Funding Information:
This Article presents independent research funded by the NIHR under its Research for Patient Benefit Programme (grant number PB-PG-0609-19216), the Stroke Association (grant number TSA 2013/04), the Swiss National Science Foundation (grant number 32003B-156658), the Dutch Organisation for Knowledge and Innovation in Health, Healthcare and Well-being (ZonMw project number 843004107), and the Leeds Neurology Foundation. Part of the work was undertaken at University College London and University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, which was supported by the NIHR UCLH Biomedical Research Centre. The views expressed in the Article are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. Peter Rothwell, University of Oxford, developed and validated the ECST risk model, provided the recalibrated algorithm for the CAR score, contributed to trial design and initial funding applications, commented on a draft of the paper, and was on the Trial Steering Committee until 2015.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2025/5/1
Y1 - 2025/5/1
N2 - Background: Carotid revascularisation, comprising either carotid endarterectomy or stenting, is offered to patients with carotid stenosis to prevent stroke based on the results of randomised trials conducted more than 30 years ago. Since then, medical therapy for stroke prevention has improved. We aimed to assess whether patients with asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid stenosis with a low or intermediate predicted risk of stroke, who received optimised medical therapy (OMT), would benefit from additional revascularisation. Methods: The Second European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST-2) is a multicentre randomised trial with blinded outcome adjudication, which was conducted at 30 centres with stroke and carotid revascularisation expertise in Europe and Canada. Patients aged 18 years or older with asymptomatic or symptomatic carotid stenosis of 50% or greater, and a 5-year predicted risk of ipsilateral stroke of less than 20% (estimated using the Carotid Artery Risk [CAR] score), were recruited. Patients were randomly assigned to either OMT alone or OMT plus revascularisation (1:1) using a web-based system. The primary outcome for this 2-year, interim analysis was a hierarchical outcome composite of: (1) periprocedural death, fatal stroke, or fatal myocardial infarction; (2) non-fatal stroke; (3) non-fatal myocardial infarction; or (4) new silent cerebral infarction on imaging. Analysis was by intention-to-treat using the win ratio—ie, each patient in the OMT alone group was compared as a pair with each patient in the OMT plus revascularisation group, with a win declared for the patient with a better outcome within the pair (a tie was declared if neither patient in the pair had a better outcome). The win ratio was calculated as the number of wins in the OMT alone group divided by the number of wins in the OMT plus revascularisation group. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN97744893) and is ongoing. Findings: Between March 1, 2012, and Oct 31, 2019, 429 patients were randomly assigned to OMT alone (n=215) or OMT plus revascularisation (n=214). One patient allocated to OMT alone withdrew consent within 48 h and was not considered further. The median age of patients was 72 years (IQR 65–78); 296 (69%) were male and 133 (31%) female. No benefit was recorded in favour of either treatment group with respect to the primary hierarchical outcome assessed 2 years after randomisation, with 5228 (11·4%) wins for the OMT alone group, 5173 (11·3%) wins for the OMT plus revascularisation group, and 35 395 (77·3%) ties between groups (win ratio 1·01 [95% CI 0·60–1·70]; p=0·97). For OMT alone versus OMT plus revascularisation, four versus three patients had periprocedural death, fatal stroke, or fatal myocardial infarction; 11 versus 16 had non-fatal stroke; seven versus five had non-fatal myocardial infarction; and 12 versus seven had new silent cerebral infarction on imaging. One periprocedural death occurred in the OMT plus revascularisation group, which was attributed to decompensated aortic stenosis 1 week after carotid endarterectomy. Interpretation: No evidence for a benefit of revascularisation in addition to OMT was found in the first 2 years following treatment for patients with asymptomatic or symptomatic carotid stenosis of 50% or greater with a low or intermediate predicted stroke risk (assessed by the CAR score). The results support treating patients with asymptomatic and low or intermediate risk symptomatic carotid stenosis with OMT alone until further data from the 5-year analysis of ECST-2 and other trials become available. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research; Stroke Association; Swiss National Science Foundation; Dutch Organisation for Knowledge and Innovation in Health, Healthcare and Well-Being; Leeds Neurology Foundation.
AB - Background: Carotid revascularisation, comprising either carotid endarterectomy or stenting, is offered to patients with carotid stenosis to prevent stroke based on the results of randomised trials conducted more than 30 years ago. Since then, medical therapy for stroke prevention has improved. We aimed to assess whether patients with asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid stenosis with a low or intermediate predicted risk of stroke, who received optimised medical therapy (OMT), would benefit from additional revascularisation. Methods: The Second European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST-2) is a multicentre randomised trial with blinded outcome adjudication, which was conducted at 30 centres with stroke and carotid revascularisation expertise in Europe and Canada. Patients aged 18 years or older with asymptomatic or symptomatic carotid stenosis of 50% or greater, and a 5-year predicted risk of ipsilateral stroke of less than 20% (estimated using the Carotid Artery Risk [CAR] score), were recruited. Patients were randomly assigned to either OMT alone or OMT plus revascularisation (1:1) using a web-based system. The primary outcome for this 2-year, interim analysis was a hierarchical outcome composite of: (1) periprocedural death, fatal stroke, or fatal myocardial infarction; (2) non-fatal stroke; (3) non-fatal myocardial infarction; or (4) new silent cerebral infarction on imaging. Analysis was by intention-to-treat using the win ratio—ie, each patient in the OMT alone group was compared as a pair with each patient in the OMT plus revascularisation group, with a win declared for the patient with a better outcome within the pair (a tie was declared if neither patient in the pair had a better outcome). The win ratio was calculated as the number of wins in the OMT alone group divided by the number of wins in the OMT plus revascularisation group. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN97744893) and is ongoing. Findings: Between March 1, 2012, and Oct 31, 2019, 429 patients were randomly assigned to OMT alone (n=215) or OMT plus revascularisation (n=214). One patient allocated to OMT alone withdrew consent within 48 h and was not considered further. The median age of patients was 72 years (IQR 65–78); 296 (69%) were male and 133 (31%) female. No benefit was recorded in favour of either treatment group with respect to the primary hierarchical outcome assessed 2 years after randomisation, with 5228 (11·4%) wins for the OMT alone group, 5173 (11·3%) wins for the OMT plus revascularisation group, and 35 395 (77·3%) ties between groups (win ratio 1·01 [95% CI 0·60–1·70]; p=0·97). For OMT alone versus OMT plus revascularisation, four versus three patients had periprocedural death, fatal stroke, or fatal myocardial infarction; 11 versus 16 had non-fatal stroke; seven versus five had non-fatal myocardial infarction; and 12 versus seven had new silent cerebral infarction on imaging. One periprocedural death occurred in the OMT plus revascularisation group, which was attributed to decompensated aortic stenosis 1 week after carotid endarterectomy. Interpretation: No evidence for a benefit of revascularisation in addition to OMT was found in the first 2 years following treatment for patients with asymptomatic or symptomatic carotid stenosis of 50% or greater with a low or intermediate predicted stroke risk (assessed by the CAR score). The results support treating patients with asymptomatic and low or intermediate risk symptomatic carotid stenosis with OMT alone until further data from the 5-year analysis of ECST-2 and other trials become available. Funding: National Institute for Health and Care Research; Stroke Association; Swiss National Science Foundation; Dutch Organisation for Knowledge and Innovation in Health, Healthcare and Well-Being; Leeds Neurology Foundation.
KW - SILENT BRAIN INFARCTS
KW - ENDARTERECTOMY
KW - STROKE
KW - SUBGROUPS
KW - SURGERY
U2 - 10.1016/S1474-4422(25)00107-3
DO - 10.1016/S1474-4422(25)00107-3
M3 - Article
SN - 1474-4422
VL - 24
SP - 389
EP - 399
JO - Lancet Neurology
JF - Lancet Neurology
IS - 5
ER -