Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30873912›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society2019

Angioplasty in asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis vs. endarterectomy compared to best medical treatment: One-year interim results of SPACE-2.

T Reiff, H H Eckstein, U Mansmann, O Jansen, G Fraedrich, H Mudra, D Böckler, M Böhm, H Brückmann, E S Debus and 14 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
8.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Guideline
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Carotid endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Current Status of Carotid Artery Stenting.Interventional radiology (Higashimatsuyama-shi (Japan) · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

24 authors at 17 institutions in 3 countries.

T Reiff1 Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7700-6134
H H Eckstein2 Department for Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
U Mansmann3 Institute of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Ludwig Maximilian University Munich, Munich, Germany.
O Jansen4 Department of Radiology and Neuroradiology, UKSH Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
G Fraedrich5 Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
H Mudra6 Department of Internal Medicine, Städtisches Klinikum München-Neuperlach, Munich, Germany.
D Böckler7 Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
M Böhm8 Department of Internal Medicine, University Hospital of Homburg/Saar, Homburg, Germany.
H Brückmann9 Department of Neuroradiology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany.
E S Debus10 Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
J Fiehler11 Department of Neuroradiology, University Hospital of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
W Lang12 Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.
K Mathias13 Department of Radiology, Klinikum Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany.
E B Ringelstein14 Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Münster, Münster, Germany.
J Schmidli15 Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.
R Stingele16 Department of Neurology, University of Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
R Zahn17 Department of Internal Medicine, Klinikum Ludwigshafen, Ludwigshafen, Germany.
T Zeller18 Department of Angiology, University Hospital Freiburg, Bad Krozingen, Germany.
A Hetzel19 Department of Neurology, University Hospital Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.
U Bodechtel20 Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
A Binder21 Department of Neurology, UKSH Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
J Glahn22 Department of Neurology, Johannes Wesling Klinikum, Minden, Germany.
W Hacke1 Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
P A Ringleb1 Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Heidelberg University · DEUniversity Hospital of Bern · CHJohannes Wesling Klinikum Minden · DEChristian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel · DETechnical University of Munich · DEClinical Research Center Kiel · DEKlinikum Dortmund · DEKlinikum Ludwigshafen · DELudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEMünchen Klinik · DESaarland University · DEUniversitäts-Herzzentrum Freiburg-Bad Krozingen · DEUniversitätsklinikum Erlangen · DEUniversity Hospital Innsbruck · ATUniversity Hospital Münster · DEUniversity Medical Center Freiburg · DEZimmer Biomet (Germany) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTreatment of individuals with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis is still handled controversially. Recommendations for treatment of asymptomatic carotid stenosis with carotid endarterectomy (CEA) are based on trials having recruited patients more than 15 years ago. Registry data indicate that advances in best medical treatment (BMT) may lead to a markedly decreasing risk of stroke in asymptomatic carotid stenosis. The aim of the SPACE-2 trial (ISRCTN78592017) was to compare the stroke preventive effects of BMT alone with that of BMT in combination with CEA or carotid artery stenting (CAS), respectively, in patients with asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis of ≥70% European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST) criteria.

methodsSPACE-2 is a randomized, controlled, multicenter, open study. A major secondary endpoint was the cumulative rate of any stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic) or death from any cause within 30 days plus an ipsilateral ischemic stroke within one year of follow-up. Safety was assessed as the rate of any stroke and death from any cause within 30 days after CEA or CAS. Protocol changes had to be implemented. The results on the one-year period after treatment are reported.

findingsIt was planned to enroll 3550 patients. Due to low recruitment, the enrollment of patients was stopped prematurely after randomization of 513 patients in 36 centers to CEA (n = 203), CAS (n = 197), or BMT (n = 113). The one-year rate of the major secondary endpoint did not significantly differ between groups (CEA 2.5%, CAS 3.0%, BMT 0.9%; p = 0.530) as well as rates of any stroke (CEA 3.9%, CAS 4.1%, BMT 0.9%; p = 0.256) and all-cause mortality (CEA 2.5%, CAS 1.0%, BMT 3.5%; p = 0.304). About half of all strokes occurred in the peri-interventional period. Higher albeit statistically non-significant rates of restenosis occurred in the stenting group (CEA 2.0% vs. CAS 5.6%; p = 0.068) without evidence of increased stroke rates.

interpretationThe low sample size of this prematurely stopped trial of 513 patients implies that its power is not sufficient to show that CEA or CAS is superior to a modern medical therapy (BMT) in the primary prevention of ischemic stroke in patients with an asymptomatic carotid stenosis up to one year after treatment. Also, no evidence for differences in safety between CAS and CEA during the first year after treatment could be derived. Follow-up will be performed up to five years. Data may be used for pooled analysis with ongoing trials.

Indexed as

Asymptomatic carotid artery stenosisbest medical treatmentcarotid artery stentingcarotid endarterectomydisease-free survivalepidemiologyprimary preventionprospective studystroke

Identifiers

PMID30873912
PMCPMC7416333
OpenAlexW2921954220

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.