Carotid stenting with distal protection in high surgical risk patients: The BEACH trial 30 day results

White, C. J., Iyer, S. S., Hopkins, L. N., Katzen, B. T. and Russell, M. E. (2006) Carotid stenting with distal protection in high surgical risk patients: The BEACH trial 30 day results. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, 67 4: 503-512. doi:10.1002/ccd.20689

Author White, C. J.
Iyer, S. S.
Hopkins, L. N.
Katzen, B. T.
Russell, M. E.
Title Carotid stenting with distal protection in high surgical risk patients: The BEACH trial 30 day results
Journal name Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 1522-1946
Publication date 2006-04-01
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1002/ccd.20689
Volume 67
Issue 4
Start page 503
End page 512
Total pages 10
Place of publication Hoboken, NJ, United States
Publisher John Wiley & Sons
Language eng
Formatted abstract
Background: The BEACH trial evaluated the outcomes of carotid artery stent placement with distal emboli protection, using the Carotid Wallstent® and the FilterWire EX®/EZTM, in patients at high surgical risk for carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Methods: We enrolled 747 patients at high surgical risk for CEA due to prespecified anatomical criteria and/or medical comorbidities. The trial included both symptomatic (>50% carotid artery stenosis) as well as asymptomatic (>80% carotid artery stenosis) high surgical risk patients. Three groups of patients were included in the trial. The Roll-in (R) group (n = 189/747, [25%]) included up to nine patients per site for familiarization of the device and protocol; the Pivotal (P) group (n = 480/747, [65%]) was intended for presentation to the FDA for consideration of device approval; and a Bilateral (B) registry group (n = 78/747, [10%]) was included because of the need to treat patients with bilateral carotid artery disease. In the 480 Pivotal patients, anatomic criteria represented the most frequent high-risk surgical category for enrollment (58.8%), followed by prior CEA (34.2%), multivessel (≥2) coronary artery disease (21.7%), and contralateral carotid occlusion (18.1%). Results: The technical success rate for stent deployment and FilterWire EX/EZ deployment and retrieval was 98.2%. The mean postprocedure angiographic diameter stenosis in the Pivotal group was reduced to 10.8%, while the overall procedure success rate (<50% residual diameter stenosis) after stent deployment was 98%. The 30 day composite major adverse event (MAE) rate for the entire cohort of 747 patients (i.e. inclusive of all 3 groups) was 5.8% (all death = 1.5%, all stroke = 4.4%, and all myocardial infarction (MI) = 1.0%). In subgroup analysis, there was no significant difference in the MAE rate between the three groups (P = 5.8%, R = 6.9%, B = 2.6%, P = 0.42). Conclusion: The similarity in periprocedural event rates for the Pivotal and Roll-in groups suggests a flat learning curve for experienced operators using this carotid stent system. The similarity in event rates for the Bilateral group, when compared with the Roll-in and Pivotal groups, suggests that staged sequential treatment of bilateral stenoses may be performed at the same risk as for unilateral lesions. The 30-day safety of this stent and distal emboli protection system is encouraging and compares favorably with other carotid stent trials in high surgical risk patients.
Keyword Stroke prevention
Embolic protection
Artery stenosis
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status Non-UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collection: School of Medicine Publications
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 162 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 200 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Mon, 14 Mar 2011, 20:31:34 EST