Second asymptomatic carotid surgery trial (ACST-2): a randomised comparison of carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy

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. Findings: Between Jan 15, 2008, and Dec 31, 2020, 3625 patients in 130 centres were randomly allocated, 1811 to CAS and 1814 to CEA, with good compliance, good medical therapy and a mean 5 years of follow-up. Overall, 1% had disabling stroke or death procedurally (15 allocated to CAS and 18 to CEA) and 2% had non-disabling procedural stroke (48 allocated to CAS and 29 to CEA). Kaplan-Meier estimates of 5-year non-procedural stroke were 2·5% in each group for fatal or disabling stroke, and 5·3% with CAS versus 4·5% with CEA for any stroke (rate ratio [RR] 1·16, 95% CI 0·86–1·57; p=0·33). Combining RRs for any non-procedural stroke in all CAS versus CEA trials, the RR was similar in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients (overall RR 1·11, 95% CI 0·91–1·32; p=0·21). Interpretation: Serious complications are similarly uncommon after competent CAS and CEA, and the long-term effects of these two carotid artery procedures on fatal or disabling stroke are comparable. Funding: UK Medical Research Council and Health Technology Assessment Programme

A Coffee Berry Borer (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae) Bibliography

Native to Africa, the coffee berry borer, Hypothenemus hampei (Ferrari) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Scolytinae), has gradually invaded most coffee-growing areas worldwide. Adult females colonize the coffee berry and oviposit within galleries in the coffee seeds. Larvae and adults consume the seeds, resulting in drastic reductions in yields and quality, negatively affecting the income of approximately 20 million coffee-growing families (~100 million people) in ~80 countries, with losses surpassing more than $500 million annually (Vega et al. 2015). It has become evident that the coffee berry borer scientific community could greatly benefit from having access to a bibliography of the literature related to the insect. Such an information source would allow scientists to find out what research areas have been explored throughout the many coffee berry borer-infested countries after more than 100 years of research on the topic. It could also help to direct lead future research efforts into novel areas, and away from topics and ideas that have been thoroughly investigated in the past

ECPPA: Randomised trial of low dose aspirin for the prevention of maternal and fetal complications in high risk pregnant women

Objective To determine the effectiveness of low dose aspirin in women at high risk of adverse outcomes associated with pre-eclampsia.Design A collaborative randomised trial comparing the effects of low dose aspirin (60 mg) with placebo on pre-eclampsia and other materno-fetal complications associated with hypertension.Setting Twelve teaching maternity hospitals and 182 obstetricians' offices in Brazil.Subjects One thousand and nine women considered to be at high risk for the development of preeclampsia, or its complications, entered the study between 12 and 32 weeks of gestation. They were randomly allocated to receive aspirin (498 women) or placebo (511 women) until delivery, and follow up was obtained for 96%.Results There were no significant differences between the treatment groups in the incidence of proteinuric pre-eclampsia (6.7% aspirin-allocated compared with 6.0% placebo-allocated women), of preterm delivery (22.3% compared with 26.1%), of intrauterine growth retardation (8.5% compared with 10.1%), or of stillbirth and neonatal death (7.3% compared with 6.0%), nor were there significant differences in the incidence of proteinuric pre-eclampsia in any subgroup of women studied, including those who had systolic blood pressures of 120 mmHg or above at entry (8.5% compared with 7.3%) or those who were chronically hypertensive (10.0% compared with 7.1%). Aspirin was not associated with a significant excess of maternal or fetal bleeding.Conclusion The results of this study do not support the routine prophylactic administration of low dose aspirin in pregnancy to any category of high risk women (even those who have chronic hypertension or who are considered to be especially liable to early onset pre-eclampsia).ESCOLA PAULISTA MED,DEPT MED,MED CLIN D,RUA BOTUCATU 740,BR-04023900 SAO PAULO,BRAZILESCOLA PAULISTA MED,DEPT MED,MED CLIN D,RUA BOTUCATU 740,BR-04023900 SAO PAULO,BRAZILWeb of Scienc

Second asymptomatic carotid surgery trial (ACST-2): a randomised comparison of carotid artery stenting versus carotid endarterectomy

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. Findings: Between Jan 15, 2008, and Dec 31, 2020, 3625 patients in 130 centres were randomly allocated, 1811 to CAS and 1814 to CEA, with good compliance, good medical therapy and a mean 5 years of follow-up. Overall, 1% had disabling stroke or death procedurally (15 allocated to CAS and 18 to CEA) and 2% had non-disabling procedural stroke (48 allocated to CAS and 29 to CEA). Kaplan-Meier estimates of 5-year non-procedural stroke were 2·5% in each group for fatal or disabling stroke, and 5·3% with CAS versus 4·5% with CEA for any stroke (rate ratio [RR] 1·16, 95% CI 0·86–1·57; p=0·33). Combining RRs for any non-procedural stroke in all CAS versus CEA trials, the RR was similar in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients (overall RR 1·11, 95% CI 0·91–1·32; p=0·21). Interpretation: Serious complications are similarly uncommon after competent CAS and CEA, and the long-term effects of these two carotid artery procedures on fatal or disabling stroke are comparable. Funding: UK Medical Research Council and Health Technology Assessment Programme