Abstract
In-stent restenosis (ISR) represents a major complication after stenting of intracranial artery stenosis (ICAS). Biomarkers derived from routine blood sampling including C-reactive protein (CRP), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and mean platelet volume (MPV) have been associated with progressive atherosclerosis. We investigated the role of CRP, NLR, PLR and MPV on the development of intracranial ISR and recurrent stroke risk. We retrospectively included all patients who had undergone stenting of symptomatic ICAS at our university hospital between 2005 and 2016. ISR (≥ 50% stenosis) was diagnosed by regular Duplex sonography follow-up studies and confirmed by digital subtraction angiography or computed tomography angiography (mean follow-up duration: 5 years). Laboratory parameters were documented before stenting, at the time of restenosis and at last clinical follow-up. Of 115 patients (mean age: 73 ± 13 years; female: 34%), 38 (33%) developed ISR. The assessed laboratory parameters did not differ between patients with ISR and those without (p > 0.1). While ISR was associated with the occurrence of recurrent ischemic stroke (p = 0.003), CRP, NLR, PLR and MPV were not predictive of such events (p > 0.1). Investigated blood biomarkers of progressive atherosclerosis were not predictive for the occurrence of ISR or recurrent ischemic stroke after ICAS stenting during a 5-year follow-up.
Subject terms: Cerebrovascular disorders, Biomarkers
Introduction
Atherosclerotic intracranial artery stenosis (ICAS) is an important cause of ischemic stroke and responsible for approximately 5–10% of all strokes in the western population1. Compared to other stroke subtypes, ICAS-related stroke is associated with a higher risk for recurrent transient ischemic attacks (TIA) or stroke2–4.
For secondary stroke prevention, the best treatment option (intracranial artery stenting vs. medical treatment only) for ICAS patients remained unclear over years5. Since the results of the SAMMPRIS study were published in 2011, aggressive medical therapy with dual antiplatelet agents and high-dose statin therapy has internationally been accepted as the gold standard for treating ischemic stroke caused by intracranial atherosclerotic disease6. In 2015, results from the VISSIT trial, which showed high rates of stroke and TIA in the best medical treatment plus stenting group, also supported aggressive medical management alone as optimal treatment for symptomatic ICAS7.
However, some patients continue to suffer from recurrent ischemic events despite best medical treatment. In such cases endovascular stenting of ICAS remains a treatment option. The high rates of in-stent restenosis (ISR, ≈ 30%) and recurrent ischemic events after intracranial artery stenting underscore the value of an individualized patient selection and follow-up regimen1,2,8–10.
In this context, biomarkers that are predictive for ISR after stenting of ICAS would help to identify patients unlikely to benefit from such therapy or needing intensified follow-up observation. Several studies investigated the impact of routine blood biomarkers as predictors for progressive atherosclerosis in different vascular beds (i.e. coronary arteries, carotids and iliac/femoral arteries)10–14. However, data on laboratory markers in ICAS patients are still lacking.
In these studies, mean platelet volume (MPV), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), C-reactive protein (CRP) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR) were associated with progressive atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis (MPV, NLR), critical limb ischemia (CRP) and coronary artery disease (NLR, PLR)11–16.
We therefore aimed to investigate the value of such routine blood parameters for the prediction of ISR and recurrent ischemic events after stenting of symptomatic high-grade intracranial artery stenosis in a monocentric study with comparatively long follow-up.
Methods
Study design and participants
This study was performed as a retrospective analysis, which included all patients who had undergone stenting of symptomatic high-grade ICAS at our primary and tertiary care university hospital between 2005 and 2016. Patients with ICAS related to a non-atherosclerotic etiology (e.g. intracranial dissection) were excluded (Fig. 1).
Figure 1.
Flow diagram of patient selection.
ICAS was diagnosed by transcranial Duplex sonography (TCD) and confirmed by cerebral magnetic resonance or computed tomography (CT) angiography. Stenting was performed in patients with symptomatic high-grade (≥ 70%) intracranial stenosis. A stenosis was deemed symptomatic, if the ischemic stroke corresponded to the territory of the affected artery. Stenting was not performed if the patient had severe concomitant disease such as malignant cancer, dementia, severe heart or lung disease or contraindications for postinterventional dual antiplatelet therapy. For these reasons, every case was individually discussed in an interdisciplinary board including experienced vascular neurologists and interventional neuroradiologists.
Patient data assessment
Patient data at baseline including demographics, vascular risk profile as well as past medical history and comorbidities were obtained from our neurovascular stenting database and were completed using the electronic medical documentation system of our university hospital17. Vascular risk factors were defined according to recent guideline recommendations18–22 or if respective (e.g. antihypertensive) medication was already prescribed.
Blood parameter assessment
Laboratory baseline examination was carried out 1 day before stenting and comprised a complete blood count analysis including MPV, lipid parameters, hemoglobin A1c, C-reactive protein, liver enzymes and renal function as well as coagulation parameters. Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (= quotient of absolute number of neutrophil granulocytes and lymphocytes) and platelet to lymphocyte ratio (= quotient of absolute number of thrombocytes and lymphocytes) were calculated retrospectively from originally obtained values. MPV was calculated by dividing the plateletcrit by the total number of platelets (reference range 7–13 fL).
Stenting procedures
Stenting of high-grade ICAS was performed by neurointerventional specialists under local anesthesia via groin puncture. In most cases (97%) self-expanding Nitinol Wingspan stents (Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA) were used. Only three patients were treated with drug-eluting stents.
At the end of the intervention, control angiography was performed to detect a potential residual stenosis in the treated vessel. After the intervention, patients were monitored at the stroke unit or neuro-intensive care unit.
All patients received full-dose heparin at the day of the intervention and until 24 h post stenting according to our standard operating procedure. On the first postinterventional day cerebral magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed in order to identify newly emerged cerebral infarcts. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT, aspirin 100 mg and clopidogrel 75 mg daily) was started at least 3 days before stenting and continued for a minimum of 3 months after the intervention. Afterwards, DAPT was usually replaced by antiplatelet monotherapy (aspirin or clopidogrel). All patients received statin therapy and intense control of modifiable vascular risk factors. LDL target levels were set according to the most recent guideline recommendations within the study period (2005–2010: LDL < 100 mg/dL; since 2011: LDL < 70 mg/dL)20,21.
Follow-up
All included patients underwent a standard follow-up regime comprising clinical examination and TCD at 1, 3 and 6 months, and annually after the stenting procedure. Six months after the intervention, digital subtraction angiography or cerebral CT angiography was routinely performed. In case of ISR detection on TCD during follow-up, additional CT angiography was performed for confirmation. Laboratory examinations were analysed when ISR was detected or at last clinical follow-up. ISR was defined as ≥ 50% restenosis in the affected vessel. Patients who did not participate in the follow-up examinations or had deceased within 3 months after the intervention were excluded from the study (n = 11, Fig. 1).
Statistics
For statistical analysis, the IBM SPSS Statistics (Version 25) was used. Continuous variables are shown using mean and standard deviation (SD), nominal parameters are presented in absolute numbers and percentages. To compare nominal data, Pearson’s Chi-square test and Fisher’s exact test were used. For continuous variables, the Gaussian distribution was proven with the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. In a further step, Student's t test (parametric data) or Mann–Whitney U test (non-parametric data) were used.
Blood biomarkers of interest (MPV, NLR, CRP, PLR) were additionally adjusted for age and sex in a binary multivariable logistic regression model for ISR as the target variable.
Statistical significance was defined as a probability value below 0.05.
Ethics approval and consent to participate
The study was approved by the ethics committee of the Medical University of Graz (ethics committee number: 24-474 ex 11/12) and was carried out in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. Informed consent was waived by the ethics committee because of the retrospective nature of the study.
Results
Of 141 patients who had undergone stenting of symptomatic intracranial artery stenosis, 115 patients (mean age: 73 ± 13 years, 34% female) were included in the final study cohort (Fig. 1). Arterial hypertension (86%) and hyperlipidaemia (80%) were the most common vascular risk factors.
Digital subtraction angiography at the end of the intervention showed residual low-grade stenosis (< 50%) in seven individuals (6%). 10 patients (9%) had peri-interventional complications including arterial dissection (n = 3), subarachnoid hemorrhage (n = 4) and ischemic stroke (n = 3). All treated patients underwent repeated clinical and ultrasonographic follow-up investigations for a mean period of 68 months (SD: ± 43 months).
In-stent restenosis
38 patients (33%) had ISR, which was detected in follow-up examinations after a mean period of 11 months (SD: ± 18 months). Of those, ISR was symptomatic in 7 patients (18%, all ischemic strokes). Common vascular risk factors did not differ between patients with versus without ISR (Table 1).
Table 1.
Demographics, risk factors and laboratory parameters at baseline dichotomized according to the occurrence of in-stent restenosis after stenting of symptomatic intracranial artery stenosis.
| All patients (n = 115) | In-stent restenosis (n = 38) | No in-stent restenosis (n = 77) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Demographics | ||||
| Women (%) | 39 (33.9) | 13 (34.2) | 26 (33.8) | 0.962 |
| Age (years) | 72.5 ± 13.1 | 74.5 ± 12.7 | 71.5 ± 13.2 | 0.258 |
| Risk factors (n, %) | ||||
| Hypertension | 99 (86.1) | 35 (92.1) | 64 (83.1) | 0.190 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 47 (40.9) | 13 (34.2) | 34 (44.2) | 0.308 |
| Hyperlipidemia | 92 (80.0) | 33 (86.8) | 59 (76.6) | 0.198 |
| Active smoking at baseline | 28 (24.3) | 9 (23.7) | 19 (24.7) | 0.907 |
| Persistent smoking during follow up | 12 (10.4) | 4 (10.5) | 8 (10.4) | 0.982 |
| Coronary artery disease | 29 (25.2) | 13 (34.2) | 16 (20.8) | 0.119 |
| Peripheral artery disease | 21 (18.3) | 5 (13.2) | 16 (20.8) | 0.320 |
| Localization of intracranial stenosis (n, %) | ||||
| Internal carotid artery | 37 (32.2) | 8 (21.1) | 29 (37.7) | 0.073 |
| Middle cerebral artery | 33 (28.7) | 13 (34.2) | 20 (26.0) | 0.358 |
| Vertebral artery | 36 (31.3) | 14 (36.8) | 22 (28.6) | 0.368 |
| Basilar artery | 30 (26.1) | 10 (26.3) | 20 (26.0) | 0.969 |
| Periinterventional complication (n, %) | 10 (8.7) | 3 (7.9) | 7 (9.1) | 0.830 |
| Hematological parameters at baseline (mean, SD) | ||||
| Thrombocytes (× 109/L) | 224.2 ± 61.4 | 224.0 ± 52.7 | 224.3 ± 65.6 | 0.980 |
| Leukocytes (× 109/L) | 7.0 ± 2.2 | 6.5 ± 1.5 | 7.3 ± 2.5 | 0.078 |
| Neutrophils (× 109/L) | 4.7 ± 2.0 | 4.3 ± 1.3 | 4.9 ± 2.2 | 0.095 |
| Lymphocytes (× 109/L) | 1.7 ± 0.6 | 1.6 ± 0.5 | 1.7 ± 0.6 | 0.658 |
| Mean platelet volume (fL) | 10.9 ± 1.0 | 10.8 ± 0.9 | 10.9 ± 1.1 | 0.729 |
| Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (× 109/L) | 3.2 ± 2.0 | 3.0 ± 1.8 | 3.3 ± 2.1 | 0.439 |
| Platelet to lymphocyte ratio (× 109/L) | 149.3 ± 69.7 | 154.2 ± 77.9 | 146.8 ± 65.6 | 0.595 |
| Biochemical parameters at baseline (mean, SD) | ||||
| C-reactive Protein (mg/L) | 11.5 ± 24.1 | 5.8 ± 7.6 | 14.4 ± 28.0 | 0.079 |
| Creatinine (mg/dL) | 1.0 ± 0.6 | 1.0 ± 0.3 | 1.1 ± 0.7 | 0.611 |
| Hemoglobin A1c (mmol/mol) | 47.6 ± 18.3 | 45.5 ± 18.6 | 48.7 ± 18.2 | 0.482 |
| Low-density lipoprotein (mg/dL) | 107.5 ± 43.4 | 106.7 ± 42.9 | 107.9 ± 44.0 | 0.899 |
| Triglycerides (mg/dL) | 168.4 ± 106.3 | 176.8 ± 91.1 | 163.9 ± 113.9 | 0.580 |
| Recurrent ischemic event (n, %) | 11 (9.6) | 8 (21.1) | 3 (3.9) | 0.003 |
MPV values at baseline and at ISR-detection or last follow-up were comparable between ISR and non-ISR patients (p = 0.729 and p = 0.929, respectively) as were NLR (p = 0.439 and p = 0.872), PLR (p = 0.595 and p = 0.813) and CRP (p = 0.079 and p = 0.203) values (Fig. 2, Table 2). Moreover, all tested blood parameters did not change significantly from baseline to ISR-detection (p > 0.1). Multivariable regression analysis did also not identify significant predictors for ISR after stenting of ICAS (p > 0.1).
Figure 2.
Blood biomarkers of platelet aggregation and inflammation in ISR and non-ISR patients after stenting of intracranial artery stenosis.
Table 2.
Laboratory parameters at last follow-up dichotomized according to the occurrence of in-stent restenosis after stenting of symptomatic intracranial artery stenosis.
| All patients (n = 115) | In-stent restenosis (n = 38) | No in-stent restenosis (n = 77) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hematological parameters at follow up (mean, SD) | ||||
| Thrombocytes (× 109/L) | 234.0 ± 77.5 | 228.2 ± 66.1 | 236.8 ± 82.8 | 0.576 |
| Leukocytes (× 109/L) | 8.0 ± 2.6 | 7.6 ± 2.6 | 8.1 ± 2.7 | 0.357 |
| Neutrophils (× 109/L) | 5.3 ± 2.5 | 5.1 ± 2.4 | 5.4 ± 2.6 | 0.469 |
| Lymphocytes (× 109/L) | 1.8 ± 0.7 | 1.7 ± 0.6 | 1.8 ± 0.7 | 0.435 |
| Mean platelet volume (fL) | 10.6 ± 0.9 | 10.6 ± 1.0 | 10.6 ± 0.9 | 0.929 |
| Neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio | 3.7 ± 3.2 | 3.6 ± 2.8 | 3.7 ± 3.4 | 0.872 |
| Platelet/lymphocyte ratio | 150.9 ± 90.4 | 153.7 ± 105.2 | 149.5 ± 82.5 | 0.813 |
| Biochemical parameters at follow up (mean, SD) | ||||
| C-reactive protein (mg/L) | 14.5 ± 36.1 | 8.1 ± 16.3 | 17.8 ± 42.7 | 0.203 |
| Creatinine (mg/dL) | 1.2 ± 0.7 | 1.1 ± 0.8 | 1.2 ± 0.7 | 0.628 |
| Hemoglobin A1c (mmol/mol) | 46.0 ± 12.9 | 45.5 ± 10.5 | 46.2 ± 14.0 | 0.838 |
| Low-density lipoprotein (mg/dL) | 88.6 ± 29.7 | 94.9 ± 33.1 | 85.4 ± 27.4 | 0.163 |
| Low-density lipoprotein target level reached* (n, %) | 28 (41.8) | 20 (46.5) | 8 (33.3) | 0.294 |
| Triglycerides (mg/dL) | 149.7 ± 100.6 | 145.1 ± 60.1 | 152.4 ± 119.2 | 0.834 |
*Target levels were set according to recent guideline recommendations (2005–2010: LDL < 100 mg/dL; since 2011: LDL < 70 mg/dL).
Recurrent ischemic cerebrovascular events
Of all included patients, 11 patients (10%) had a recurrent ischemic cerebrovascular event (stroke: n = 9, TIA: n = 2) after a mean follow-up period of 6 months (SD: ± 11 months).
Patients with ISR were more likely to suffer from stroke or TIA compared to the non-ISR group (11% versus 4%, p = 0.003). Stenting of middle cerebral artery stenosis (55% versus 26%, p = 0.046) was also significantly associated with recurrent cerebral ischemic events in univariable analyses. MPV, NLR, PLR and CRP at baseline and at last clinical follow-up were not predictive in this context (p > 0.1, Table 3).
Table 3.
Demographics, vascular risk profile and laboratory parameters at baseline dichotomized according to the occurrence of recurrent ischemic cerebrovascular events after stenting of symptomatic intracranial artery stenosis during a 5-year follow-up.
| Recurrent ischemic stroke/TIA (n = 11) | No recurrent ischemic stroke/TIA (n = 104) | P value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Demographics | |||
| Women (%) | 5 (45.5) | 34 (37.2) | 0.395 |
| Age (years) | 71.9 ± 14.1 | 72.5 ± 13.0 | 0.880 |
| Risk factors (n, %) | |||
| Hypertension | 10 (90.9) | 89 (85.6) | 0.627 |
| Diabetes mellitus | 5 (45.5) | 42 (40.4) | 0.745 |
| Hyperlipidemia | 10 (90.9) | 82 (78.8) | 0.342 |
| Active smoking at baseline | 2 (18.5) | 26 (25.0) | 0.616 |
| Persistent smoking during follow up | 0 (0.0) | 12 (11.5) | 0.234 |
| Coronary artery disease | 1 (9.1) | 28 (26.9) | 0.195 |
| Peripheral artery disease | 0 (0.0) | 21 (20.1) | 0.099 |
| Localization of intracranial stenosis (n, %) | |||
| Internal carotid artery | 2 (18.2) | 35 (33.7) | 0.296 |
| Middle cerebral artery | 6 (54.5) | 27 (26.0) | 0.046 |
| Vertebral artery | 3 (27.3) | 33 (31.7) | 0.762 |
| Basilar artery | 3 (27.3) | 27 (26.0) | 0.925 |
| Periinterventional complication (n, %) | 0 (0.0) | 10 (9.6) | 0.282 |
| Hematological parameters at baseline (mean, SD) | |||
| Thrombocytes (× 109/L) | 208.7 ± 44.3 | 225.8 ± 62.9 | 0.382 |
| Leukocytes (× 109/L) | 6.8 ± 1.9 | 7.1 ± 2.6 | 0.699 |
| Neutrophils (× 109/L) | 4.4 ± 1.8 | 4.7 ± 2.0 | 0.568 |
| Lymphocytes (× 109/L) | 1.7 ± 0.7 | 17. ± 0.6 | 0.869 |
| Mean platelet volume (fL) | 10.7 ± 0.9 | 10.9 ± 1.1 | 0.471 |
| Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio | 3.0 ± 2.0 | 3.2 ± 2.1 | 0.806 |
| Platelet to lymphocyte ratio | 148.7 ± 79.1 | 149.3 ± 69.1 | 0.978 |
| Biochemical parameters at baseline (mean, SD) | |||
| C-reactive Protein (mg/L) | 3.9 ± 2.1 | 12.4 ± 25.3 | 0.269 |
| Creatinine (mg/dL) | 0.9 ± 0.2 | 1.1 ± 0.6 | 0.403 |
| Hemoglobin A1c (mmol/mol) | 48.9 ± 23.4 | 47.5 ± 17.8 | 0.841 |
| Low-density lipoprotein (mg/dL) | 117.8 ± 69.7 | 106.3 ± 39.6 | 0.431 |
| Triglycerides (mg/dL) | 195.6 ± 102.1 | 165.1 ± 106.9 | 0.394 |
| In-stent restenosis (n, %) | 8 (72.7) | 30 (28.9) | 0.003 |
Discussion
In this retrospective analysis, routine blood biomarkers that have been associated with progressive atherosclerosis in different vascular beds in other studies were not predictive for ISR or recurrent ischemic cerebrovascular events after stenting of symptomatic high-grade intracranial artery stenosis. In line with earlier studies2,9,10, ISR was a significant risk factor for the occurrence of recurrent stroke or TIA during a long-term follow-up period of up to 5 years, while tested blood biomarkers were not contributory.
Recently, routine blood biomarkers of inflammation and platelet aggregation were investigated regarding their predictive value for progressive arterial disease. MPV is considered a marker for platelet activity as larger platelets express denser granules, leading to a higher potential of platelet aggregation, neointimal hyperplasia and thrombo-embolism23,24. In this context, MPV has been associated with progressive atherosclerosis of coronary and peripheral arteries12,24,25. After carotid artery stenting, MPV has been identified as predictor for ISR in an Asian study population, but this could not be confirmed in a recent investigation in a larger European patient cohort12,17.
Inflammatory processes play a central role in all stages of atherosclerosis. CRP and NLR are indicators of increased local and systemic inflammation and have been related to more instable atherosclerotic plaques and progressive stenosis of intracranial arteries13,26,27. As reactive thrombocythemia is a well-known response on acute-phase reactions, it was not surprising that PLR has also been identified as independent predictor of progressive (coronary) artery disease12,13. All those blood biomarkers are easily available in clinical practice and could thus be valuable parameters to identify patients at risk for ISR or recurrent stroke after stenting of ICAS.
To the best of our knowledge, we here present the first study that investigated the predictive value of routine blood biomarkers for ISR after intracranial artery stenting over a long-term follow-up period of up to 5 years.
During the follow-up period, one third of all patients was diagnosed with ISR, which is comparable to recently published data (22–46%)2,8,9. However, we were not able to detect an association between tested blood biomarkers and ISR after stenting of ICAS neither at baseline nor at follow-up or ISR detection. Moreover, biomarker levels did not change from baseline to ISR-detection.
This contrasts with earlier studies that found an association between increased CRP and the occurrence of ISR after stenting of extra-/intracranial arteries and progressive intracranial large artery disease27–30. However, those studies were limited by a very small number of ICAS patients (n = 16)28 and did not differentiate between intra- and extracranial artery stenosis or excluded patients after intracranial artery stenting29,30. Moreover, these studies investigated relatively young study populations with a moderate number of classical vascular risk factors29,30. This might also explain the higher CRP levels detected in our study, as CRP is a non-specific marker of inflammation and acute-phase reaction, which increases with age and comorbidities31, and therefore might limit the value of CRP as a predictive marker for ISR after stenting.
Previous studies suggested an association between MPV and ISR after carotid and coronary artery stenting14,15. However, in those studies, patients who developed ISR had a high number of concomitant vascular risk factors (e.g. diabetes mellitus). It is known that arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus and hyperlipidemia independently increase MPV levels14. This might explain the missing link between MPV and ISR after ICAS in this study, as vascular risk factors were comparable between ISR and non-ISR patients, which is further supported by two recent negative studies on the value of MPV on progressive carotid artery disease17,32.
Although our study is the largest investigation on ISR after stenting of ICAS to date, the number of included patients is considerably lower than those in recent studies that have investigated the value of NLR and PLR on progressive atherosclerotic disease (n > 1000) in other blood vessels12,15. Therefore, a weak correlation between NLR/PLR levels and ISR after stenting of ICAS could have been missed in our study. Nevertheless, we were able to exclude a major contribution of such markers to progressive intracranial artery disease, as we had laboratory studies at baseline and follow-up available.
Despite a long-term follow-up period of up to 5 years, which is notably longer compared to earlier studies focusing on ISR development after ICAS stenting28,33, we observed a low number of recurrent cerebrovascular events. The missing link between the tested blood biomarkers and recurrent stroke/TIA must therefore be interpreted cautiously. Another limitation of this study is its retrospective design as other possibly valuable biomarkers, that have been associated with progressive atherosclerosis in recent studies (e.g. lipoprotein a or lipoprotein associated phospholipase A2)34–36, were not available because they were not part of our routine laboratory examination. Nevertheless, the findings of this study render a major contribution of routine blood biomarkers of progressive atherosclerosis to the prediction of ISR after stenting of intracranial artery stenosis over a long-term 5-year follow-up period unlikely.
Acknowledgements
We thank the Doctoral School Sustainable Health Research of the Medical University of Graz for their support.
Author contributions
T.G. conceived the study and designed the research question. M.H. and G.W. acquired the data. M.H. and M.K. had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis, which was discussed with T.G. M.H., M.K. and T.G. wrote the first draft of the manuscript. K.N., H.D., H.M., C.V., M.A., G.W., S.F.H., S.H. and C.E. co-drafted and commented on the final version. All authors approved the final version of the manuscript.
Data availability
Data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Footnotes
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
- 1.Holmstedt CA, Turan TN, Chimowitz MI. Atherosclerotic intracranial arterial stenosis: Risk factors, diagnosis, and treatment. Lancet Neurol. 2013;12:1106–1114. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(13)70195-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Ding D, Starke RM, Crowley RW, Liu KC. Role of stenting for intracranial atherosclerosis in the post-SAMMPRIS era. BioMed Res. Int. 2013;2013:304320. doi: 10.1155/2013/304320. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Zhu SG, et al. Predictive factors for in-stent restenosis after balloon-mounted stent placement for symptomatic intracranial atherosclerosis. J. Vasc. Surg. 2010;52:1114. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2010.08.057. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Chimowitz MI, et al. Comparison of warfarin and aspirin for symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 2005;352:1305–1316. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa043033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Gröschel K, Schnaudigel S, Pilgram SM, Wasser K, Kastrup A. A systematic review on outcome after stenting for intracranial atherosclerosis. Stroke. 2009;40:340–347. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.532713. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Chimowitz MI, et al. Stenting versus aggressive medical therapy for intracranial arterial stenosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 2011;365:993–1003. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1105335. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Zaidat BF, et al. Effect of a balloon-expandable intracranial stent vs medical therapy on risk of stroke in patients with symptomatic intracranial stenosis: The VISSIT randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2015;313:1240–1248. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.1693. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Ma N, et al. Stenting for symptomatic intracranial arterial stenosis in China: 1-year outcome of a multicentre registry study. Stroke Vasc. Neurol. 2018;3:176–184. doi: 10.1136/svn-2017-000137. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Derdeyn CP, et al. 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. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62038-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Amin-Hanjani S, et al. Detection of intracranial in-stent restenosis using quantitative magnetic resonance angiography. Stroke. 2010;41:2534–2538. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.594739. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Guetl K, et al. The white blood cell count to mean platelet volume ratio for the prediction of chronic limb-threatening ischemia in lower extremity artery disease. J. Clin. Med. 2019;8:1593. doi: 10.3390/jcm8101593. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Zhang S, et al. Predictive value of neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio in patients with acute ST segment elevation myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis. BMC Cardiovasc. Disord. 2018;18:75. doi: 10.1186/s12872-018-0812-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Serrano CVJ, et al. Association between neutrophil-lymphocyte and platelet-lymphocyte ratios and coronary artery calcification score among asymptomatic patients: Data from a cross-sectional study. Mediat. Inflamm. 2019;2019:6513847. doi: 10.1155/2019/6513847. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Chu SG, et al. Mean platelet volume as a predictor of cardiovascular risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Thromb. Haemost. 2010;8:148–156. doi: 10.1111/j.1538-7836.2009.03584.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Dai Z, et al. Mean platelet volume as a predictor for restenosis after carotid angioplasty and stenting. Stroke. 2018;49:872–876. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.117.019748. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Akboga MK, et al. Association of platelet to lymphocyte ratio with inflammation and severity of coronary atherosclerosis in patients with stable coronary artery disease. Angiology. 2016;67:89–95. doi: 10.1177/0003319715583186. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Haidegger M, et al. Mean platelet volume does not predict restenosis after carotid artery stenting in Whites. Stroke. 2020;51:986–989. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.119.028180. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Williams B, ESC Scientific Document Group et al. 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension. Eur. Heart J. 2018;39:3021–3104. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy339. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Chamberlain JJ, et al. Diagnosis and management of diabetes: Synopsis of the 2016 American Diabetes Association Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes. Ann. Intern. Med. 2016;164:542–552. doi: 10.7326/M15-3016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.De Backer G, et al. European guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice. Third Joint Task Force of European and other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (constituted by representatives of eight societies and by invited experts) Eur. Heart J. 2003;24:1601–1610. doi: 10.1016/S0195-668X(03)00347-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Reiner Z, ESC Scientific Document Group et al. 2011 ESC/EAS guidelines for the management of dyslipidaemias. Eur. Heart J. 2011;32:1769–1818. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr158. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Manciaa G, et al. Reappraisal of European guidelines on hypertension management: A European Society of Hypertension Task Force document. J. Hypertens. 2009;27:1–38. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0b013e3283220fd1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Bath PM, Butterworth RJ. Platelet size: Measurement, physiology and vascular disease. Blood Coagul. Fibrinolysis. 1996;7:157–161. doi: 10.1097/00001721-199603000-00011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Choi DH, Kang SH, Song H. Mean platelet volume: A potential biomarker of the risk and prognosis of heart disease. Korean J. Intern. Med. 2016;31:1009–1017. doi: 10.3904/kjim.2016.078. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Rief P, et al. Low mean platelet volume is associated with critical limb ischemia in peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Sci. Rep. 2018;8:6718. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-25058-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Dai Z, et al. Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio as a predictor of restenosis after angioplasty and stenting for asymptomatic carotid stenosis. Angiology. 2018;70:160–165. doi: 10.1177/0003319718784805. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Arenillas J. Intracranial atherosclerosis and inflammation: Lessons from the East and the West. Brain Circ. 2015;1:47–52. doi: 10.4103/2394-8108.162531. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Gupta R, Bhatt A, Kassab M, Majid A. Elevated levels of pre-procedural high-sensitivity C-reactive protein is associated with midterm restenosis after extra- and intracranial stenting. J. Neuroimaging. 2008;20:77. doi: 10.1111/j.1552-6569.2008.00313.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Arenillas JF, et al. Progression of symptomatic intracranial large artery atherosclerosis is associated with a proinflammatory state and impaired fibrinolysis. Stroke. 2008;39:1456–1463. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.107.498600. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Arenillas JF, et al. C-reactive protein predicts further ischemic events in first-ever transient ischemic attack or stroke patients with intracranial large-artery occlusive disease. Stroke. 2003;34:2463–2470. doi: 10.1161/01.STR.0000089920.93927.A7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Friedman EM, Christ SL, Mroczek DK. Inflammation partially mediates the association of multimorbidity and functional limitations in a national sample of middle-aged and older adults: The MIDUS study. J. Aging Health. 2015;27:843–863. doi: 10.1177/0898264315569453. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Mayer FJ, et al. Mean platelet volume predicts outcome in patients with asymptomatic carotid artery disease. Eur. J. Clin. Investig. 2014;44:22–28. doi: 10.1111/eci.12184. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Lai XB, et al. Predictors of in-stent stenosis and occlusion after endovascular treatment of intracranial vascular disease with the Willis covered stent. J. Clin. Neurosci. 2019;20:122–127. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2012.01.051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Tao L, ShiChuan W, DeTai Z, Lihua H. Evaluation of lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2, serum amyloid A, and fibrinogen as diagnostic biomarkers for patients with acute cerebral infarction. J. Clin. Lab. Anal. 2020;34:e23084. doi: 10.1002/jcla.23084. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Garg PK, et al. Lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 and risk of incident cardiovascular disease in a multi-ethnic cohort: The multi ethnic study of atherosclerosis. Atherosclerosis. 2015;241:176–182. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2015.05.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Agarwala A, et al. The association of lipoprotein(a) with incident heart failure hospitalization: Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities study. Atherosclerosis. 2017;262:131–137. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2017.05.014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
Data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.