Response from the SAMMPRIS trial principal investigators regarding inaccuracies in this editorial

As the principal investigators for the Stenting and Aggressive Medical Management for the Prevention of Recurrent Ischemic Stroke (SAMMPRIS) trial,1 we are compelled to address a few inaccuracies regarding this study in the recent editorial by Dr Alexander.2 The first point is the patient population. The SAMMPRIS population was the right patient population to test. We had very good data from the Warfarin versus Aspirin for Symptomatic Intracranial Disease (WASID) trial that patients with recently symptomatic severe stenosis were at the highest risk for recurrent stroke.3 This high-risk population offered the best chance for showing a benefit with revascularization. Much of the criticism in the editorial has the benefit of hindsight. The hemodynamic versus embolic mechanisms for stroke may be important in defining groups that benefit from angioplasty in the future.4 This distinction does not matter for extracranial carotid disease...

Source: Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery - June 11, 2016 Category: Neurosurgery Authors: Derdeyn, C. P., Fiorella, D., Chimowitz, M. Tags: PostScript Source Type: research