Lancet neurology
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
250 microg or 500 microg interferon beta-1b versus 20 mg glatiramer acetate in relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: a prospective, randomised, multicentre study.
The aim of the Betaferon Efficacy Yielding Outcomes of a New Dose (BEYOND) trial was to compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of 250 microg or 500 microg interferon beta-1b with glatiramer acetate for treating relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. ⋯ Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Long-term risk of carotid restenosis in patients randomly assigned to endovascular treatment or endarterectomy in the Carotid and Vertebral Artery Transluminal Angioplasty Study (CAVATAS): long-term follow-up of a randomised trial.
In the Carotid and Vertebral Artery Transluminal Angioplasty Study (CAVATAS), early recurrent carotid stenosis was more common in patients assigned to endovascular treatment than it was in patients assigned to endarterectomy (CEA), raising concerns about the long-term effectiveness of endovascular treatment. We aimed to investigate the long-term risks of restenosis in patients included in CAVATAS. ⋯ British Heart Foundation; UK National Health Service Management Executive; UK Stroke Association.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Endovascular treatment with angioplasty or stenting versus endarterectomy in patients with carotid artery stenosis in the Carotid and Vertebral Artery Transluminal Angioplasty Study (CAVATAS): long-term follow-up of a randomised trial.
Endovascular treatment (angioplasty with or without stenting) is an alternative to carotid endarterectomy for carotid artery stenosis but there are scarce long-term efficacy data showing that it prevents stroke. We therefore report the long-term results of the Carotid and Vertebral Artery Transluminal Angioplasty Study (CAVATAS). ⋯ British Heart Foundation; UK National Health Service Management Executive; UK Stroke Association.
-
Cervicogenic headache is characterised by pain referred to the head from the cervical spine. Although the International Headache Society recognises this type of headache as a distinct disorder, some clinicians remain sceptical. ⋯ In this Review, we outline the basic science and clinical evidence for cervicogenic headache and indicate how opposing approaches to its definition and diagnosis affect the evidence for its clinical management. We provide recommendations that enable a pragmatic approach to the diagnosis and management of probable cervicogenic headache, as well as a rigorous approach to the diagnosis and management of definite cervical headache.