title: [Not Available].
abstract: There is an ongoing discussion about reimbursement of stent-angioplasty for the treatment of intracranial stenoses in Germany. The discussion was initiated by the statutory health insurance companies after publication of the SAMMPRIS study results, which were in favor for medical management compared to stent-angioplasty with the Wingspan® stent system. A report (Rapid report N14-01) mainly based on SAMMPRIS was written by the German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) and serves as a basis for the decision-making process. This report was previously commented by the medical societies involved. Limitations of the SAMMPRIS trial and vital indications for intracranial stenting were outlined in this comment (acute vessel occlusion, hemodynamic impairment, recurrent symptoms under medical treatment). Currently also emergency stent procedures are a matter of debate. In this context a second IQWiG report was commissioned (GA 15 - 02) addressing the results of the VISSIT trial, the transferability of the results of the first report to emergency treatments and the practice of emergency intracranial stent treatment in Germany. Regarding transferability of results the main conclusion was that there was no evidence that the results of the studies analyzed for the first report (mainly SAMMPRIS) could not be transferred to emergency treatments. From a medical professional and scientific standpoint it is inacceptable to compare outcomes of a secondary prophylactic treatment with emergency procedures. The analysis of emergency treatments in Germany based on retrospective case series with a cumulative number of 31 patients. Since most emergency procedures are performed in a clinical context and are not necessarily subject to scientific evaluation, this does not reflect current practice in Germany. The first part of this statement briefly outlines the design of SAMMPRIS and VISSIT and the interpretation of the trial results from a professional perspective. The current state of discussion regarding reimbursement of intracranial stenting is summarized. The second section contains a detailed comment on the current IQWiG report GA15-02 "Stents for the treatment of intracranial artery stenosis: VISSIT study and acute treatment in Germany".
authors.forename: W
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Kurre
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Berlis
authors.forename: H-C
authors.initials: HC
authors.lastname: Diener
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Fiehler
authors.forename: R
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Gold
authors.forename: C
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Groden
authors.forename: G F
authors.initials: GF
authors.lastname: Hamann
authors.forename: J
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Röther
authors.forename: B
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Eckert
mesh_terms: D001157:Arterial Occlusive Diseases / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000628:therapy*; D002561:Cerebrovascular Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis / Q000628:therapy*; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D005858:Germany; D006801:Humans; D009462:Neurology / Q000592:standards*; D017410:Practice Guidelines as Topic; D011871:Radiology / Q000592:standards*; D015607:Stents / Q000592:standards*; D016896:Treatment Outcome