Comparison of periprocedural and long term outcomes of proximal versus distal cerebral protection method during carotid artery stenting

VASA ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 297-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zeynep Bastug Gul ◽  
Emre Akkaya ◽  
Ertan Vuruskan ◽  
Ozgur Akgul ◽  
Hamdi Pusuroglu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Cerebral Protection ◽  
Protection System ◽  
One Year ◽  
Distal Filter ◽  
Flow Blockage

Abstract. Background: The aim of this study was to assess the periprocedural and one-year outcomes of two different cerebral protection systems used during carotid artery stenting (CAS). Patients and methods: We enrolled 90 consecutive patients with carotid artery stenosis who underwent CAS with a proximal flow blockage protection system (mean age 69.7 ± 8) or distal protection with a filter (mean age 70.8 ± 7). Results: CAS was performed successively on 89 patients (99 %). Adverse events were defined as major stroke, minor stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), myocardial infarction, and death. Two strokes, one TIA, one death, and one myocardial infarction were observed in-hospital. There were no significant differences in safety or benefits between the proximal flow blockage embolic protection system (n = 45) and the distal filter protection system (n = 45) in terms of clinically apparent cerebral embolism, TIA, death, or myocardial infarction during the periprocedural stage or during the one-year follow-up period. Conclusions: Although it has been shown that the proximal flow blockage cerebral protection system decreases the risk of silent cerebral embolism, it has no advantage over the distal filter protection system in terms of adverse cerebrovascular or cardiac events during the periprocedural stage or during the long-term follow-up period.

scholarly journals Carotid artery stenting has similar outcomes in men and women

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marina Ansuategui ◽  
Gabriela Ibarra ◽  
Carmen Romero ◽  
Alejandra Comanges ◽  
Jose A. Gonzalez-Fajardo
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Cardiovascular Risk ◽  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Therapeutic Option ◽  
Stent Patency ◽  
Cerebrovascular Events ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

Abstract Background The aim of carotid interventions is to prevent cerebrovascular events. Endovascular treatment (carotid-artery-stenting/CAS) has become established as an alternative to open surgery in some cases. Historically, female sex has been considered as a perioperative risk factor, however, there are few studies regarding this hypothesis when it comes to CAS. Objectives To analyze the CAS results in our center adjusted by sex. Methods A retrospective cohort study was designed, including patients with carotid atheromatosis operated at a single center from January 2016 to June 2019. Our objective was to compare cardiovascular risk, including myocardial infarction, stroke, and mortality, by sex. Follow-up rates of stent patency, restenosis, stroke, myocardial infarction, and death were reported. Results 71 interventions were performed in 50 men (70.42%) and 21 women (29.57%). Mean age was 70.50 ± 10.72 years for men and 73.62 ± 11.78 years for women. Cardiovascular risk factors did not differ significantly between sexes. Mean follow-up was 11.28 ± 11.28 months. There were no significant differences in neurological events during follow-up. No adverse cardiological events were detected at any time. Regarding the mortality rate, during medium-term follow up there were 2 neurological related deaths with no significant differences between sexes (p=0.8432). Neither sex had higher rated of restenosis during long term follow-up (5.63% vs. 1.41%, p = 0.9693) or reoperation (1.41% vs. 1.41%, p = 0.4971). All procedures remained patent (<50% restenosis). Conclusions Despite the limitations of our study, CAS is a therapeutic option that is as effective and safe in women as in men. No sex differences were observed.

Three-year outcomes after carotid artery revascularization: Gender-related differences

Vascular ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (5) ◽  
pp. 459-467
Author(s):  
Renato Casana ◽  
Chiara Malloggi ◽  
Valerio Stefano Tolva ◽  
Andrea Odero Jr ◽  
Richard Bulbulia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Single Centre ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Asymptomatic Patients ◽  
Carotid Artery Endarterectomy

Objectives Carotid artery stenosis is thought to cause up to 10% of ischemic strokes. Historically, carotid artery endarterectomy has shown a higher risk of perioperative adverse events for women. More recent trials reported conflicting results regarding the benefit of carotid artery endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting for men and women. The aim of the present retrospective study was to investigate the influence of gender on the short- (30 days) and long-term (3 years) outcomes of carotid artery endarterectomy and carotid artery stenting in a single centre. Methods From 2010 to 2017, 912 consecutive symptomatic and asymptomatic patients who underwent carotid artery endarterectomy (389, 42.7%) or carotid artery stenting (523, 57.3%) in a single institution had been evaluated to determine the influence of sex (540 men, 59.2%, vs. 372 women, 40.8%) on the outcomes after both revascularization procedures during three years of follow-up. The primary endpoint was the incidence of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and restenosis in the short-term follow-up. The secondary endpoint was the incidence of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and restenosis in the long-term follow-up. Results Mean clinical follow-up was 21.1 (16.1) months. Women had internal and common carotid artery diameters significantly smaller with respect to men. For peri-procedural outcomes, women undergoing carotid artery stenting had a higher risk of moderate (50–70%) restenosis (6 women, 2.9%, vs. 3 men, 1.0%). For long-term outcomes, women undergoing carotid artery endarterectomy had a higher rate of moderate restenosis (16 women, 16.3%, vs. 11 men, 7.6%). No significant differences in long-term outcomes were observed between men and women undergoing carotid artery stenting, even after stratification for baseline risk factors. Conclusions Contrary to previous reports, from this single-centre study, long-term risk of events seems to be higher in women who underwent carotid artery endarterectomy than in those who underwent carotid artery stenting, while fewer differences were observed in men.

Comparative outcomes of carotid artery stenting for asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid artery stenosis: a single-center prospective study

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 126-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dapeng Mo ◽  
Bo Wang ◽  
Ning Ma ◽  
Feng Gao ◽  
Zhongrong Miao
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenosis ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Artery Stenosis ◽  
Acute Thrombosis ◽  
Symptomatic Carotid ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

BackgroundCarotid artery stenting (CAS) for symptomatic carotid artery stenosis (SCS) has been proved to be safe and effective in many randomized controlled trials, but the safety and efficacy of CAS for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis (ACS) is not clear.ObjectiveTo prospectively compare the outcomes of CAS between patients with ACS and SCS.Methods402 consecutive patients, 233 with ACS and 169 with SCS, underwent CAS. The primary outcome was a composite of death, stroke or myocardial infarction at 30 days and during the follow-up period. Procedural success and complications such as hyperperfusion, sinus-cardiac reflex, gastrointestinal hemorrhage, myocardial infarction, acute thrombosis, and vagus nerve reflex were also compared between the ACS and SCS groups.ResultsCAS was successful in all patients. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics of the patients (age, gender, hypertension, diabetes, smoking, alcohol consumption and dyslipidemia) and in 30-day or long-term follow-up outcomes between the ACS and SCS groups.ConclusionsPeriprocedural and long-term follow-up outcomes of CAS appear similar for ACS and SCS.

Long-term effects of an intensive prevention program (IPP) after acute myocardial infarction – the IPP Follow-up and Prevention Boost Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
H Wienbergen ◽  
A Fach ◽  
S Meyer ◽  
J Schmucker ◽  
R Osteresch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Risk Factor ◽  
Prevention Program ◽  
Study Endpoint ◽  
Funding Source ◽  
Risk Factor Control ◽  
One Year

Abstract Background The effects of an intensive prevention program (IPP) for 12 months following 3-week rehabilitation after myocardial infarction (MI) have been proven by the randomized IPP trial. The present study investigates if the effects of IPP persist one year after termination of the program and if a reintervention after &gt;24 months (“prevention boost”) is effective. Methods In the IPP trial patients were recruited during hospitalization for acute MI and randomly assigned to IPP versus usual care (UC) one month after discharge (after 3-week rehabilitation). IPP was coordinated by non-physician prevention assistants and included intensive group education sessions, telephone calls, telemetric and clinical control of risk factors. Primary study endpoint was the IPP Prevention Score, a sum score evaluating six major risk factors. The score ranges from 0 to 15 points, with a score of 15 points indicating best risk factor control. In the present study the effects of IPP were investigated after 24 months – one year after termination of the program. Thereafter, patients of the IPP study arm with at least one insufficiently controlled risk factor were randomly assigned to a 2-months reintervention (“prevention boost”) vs. no reintervention. Results At long-term follow-up after 24 months, 129 patients of the IPP study arm were compared to 136 patients of the UC study arm. IPP was associated with a significantly better risk factor control compared to UC at 24 months (IPP Prevention Score 10.9±2.3 points in the IPP group vs. 9.4±2.3 points in the UC group, p&lt;0.01). However, in the IPP group a decrease of risk factor control was observed at the 24-months visit compared to the 12-months visit at the end of the prevention program (IPP Prevention Score 10.9±2.3 points at 24 months vs. 11.6±2.2 points at 12 months, p&lt;0.05, Figure 1). A 2-months reintervention (“prevention boost”) was effective to improve risk factor control during long-term course: IPP Prevention Score increased from 10.5±2.1 points to 10.7±1.9 points in the reintervention group, while it decreased from 10.5±2.1 points to 9.7±2.1 points in the group without reintervention (p&lt;0.05 between the groups, Figure 1). Conclusions IPP was associated with a better risk factor control compared to UC during 24 months; however, a deterioration of risk factors after termination of IPP suggests that even a 12-months prevention program is not long enough. The effects of a short reintervention after &gt;24 months (“prevention boost”) indicate the need for prevention concepts that are based on repetitive personal contacts during long-term course after coronary events. Figure 1 Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Foundation. Main funding source(s): Stiftung Bremer Herzen (Bremen Heart Foundation)

scholarly journals The CRP/albumin ratio: a novel predictor of in-stent restenosis after carotid artery stenting

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
A.N Calik ◽  
T Cinar ◽  
D Inan ◽  
D Genc ◽  
H Kuplay ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Independent Predictor ◽  
C Reactive Protein ◽  
Albumin Ratio ◽  
Reactive Protein ◽  
Stent Restenosis ◽  
In Stent Restenosis

Abstract Background In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a potential problem and raises concerns about the long-term safety and efficacy of carotid artery stenting (CAS). As inflammation has a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of ISR, a novel and more sensitive inflammatory marker, CRP/albumin ratio (CAR) may be used to predict ISR in patients undergoing CAS. Purpose The present study aimed to assess the predictive value of preprocedural C-reactive protein/albumin ratio (CAR) for ISR after CAS. Method In this retrospective study, 206 patients who underwent successful CAS procedure in a tertiary heart centre were included. For each patient, both C-reactive protein (CRP) and serum albumin were determined before the index procedure. The CAR was calculated by dividing serum CRP by serum albumin level. The main end-point of the study was ISR during long-term follow-up. Results ISR developed in 34 (16.5%) out of 206 patients after a mean follow-up of 24.2±1.5 months. The CAR was significantly elevated in patients with ISR compared to those who were not (0.99 [1.3] vs. 0.15 [0.2], p&lt;0.01, respectively). In a multivariate Cox regression analysis, the CAR was an independent predictor of ISR (HR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.29–2.64, p&lt;0.01). A ROC curve analysis revealed that the optimal value of CAR in predicting ISR was &gt;0.53 with a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 97.1% [area under curve (AUC) 0.98, p&lt;0.001]. Conclusion The present study demonstrated that CAR, a new inflammatory-based index, is a strong independent predictor of ISR after CAS. As a simple and easily accessible parameter, this index may be used for the assessment of ISR in patients who are treated with CAS. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

scholarly journals CAROTID ARTERY STENTING IN OCTOGENARIANS: SUCCESS RATE, COMPLICATIONS AND LONG-TERM FOLLOW-UP OF A SINGLE-CENTER COHORT

2016 ◽  
Vol 67 (13) ◽  
pp. 299
Author(s):  
Juergen Kammler ◽  
Hermann Blessberger ◽  
Alexander Kypta ◽  
Michael Lichtenauer ◽  
Thomas Lambert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Success Rate ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Single Center ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

scholarly journals Long-term impact of chronic total occlusion recanalisation in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction

Heart ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 104 (17) ◽  
pp. 1432-1438 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joëlle Elias ◽  
Ivo M van Dongen ◽  
Truls Råmunddal ◽  
Peep Laanmets ◽  
Erlend Eriksen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Cardiac Death ◽  
Chronic Total Occlusion ◽  
Randomised Trial ◽  
Left Ventricular ◽  
Total Occlusion ◽  
St Elevation ◽  
One Year

BackgroundDuring primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), a concurrent chronic total occlusion (CTO) is found in 10% of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Long-term benefits of CTO-PCI have been suggested; however, randomised data are lacking. Our aim was to determine mid-term and long-term clinical outcome of CTO-PCI versus CTO-No PCI in patients with STEMI with a concurrent CTO.MethodsThe Evaluating Xience and left ventricular function in PCI on occlusiOns afteR STEMI (EXPLORE) was a multicentre randomised trial that included 302 patients with STEMI after successful primary PCI with a concurrent CTO. Patients were randomised to either CTO-PCI or CTO-No PCI. The primary end point of the current study was occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE): cardiac death, coronary artery bypass grafting and MI. Other end points were 1-year left ventricular function (LVF); LV-ejection fraction and LV end-diastolic volume and angina status.ResultsThe median long-term follow-up was 3.9 (2.1–5.0) years. MACE was not significantly different between both arms (13.5% vs 12.3%, HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.98; P=0.93). Cardiac death was more frequent in the CTO-PCI arm (6.0% vs 1.0%, P=0.02) with no difference in all-cause mortality (12.9% vs 6.2%, HR 2.07, 95% CI 0.84 to 5.14; P=0.11). One-year LVF did not differ between both arms. However, there were more patients with freedom of angina in the CTO-PCI arm at 1 year (94% vs 87%, P=0.03).ConclusionsIn this randomised trial involving patients with STEMI with a concurrent CTO, CTO-PCI was not associated with a reduction in long-term MACE compared to CTO-No PCI. One-year LVF was comparable between both treatment arms. The finding that there were more patients with freedom of angina after CTO-PCI at 1-year follow-up needs further investigation.Clinical trial registrationEXPLORE trial number NTR1108 www.trialregister.nl.

scholarly journals Carotid artery stenting: Results and long-term follow-up

2006 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 68 ◽  
Author(s):  
AK Gupta ◽  
S Purkayastha ◽  
TR Kapilamoorthy ◽  
MD Nair ◽  
T Krishnamoorthy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Carotid Artery Stenting ◽  
Long Term Follow Up

scholarly journals Hybrid revascularization of the heart and brain: which carotid endarterectomy is preferable?

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 15-26
Author(s):  
Anton N. Kazantsev ◽  
Roman A. Vinogradov ◽  
Sergey V. Artyukhov ◽  
Lyudmila V. Roshkovskaya ◽  
Vyacheslav V. Matusevich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Carotid Artery ◽  
Ischaemic Stroke ◽  
Intravenous Heparin ◽  
Hybrid Revascularization ◽  
Group 3 ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

The aim of this study was to analyse the inpatient and long-term results of hybrid surgery, incorporating percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and different types of carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Materials and methods. A prospective, open-label cohort comparison study was conducted in 20182020 and included 363 patients with atherosclerosis of both the internal carotid artery (ICA) and coronary artery, who underwent hybrid revascularization of the brain and myocardium. All patients were divided into four groups based on the revascularization strategy: group 1 (n = 107; 29.5%) PCI + eversion CEA; group 2 (n = 98; 27%) PCI + classic CEA with patch angioplasty; group 3 (n = 72; 19.8%) PCI + glomus-sparing CEA according to R.A. Vinogradov; and group 4 (n = 86; 23.7%) PCI + glomus-sparing CEA according to A.N. Kazantsev. The follow-up period was 20.8 8.0 months. The patient received a loading dose of clopidogrel (300 mg) before the PCI, and the procedure was then performed in an endovascular operating room. A radial artery catheter was inserted, and the patient received 10,000 IU of intravenous heparin before the procedure. After the PCI, the patient was taken to the vascular operating room, where they underwent the CEA. The patient received 5,000 IU of intravenous heparin before artery clamping. Glomus-sparing CEA according to A.N. Kazantsev was performed as follows: an arteriotomy was conducted along the internal edge of the external carotid artery (ECA), adjacent to the carotid sinus and 23 cm above the ostium, and extending to the common carotid artery (CCA) (also 23 cm below the ECA ostium), depending on the size of the atherosclerotic plaque. The ICA was transected in the area bound by the ECA and CCA walls. Eversion CEA of the ICA was performed, followed by open CEA of the ECA and CCA. The ICA was implanted in its previous position in the preserved area. Results. No mortality was recorded during the inpatient follow-up period. All cases of myocardial infarction occurred after eversion and classic CEA: 3 in group 1 (2.8%) and 1 in group 2 (1.02%); р = 0.2. No ischaemic stroke was recorded only in patients who underwent CAE according to A.N. Kazantsev (р = 0.66); however, ischaemic stroke occurred in two patients in group 1 (1.8%), in two patients in group 2 (2.04%) and in one patient in group 3 (1.38%). The highest number of cardiovascular events occurred in group 1, due to carotid glomus injury, which led to poorly controlled hypertension during the inpatient stay. This tendency influenced the composite endpoints (death + myocardial infarction + ischaemic stroke), which were highest in group 1 (5 or 4.6%) compared to 3 (3.06%), 1 (1.38%) and 0 in groups 24, respectively (р = 0.18). The groups were comparable in the frequency of long-term complications. However, the incidence of ICA restenosis was lowest and no ECA thrombosis/occlusion was observed after glomus-sparing CEA according to R.A. Vinogradov and A.N. Kazantsev. Conclusion. A hybrid PCI + CEA for brain revascularization should be glomus-sparing. CEA according to A.N. Kazantsev was characterized by lack of procedural arteriotomy complications. This procedure enables blood pressure monitoring in the postoperative period, thus minimizing the risk of cardiovascular complications.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document