Effects of carotid artery stenosis treatment on blood pressure

2012 ◽  
Vol 117 (4) ◽  
pp. 755-760 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joonho Chung ◽  
Byung Moon Kim ◽  
Ho Kyu Paik ◽  
Dong-Keun Hyun ◽  
Hyeonseon Park

Object The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the long-term effects of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid artery stenting (CAS) on blood pressure (BP). Methods Between January 2003 and December 2009, 134 patients underwent 145 procedures for treatment of carotid artery stenosis. Patients with at least 1 year of clinical and radiographic follow-up after treatment were included in this study. A total of 102 patients met this criterion and were placed in the CEA group (n = 59) or the CAS group (n = 43) according to their treatment. The percentage change in BP decrement and the number of patients with a normotensive BP were evaluated and compared between the groups. Results There were no significant differences between the groups with regard to baseline characteristics. Compared with the pretreatment BP, the follow-up BPs were significantly decreased in both groups. At the 1-year followup, the percentage change in the BP decrement was greater in the CAS group (percentage change: systolic BP 9.6% and diastolic BP 12.8%) than in the CEA group (percentage change: systolic BP 5.9% [p = 0.035] and diastolic BP = 8.1% [p = 0.049]), and there were more patients with a normotensive BP in the CAS group (46.5%) than in the CEA group (22.0%, p = 0.012). Conclusions Both CEA and CAS have BP-lowering effects. Carotid artery stenting seems to have a better effect than CEA on BP at the 1-year follow-up.

2014 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 126-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dapeng Mo ◽  
Bo Wang ◽  
Ning Ma ◽  
Feng Gao ◽  
Zhongrong Miao

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.


Vascular ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 183-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kosmas I. Paraskevas ◽  
Dimitri P. Mikhailidis ◽  
Frank J. Veith

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has emerged as a potential alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) for the management of carotid artery stenosis. The purpose of this article is to provide an evaluation and critical overview of the trials comparing the early and later results of CAS with CEA for symptomatic carotid stenosis. The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, PubMed/Medline, and EMBASE databases were searched up to February 1, 2009, to identify trials comparing the long-term outcomes of CAS with CEA. The MeSH terms used were “carotid artery stenting,” “carotid endarterectomy,” “symptomatic carotid artery stenosis,” “treatment,” “clinical trial,” “randomized,” and “long-term results,” in various combinations. One single-center and three multicenter randomized studies reporting their long-term results from the comparison of CAS with CEA for symptomatic carotid stenosis were identified. All four studies independently reached the conclusion that CAS may not provide results equivalent to those of CEA for the management of symptomatic carotid stenosis. A higher incidence of recurrent stenosis and peri- and postprocedural events accounted for the inferior results reported for CAS compared with CEA. Current data from randomized studies indicate that CAS provides inferior long-term results compared with CEA for the management of symptomatic carotid artery stenosis. However, it can be argued that all of these trials were performed when both CAS equipment and CAS operators had not evolved to their current status. Given that current equipment and mature experience are required for CAS before comparing it with the current “gold standard” procedure (CEA), the results of soon-to-be reported trials (Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy vs Stenting Trial [CREST], International Carotid Stenting Study [ICSS], or others) may alter the current impression that CAS is inferior to CEA for the treatment of symptomatic carotid stenosis.


2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 65-75
Author(s):  
Kenta Fujimoto ◽  
Hiroyuki Hashimoto ◽  
Mitsuhisa Nishiguchi ◽  
Toshitaka Inui ◽  
Naoki Tani ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document