Literature DB >> 14681601

In-stent recurrent stenosis after carotid artery stenting: life table analysis and clinical relevance.

Brajesh K Lal1, Robert W Hobson, Jonathan Goldstein, Madge Geohagan, Elie Chakhtoura, Peter J Pappas, Zafar Jamil, Paul B Haser, Shubha Varma, Frank T Padberg, Joaquim J Cerveira.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Carotid artery stenting has been proposed as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy in cerebral revascularization. Although early results from several centers have been encouraging, concerns remain regarding long-term durability of carotid artery stenting. We report the incidence, characteristics, and management of in-stent recurrent stenosis after long-term follow-up of carotid artery stenting.
METHODS: Carotid artery stenting (n = 122) was performed in 118 patients between September 1996 and March 2003. Indications included recurrent stenosis after previous carotid endarterectomy (66%), primary lesions in patients at high-risk (29%), and previous ipsilateral cervical radiation therapy (5%). Fifty-five percent of patients had asymptomatic stenosis; 45% had symptomatic lesions. Each patient was followed up with serial duplex ultrasound scanning. Selective angiography and repeat intervention were performed when duplex ultrasound scans demonstrated 80% or greater in-stent recurrent stenosis. Data were prospectively recorded, and were statistically analyzed with the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test.
RESULTS: Carotid artery stenting was performed successfully in all cases, with the WallStent or Acculink carotid stent. Thirty-day stroke and death rate was 3.3%, attributable to retinal infarction (n = 1), hemispheric stroke (n = 1), and death (n = 2). Over follow-up of 1 to 74 months (mean, 18.8 months), 22 patients had in-stent recurrent stenosis (40%-59%, n = 11; 60%-79%, n = 6; > or =80%, n = 5), which occurred within 18 months of carotid artery stenting in 13 patients (60%). None of the patients with in-stent recurrent stenosis exhibited neurologic symptoms. Life table analysis and Kaplan-Meier curves predicted cumulative in-stent recurrent stenosis 80% or greater in 6.4% of patients at 60 months. Three of five in-stent recurrent stenoses occurred within 15 months of carotid artery stenting, and one each occurred at 20 and 47 months, respectively. Repeat angioplasty was performed once in 3 patients and three times in 1 patient, and repeat stenting in 1 patient, without complications. One of these patients demonstrated asymptomatic internal carotid artery occlusion 1 year after repeat intervention.
CONCLUSIONS: Carotid artery stenting can be performed with a low incidence of periprocedural complications. The cumulative incidence of clinically significant in-stent recurrent stenosis (> or =80%) over 5 years is low (6.4%). In-stent restenosis was not associated with neurologic symptoms in the 5 patients noted in this cohort. Most instances of in-stent recurrent stenosis occur early after carotid artery stenting, and can be managed successfully with endovascular techniques.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14681601     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2003.08.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0741-5214            Impact factor:   4.268


  14 in total

Review 1.  Carotid endarterectomy and stenting in management of extracranial carotid occlusive disease.

Authors:  Robert W Hobson
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 2.  State of the art in carotid artery stenting: trial data, technical aspects, and limitations.

Authors:  Rajan A G Patel
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Transl Res       Date:  2014-04-26       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 3.  Treatment of carotid artery disease: stenting or surgery.

Authors:  Brajesh K Lal; Robert W Hobson
Journal:  Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 5.081

4.  The incidence of carotid in-stent stenosis is underestimated ≥50% or ≥80% and its clinical implications.

Authors:  Ali F AbuRahma; Zachary T AbuRahma; Grant Scott; Elliot Adams; Abe Mata; Matthew Beasley; L Scott Dean; Elaine Davis
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2018-12-11       Impact factor: 4.268

5.  Instent restenosis after carotid stenting: treatment using an off-label cardiac scoring balloon.

Authors:  Grant C Sorkin; Travis M Dumont; Jorge L Eller; Maxim Mokin; L Nelson Hopkins; Kenneth V Snyder; Adnan H Siddiqui; Elad I Levy
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Neurol       Date:  2014-05

Review 6.  Management of De Novo Carotid Stenosis and Postintervention Restenosis-Carotid Endarterectomy Versus Carotid Artery Stenting-a Review of Literature.

Authors:  Runqi Wangqin; Paul R Krafft; Keaton Piper; Jay Kumar; Kaya Xu; Maxim Mokin; Zeguang Ren
Journal:  Transl Stroke Res       Date:  2019-02-22       Impact factor: 6.829

7.  In-stent restenosis after interventional treatment of carotid artery stenoses: a long-term follow-up of a single center cohort.

Authors:  J Kammler; H Blessberger; T Lambert; J Kellermair; M Grund; A Nahler; M Lichtenauer; S Schwarz; C Reiter; C Steinwender; A Kypta
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2017-02-08       Impact factor: 5.460

8.  Prognostic Factors for Neurologic Outcome in Patients with Carotid Artery Stenting.

Authors:  Chi-Sheng Hung; Mao-Shin Lin; Ying-Hsien Chen; Ching-Chang Huang; Hung-Yuan Li; Hsien-Li Kao
Journal:  Acta Cardiol Sin       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 2.672

9.  Long-term outcome after angioplasty of symptomatic internal carotid artery stenosis with and without stent.

Authors:  O Wittkugel; J Gbadamosi; M Rosenkranz; J Fiehler; H Zeumer; U Grzyska
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2007-10-25       Impact factor: 2.804

10.  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.

Authors:  Leo H Bonati; Jörg Ederle; Dominick J H McCabe; Joanna Dobson; Roland L Featherstone; Peter A Gaines; Jonathan D Beard; Graham S Venables; Hugh S Markus; Andrew Clifton; Peter Sandercock; Martin M Brown
Journal:  Lancet Neurol       Date:  2009-08-28       Impact factor: 44.182

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.