AIM: Comparison of restenosis in patients who underwent both carotid artery angioplasty with stenting (CAS) and contralateral carotid endarterectomy (CEA). METHODS: From our CAS data registry (1998-present) all patients with a history of contralateral CEA at any other time were selected (n = 63). Mean age was 70.6, SD = 6.8 for CAS and 68.2, SD = 6.1 for CEA and symptomatic carotid artery stenosis was present in 24% of patients pre-CAS and 40% pre-CEA. All CEAs were primary interventions, 19% of CAS were secondary to restenosis after previous ipsilateral CEA. All patients were followed up prospectively with duplex at 1 year (CAS: n = 58, CEA: n = 59), 2 years (CAS: n = 44, CEA: n = 53), 3 years (CAS: n = 27, CEA: n = 41), and every year thereafter. Within each patient we compared restenosis (>50%) between CAS and CEA procedures. RESULTS: After a follow-up of 28.7 months for CAS (SD = 16.9) and 54.4 months for CEA (SD = 39.5) the rate of = or > 50% restenosis for CAS vs CEA at 1, 2, and 3 years was 23% vs 10%; 31% vs 19%; and 34 vs 24%, respectively (log rank P = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Our intrapatient comparison of patients who underwent both CAS and contralateral CEA did not reveal significant difference in restenosis between both procedures.
AIM: Comparison of restenosis in patients who underwent both carotid artery angioplasty with stenting (CAS) and contralateral carotid endarterectomy (CEA). METHODS: From our CAS data registry (1998-present) all patients with a history of contralateral CEA at any other time were selected (n = 63). Mean age was 70.6, SD = 6.8 for CAS and 68.2, SD = 6.1 for CEA and symptomatic carotid artery stenosis was present in 24% of patients pre-CAS and 40% pre-CEA. All CEAs were primary interventions, 19% of CAS were secondary to restenosis after previous ipsilateral CEA. All patients were followed up prospectively with duplex at 1 year (CAS: n = 58, CEA: n = 59), 2 years (CAS: n = 44, CEA: n = 53), 3 years (CAS: n = 27, CEA: n = 41), and every year thereafter. Within each patient we compared restenosis (>50%) between CAS and CEA procedures. RESULTS: After a follow-up of 28.7 months for CAS (SD = 16.9) and 54.4 months for CEA (SD = 39.5) the rate of = or > 50% restenosis for CAS vs CEA at 1, 2, and 3 years was 23% vs 10%; 31% vs 19%; and 34 vs 24%, respectively (log rank P = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Our intrapatient comparison of patients who underwent both CAS and contralateral CEA did not reveal significant difference in restenosis between both procedures.
Authors: Dat Tin Nguyen; Boldizsár Vokó; Balázs Bence Nyárádi; Tamás Munkácsi; Ákos Bérczi; Zoltán Vokó; Edit Dósa Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-02-11 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Adam Mazurek; Krzysztof Malinowski; Kenneth Rosenfield; Laura Capoccia; Francesco Speziale; Gianmarco de Donato; Carlo Setacci; Christian Wissgott; Pasqualino Sirignano; Lukasz Tekieli; Andrey Karpenko; Waclaw Kuczmik; Eugenio Stabile; David Christopher Metzger; Max Amor; Adnan H Siddiqui; Antonio Micari; Piotr Pieniążek; Alberto Cremonesi; Joachim Schofer; Andrej Schmidt; Piotr Musialek Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-08-17 Impact factor: 4.964