OBJECTIVES: We prospectively studied the long-term outcome of endovascular treatment of instent renal artery stenosis (IRAS). BACKGROUND: Restenosis is a considerable drawback of stent-supported angioplasty of renal artery stenosis especially in small vessel diameters. The appropriate treatment strategy is not yet defined. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During a 10-year period 56 consecutive patients (65 lesions) with their first IRAS were included in a prospective follow-up program (mean follow-up 53 +/- 25 months, range 6-102). Primary endpoint of the study was the reoccurence of IRAS (>or= 70%) after primarily successful treatment of the first IRAS determined by duplex ultrasound. RESULTS: Primary success rate was 100%, no major complication occurred. Nineteen lesions were treated with plain balloon angioplasty (group 1, 30%), 42 lesions with stent-in-stent placement (group 2, 65%) using various bare metal balloon expandable stents, and 4 lesions with drug-eluting stent angioplasty (group 3, 6%). During follow-up, overall 21 lesions (32%) developed reoccurence of IRAS: n = 7/19 in group 1 (37%), n = 14/42 in group 2 (33%), and n = 0/4 in group 3 (0%; P = 0.573). Reoccurence of IRAS was more likely to occur in smaller vessel diameters than in larger ones [3-4mm: 4/7 (57%); 5 mm: 11/26 (42%); 6 mm: 5/25 (20%); 7 mm: 1/7 (14%), P = 0.088]. Multivariable analysis found bilateral IRAS and IRAS of both renal arteries of the same side in case of multiple ipsilateral renal arteries as independent predictors for reoccurence of IRAS. CONCLUSION: Treatment of IRAS is feasible and safe. The data demonstrate a nonsignificant trend towards lower restenosis with restenting of IRAS versus balloon angioplasty of IRAS. Individual factors influence the likelihood of reoccurence of IRAS. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
OBJECTIVES: We prospectively studied the long-term outcome of endovascular treatment of instent renal artery stenosis (IRAS). BACKGROUND:Restenosis is a considerable drawback of stent-supported angioplasty of renal artery stenosis especially in small vessel diameters. The appropriate treatment strategy is not yet defined. PATIENTS AND METHODS: During a 10-year period 56 consecutive patients (65 lesions) with their first IRAS were included in a prospective follow-up program (mean follow-up 53 +/- 25 months, range 6-102). Primary endpoint of the study was the reoccurence of IRAS (>or= 70%) after primarily successful treatment of the first IRAS determined by duplex ultrasound. RESULTS: Primary success rate was 100%, no major complication occurred. Nineteen lesions were treated with plain balloon angioplasty (group 1, 30%), 42 lesions with stent-in-stent placement (group 2, 65%) using various bare metal balloon expandable stents, and 4 lesions with drug-eluting stent angioplasty (group 3, 6%). During follow-up, overall 21 lesions (32%) developed reoccurence of IRAS: n = 7/19 in group 1 (37%), n = 14/42 in group 2 (33%), and n = 0/4 in group 3 (0%; P = 0.573). Reoccurence of IRAS was more likely to occur in smaller vessel diameters than in larger ones [3-4mm: 4/7 (57%); 5 mm: 11/26 (42%); 6 mm: 5/25 (20%); 7 mm: 1/7 (14%), P = 0.088]. Multivariable analysis found bilateral IRAS and IRAS of both renal arteries of the same side in case of multiple ipsilateral renal arteries as independent predictors for reoccurence of IRAS. CONCLUSION: Treatment of IRAS is feasible and safe. The data demonstrate a nonsignificant trend towards lower restenosis with restenting of IRAS versus balloon angioplasty of IRAS. Individual factors influence the likelihood of reoccurence of IRAS. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
Authors: Mark Shipeng Yu; David A Folt; Christopher A Drummond; Steven T Haller; Emily L Cooper; Pamela Brewster; Kaleigh L Evans; Christopher J Cooper Journal: Curr Atheroscler Rep Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 5.113
Authors: Rodrigo Gibin Jaldin; Marcone Lima Sobreira; Regina Moura; Matheus Bertanha; Rafael Elias Fares Pimenta; Ricardo de Alvarenga Yoshida; Jamil Victor de Oliveira Mariúba; Winston Bonetti Yoshida Journal: J Vasc Bras Date: 2018 Jan-Mar