BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The outcome for simultaneous revascularization of more than 1 supra-aortic arterial stenosis has not been evaluated because of concerns regarding the increased risk of additional procedures. We evaluated the feasibility and safety of concomitant multiple supra-aortic arterial revascularizations (CMSAR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 50 consecutive patients who underwent CMSARs with angioplasty and stent placement. The study included a separate lesion group (LG) (n = 28), ipsilateral LG (n = 17) including adjacent (n = 6) and remote (n = 11) tandem lesions, and triple LG (n = 5). We assessed the procedural success (defined as residual stenosis <30%) and periprocedural event rate (ER) (minor or major stroke, and death). We compared the ERs in the lesion (ipsilateral vs separate) and symptom (unstable vs stable) pattern groups with the Fisher exact test. RESULTS: Procedural success was achieved in all patients (50/50). Periprocedural events within 30 days were noted in 5 (10%). ER within 2 days after the procedure was higher in the ipsilateral LG (4/17) than in the separate LG (0/28) (P = .016). Major events consisting of a major stroke and a death occurred in 2 patients in the unstable group (4%) and was more common in the unstable (2 of 7) than in the stable group (0/38) (P = .029). During the mean 11-month follow-up period, there was 1 symptomatic recurrence. CONCLUSION: CMSARs are feasible with a high procedural success rate resulting in a favorable short-term outcome. However, they must be carefully performed in ipsilateral LG, especially in patients in the unstable group.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The outcome for simultaneous revascularization of more than 1 supra-aortic arterial stenosis has not been evaluated because of concerns regarding the increased risk of additional procedures. We evaluated the feasibility and safety of concomitant multiple supra-aortic arterial revascularizations (CMSAR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 50 consecutive patients who underwent CMSARs with angioplasty and stent placement. The study included a separate lesion group (LG) (n = 28), ipsilateral LG (n = 17) including adjacent (n = 6) and remote (n = 11) tandem lesions, and triple LG (n = 5). We assessed the procedural success (defined as residual stenosis <30%) and periprocedural event rate (ER) (minor or major stroke, and death). We compared the ERs in the lesion (ipsilateral vs separate) and symptom (unstable vs stable) pattern groups with the Fisher exact test. RESULTS: Procedural success was achieved in all patients (50/50). Periprocedural events within 30 days were noted in 5 (10%). ER within 2 days after the procedure was higher in the ipsilateral LG (4/17) than in the separate LG (0/28) (P = .016). Major events consisting of a major stroke and a death occurred in 2 patients in the unstable group (4%) and was more common in the unstable (2 of 7) than in the stable group (0/38) (P = .029). During the mean 11-month follow-up period, there was 1 symptomatic recurrence. CONCLUSION: CMSARs are feasible with a high procedural success rate resulting in a favorable short-term outcome. However, they must be carefully performed in ipsilateral LG, especially in patients in the unstable group.
Authors: Edward G Grant; Carol B Benson; Gregory L Moneta; Andrei V Alexandrov; J Dennis Baker; Edward I Bluth; Barbara A Carroll; Michael Eliasziw; John Gocke; Barbara S Hertzberg; Sandra Katanick; Laurence Needleman; John Pellerito; Joseph F Polak; Kenneth S Rholl; Douglas L Wooster; R Eugene Zierler Journal: Radiology Date: 2003-09-18 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: G S Roubin; G New; S S Iyer; J J Vitek; N Al-Mubarak; M W Liu; J Yadav; C Gomez; R E Kuntz Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-01-30 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: A Mathur; G S Roubin; S S Iyer; C Piamsonboon; M W Liu; C R Gomez; J S Yadav; H D Chastain; L M Fox; L S Dean; J J Vitek Journal: Circulation Date: 1998-04-07 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: J C Wojak; D C Dunlap; K R Hargrave; L A DeAlvare; H S Culbertson; J J Connors Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: F Shawl; W Kadro; M J Domanski; F L Lapetina; A A Iqbal; K G Dougherty; D D Weisher; J F Marquez; S T Shahab Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2000-06 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: H J M Barnett; D W Taylor; R B Haynes; D L Sackett; S J Peerless; G G Ferguson; A J Fox; R N Rankin; V C Hachinski; D O Wiebers; M Eliasziw Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1991-08-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: B S Choi; J W Park; J E Shin; P-H Lü; J K Kim; S J Kim; D H Lee; J S Kim; H J Kim; D C Suh Journal: Interv Neuroradiol Date: 2010-10-25 Impact factor: 1.610
Authors: D C Suh; J L Kim; E H Kim; J K Kim; J-H Shin; D H Hyun; H Y Lee; D H Lee; J S Kim Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-01-19 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: J H Kwak; L Zhao; J K Kim; S Park; D-G Lee; J H Shim; D H Lee; J S Kim; D C Suh Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2013-10-03 Impact factor: 3.825