Literature DB >> 18486419

Alert for increased long-term follow-up after carotid artery stenting: results of a prospective, randomized, single-center trial of carotid artery stenting vs carotid endarterectomy.

Markus G M Steinbauer1, Karin Pfister, Markus Greindl, Felix Schlachetzki, Ingitha Borisch, Gerhard Schuirer, Stefan Feuerbach, Piotr M Kasprzak.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been shown to be effective in stroke prevention for patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis. Although several prospective randomized trials indicate that carotid artery stenting (CAS) is an alternative but not superior treatment modality, there is still a significant lack of long-term data comparing CAS with CEA. This study presents long-term results of a prospective, randomized, single-center trial.
METHODS: Between August 1999 and April 2002, 87 patients with a symptomatic high-grade internal carotid artery stenosis (>70%) were randomized to CAS or CEA. After a median observation time of 66 +/- 14.2 months (CAS) and 64 +/- 12.1 months (CEA), 42 patients in each group were re-evaluated retrospectively by clinical examination and documentation of neurologic events. Duplex ultrasound imaging was performed in 61 patients (32 CAS, 29 CEA), and patients with restenosis >70% were re-evaluated by angiography.
RESULTS: During the observation period, 23 patients (25.2%) died (10 CAS, 13 CEA), and three were lost to follow up. The incidence of strokes was higher after CAS, with four strokes in 42 CAS patients vs none in 42 CEA patients. One transient ischemic attack occurred in each group. A significantly higher rate of restenosis >70% (6 of 32 vs 0 of 29) occurred after CAS compared with CEA. Five of 32 CAS patients (15.6%) presented with high-grade (>70%) restenosis as an indication for secondary intervention or surgical stent removal, and three presented with neurologic symptoms. No CEA patients required reintervention (P < .05 vs CAS). A medium-grade (<70%) restenosis was detected in eight of 32 CAS patients (25%) and in one of 29 CEA patients (3.4%). In five of 32 CAS (15.6%) and three of 29 CEA patients (10.3%), a high-grade stenosis of the contralateral carotid artery was observed and treated during the observation period.
CONCLUSION: The long-term results of this prospective, randomized, single-center study revealed a high incidence of relevant restenosis and neurologic symptoms after CAS. CEA seems to be superior to CAS concerning the development of restenosis and significant prevention of stroke. However, the long-term results of the ongoing multicenter trials have to be awaited for a final conclusion.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18486419     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2008.02.049

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


  22 in total

1.  Carotid artery stenting without angioplasty and cerebral protection: a single-center experience with up to 7 years' follow-up.

Authors:  S Baldi; T Zander; M Rabellino; G González; M Maynar
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2011-02-24       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Factors Associated with Increased Rates of Post-procedural Stroke or Death following Carotid Artery Stent Placement: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Muhib Khan; Adnan I Qureshi
Journal:  J Vasc Interv Neurol       Date:  2014-05

3.  European Stroke Organisation guideline on endarterectomy and stenting for carotid artery stenosis.

Authors:  Leo H Bonati; Stavros Kakkos; Joachim Berkefeld; Gert J de Borst; Richard Bulbulia; Alison Halliday; Isabelle van Herzeele; Igor Koncar; Dominick Jh McCabe; Avtar Lal; Jean-Baptiste Ricco; Peter Ringleb; Martin Taylor-Rowan; Hans-Henning Eckstein
Journal:  Eur Stroke J       Date:  2021-05-11

4.  Carotid artery stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment of carotid artery stenosis.

Authors:  Mandy D Müller; Philippe Lyrer; Martin M Brown; Leo H Bonati
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-02-25

Review 5.  Short term and intermediate term comparison of endarterectomy versus stenting for carotid artery stenosis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled clinical trials.

Authors:  Pascal Meier; Guido Knapp; Umesh Tamhane; Seemant Chaturvedi; Hitinder S Gurm
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-02-12

6.  Cardiac damage after carotid intervention: a meta-analysis after a decade of randomized trials.

Authors:  George Galyfos; Fragiska Sigala; Evridiki Karanikola; Chrisoula Loizou; Konstantinos Toutouzas; Konstantinos Filis
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2014-05-15       Impact factor: 2.078

Review 7.  Carotid artery stenting versus endarterectomy: a systematic review.

Authors:  Amir Gahremanpour; Emerson C Perin; Guilherme Silva
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  2012

8.  Inflammation and in-stent restenosis: the role of serum markers and stent characteristics in carotid artery stenting.

Authors:  Katrin Wasser; Sonja Schnaudigel; Janin Wohlfahrt; Marios-Nikos Psychogios; Michael Knauth; Klaus Gröschel
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-07-28       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Carotid Artery Stenting Versus Endarterectomy for Carotid Stenosis: A Chronological and Worldwide Study.

Authors:  Lei Zhang; Zhiqing Zhao; Yaoming Ouyang; Junmin Bao; Qingsheng Lu; Rui Feng; Jian Zhou; Zaiping Jing
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 1.889

10.  Stroke prevention: managing modifiable risk factors.

Authors:  Silvia Di Legge; Giacomo Koch; Marina Diomedi; Paolo Stanzione; Fabrizio Sallustio
Journal:  Stroke Res Treat       Date:  2012-11-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.