PURPOSE: To evaluate the immediate and long-term outcomes of drug-eluting stent (DES) vs. bare metal stent (BMS) for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis (VAS). METHODS: From 2003 to 2010, 206 consecutive patients (158 men; mean age 66.8 years) underwent DES (sirolimus-eluting or paclitaxel-eluting) or BMS placement for symptomatic extracranial and intracranial stenoses in 219 vertebral arteries. The technical success, clinical success, periprocedural complications, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and overall survival were compared between the DES and BMS groups. RESULTS: The technical success rate was 98.3% (119/121) for the DES group vs. 100% for the BMS group (p = 0.503). The clinical success rate was 95.5% (107/112) for the DES group vs. 97.9% (92/94) for the BMS group (p = 0.592). No periprocedural death or stroke occurred. The overall periprocedural complication rate was 2.7% (3/112) in the DES group vs. 4.3% (4/94) in BMS group (p = 0.813). The median follow-up was 43 months (range 3-95) for the DES group and 46 months (range 6-89) for BMS. At last follow-up, the TVR rate was 6.3% (7/112) for the DES group vs. 20.2% (19/94) for the BMS group (p = 0.003); 4 (3.6%) patients in the DES group and 8 (8.5%) patients in the BMS group experienced a VBS stroke (p = 0.132). By life-table analysis, the 5-year TVR rate was 4.5% (5/112) for the DES group vs. 19.1% (18/94) for the BMS group (p = 0.001). No difference was detected in the overall survival curves between the groups (p = 0.500). CONCLUSION: Both DES and BMS are feasible, safe, and effective for symptomatic VAS. However, DES can significantly decrease the TVR rate in the long term compared with BMS.
PURPOSE: To evaluate the immediate and long-term outcomes of drug-eluting stent (DES) vs. bare metal stent (BMS) for symptomatic vertebral artery stenosis (VAS). METHODS: From 2003 to 2010, 206 consecutive patients (158 men; mean age 66.8 years) underwent DES (sirolimus-eluting or paclitaxel-eluting) or BMS placement for symptomatic extracranial and intracranial stenoses in 219 vertebral arteries. The technical success, clinical success, periprocedural complications, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and overall survival were compared between the DES and BMS groups. RESULTS: The technical success rate was 98.3% (119/121) for the DES group vs. 100% for the BMS group (p = 0.503). The clinical success rate was 95.5% (107/112) for the DES group vs. 97.9% (92/94) for the BMS group (p = 0.592). No periprocedural death or stroke occurred. The overall periprocedural complication rate was 2.7% (3/112) in the DES group vs. 4.3% (4/94) in BMS group (p = 0.813). The median follow-up was 43 months (range 3-95) for the DES group and 46 months (range 6-89) for BMS. At last follow-up, the TVR rate was 6.3% (7/112) for the DES group vs. 20.2% (19/94) for the BMS group (p = 0.003); 4 (3.6%) patients in the DES group and 8 (8.5%) patients in the BMS group experienced a VBS stroke (p = 0.132). By life-table analysis, the 5-year TVR rate was 4.5% (5/112) for the DES group vs. 19.1% (18/94) for the BMS group (p = 0.001). No difference was detected in the overall survival curves between the groups (p = 0.500). CONCLUSION: Both DES and BMS are feasible, safe, and effective for symptomatic VAS. However, DES can significantly decrease the TVR rate in the long term compared with BMS.
Authors: Ran Xu; Xiao Zhang; Sihua Liu; Xue Wang; Wenjiao Wang; Kun Yang; Tao Wang; Adam A Dmytriw; Xuesong Bai; Yan Ma; Liqun Jiao; Bin Yang Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2022-05-17
Authors: Damian R Maciejewski; Piotr Pieniazek; Lukasz Tekieli; Piotr Paluszek; Tadeusz Przewlocki; Tomasz Tomaszewski; Roman Machnik; Mariusz Trystula; Jacek Legutko; Anna Kablak-Ziembicka Journal: Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 1.426