BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the procedural safety, clinical, and angiographic outcome of carotid angioplasty and stenting for high-grade (≥70%) radiation-induced carotid stenosis (RIS) using atherosclerotic stenosis (AS) as a control. METHODS: In this 6-year prospective nonrandomized study, we compared the carotid angioplasty and stenting outcome of 65 consecutive patients (84 vessels) with RIS with that of a control group of 129 consecutive patients (150 vessels) with AS. Study end points were 30-day periprocedural stroke or death, ipsilateral ischemic stroke, technical success, procedural characteristics, instent restenosis (ISR; ≥50%) and symptomatic ISR. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 47.3 months (95% confidence interval, 26.9-61.6). Imaging assessment was available in 74 vessels (RIS) and 120 vessels (AS) in 2 years. Comparing RIS group with AS group, the rates of periprocedural stroke or death were 1.5% (1/65) versus 1.6% (2/129; P=1); ipsilateral ischemic stroke rates were 4.6% (3/65) versus 4.7% (6/129; P=1); the annual risks of ipsilateral ischemic stroke were 1.2% (3 patient/254.7 patient year) versus 1.2% (6 patient/494.2 patient year; P=0.89); technical success rates were both 100%. Stenting of common carotid artery and the use of multiple stents was more common in the RIS group (P=0 in both cases); ISR rates were 25.7% (19/74) versus 4.2% (5/120; P<0.001); symptomatic ISR rates were 6.8% (5/74) versus 0.8% (1/120; P=0.031). CONCLUSIONS: The safety, effectiveness, and technical difficulty of carotid angioplasty and stenting for RIS are comparable with that for AS although it is associated with a higher rate of ISR. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was not registered as enrollment started in 2006.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the procedural safety, clinical, and angiographic outcome of carotid angioplasty and stenting for high-grade (≥70%) radiation-induced carotid stenosis (RIS) using atherosclerotic stenosis (AS) as a control. METHODS: In this 6-year prospective nonrandomized study, we compared the carotid angioplasty and stenting outcome of 65 consecutive patients (84 vessels) with RIS with that of a control group of 129 consecutive patients (150 vessels) with AS. Study end points were 30-day periprocedural stroke or death, ipsilateral ischemic stroke, technical success, procedural characteristics, instent restenosis (ISR; ≥50%) and symptomatic ISR. RESULTS: The median follow-up was 47.3 months (95% confidence interval, 26.9-61.6). Imaging assessment was available in 74 vessels (RIS) and 120 vessels (AS) in 2 years. Comparing RIS group with AS group, the rates of periprocedural stroke or death were 1.5% (1/65) versus 1.6% (2/129; P=1); ipsilateral ischemic stroke rates were 4.6% (3/65) versus 4.7% (6/129; P=1); the annual risks of ipsilateral ischemic stroke were 1.2% (3 patient/254.7 patient year) versus 1.2% (6 patient/494.2 patient year; P=0.89); technical success rates were both 100%. Stenting of common carotid artery and the use of multiple stents was more common in the RIS group (P=0 in both cases); ISR rates were 25.7% (19/74) versus 4.2% (5/120; P<0.001); symptomatic ISR rates were 6.8% (5/74) versus 0.8% (1/120; P=0.031). CONCLUSIONS: The safety, effectiveness, and technical difficulty of carotid angioplasty and stenting for RIS are comparable with that for AS although it is associated with a higher rate of ISR. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was not registered as enrollment started in 2006.
Entities:
Keywords:
carotid stenosis; head and neck neoplasms; outcome and process assessment (health care); radiotherapy
Authors: Umberto Campia; Javid J Moslehi; Laleh Amiri-Kordestani; Ana Barac; Joshua A Beckman; David D Chism; Paul Cohen; John D Groarke; Joerg Herrmann; Carolyn M Reilly; Neal L Weintraub Journal: Circulation Date: 2019-03-26 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Erin S Murphy; Hao Xie; Thomas E Merchant; Jennifer S Yu; Samuel T Chao; John H Suh Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2015-02-12 Impact factor: 4.130