Literature DB >> 30552039

The incidence of carotid in-stent stenosis is underestimated ≥50% or ≥80% and its clinical implications.

Ali F AbuRahma1, Zachary T AbuRahma2, Grant Scott2, Elliot Adams2, Abe Mata2, Matthew Beasley2, L Scott Dean3, Elaine Davis3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The incidence of carotid in-stent stenosis has been reported to vary between 1% and 30%. Most published studies have short follow-up, which may lead to underestimation of the incidence of in-stent stenosis. This study analyzed the incidence of ≥50% and ≥80% in-stent stenosis using validated duplex ultrasound criteria and its clinical implications.
METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of 450 carotid artery stenting (CAS) procedures (February 6, 2001-December 19, 2016). All patients had postoperative carotid duplex ultrasound examination, which was repeated at 1 month, 6 months, and every 6 to 12 months thereafter. A Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate rates of freedom from ≥50% in-stent stenosis (internal carotid artery peak systolic velocity of ≥224 cm/s) and ≥80% in-stent stenosis (internal carotid artery peak systolic velocity of ≥325 cm/s), freedom from reintervention, and survival.
RESULTS: The mean age was 68.3 years, with a mean follow-up of 40.3 months. A total of 201 patients (45% [201/450]) had CAS for symptomatic disease. Primary CAS was done in 291 patients (65%); in the remaining 35%, CAS was done for postcarotid endarterectomy (CEA) stenosis. A total of 101 patients (23%) had ≥50% late carotid in-stent stenosis, and of these, 33 (7.4%) had ≥80% in-stent stenosis. Nineteen patients (4.3%) developed late transient ischemic attack and three (0.7%) late stroke. Twenty-three (5.2%) patients had late reintervention. Rates of freedom from ≥50% in-stent stenosis in the whole series were 85%, 79%, 75%, 72%, and 70% at 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, and 5 years, respectively. The rates of freedom from ≥50% in-stent stenosis for primary CAS and CAS for post-CEA stenosis were not statistically significant (P = .540). The rates of freedom from ≥80% in-stent stenosis for the whole series were 96%, 95%, 93%, 90%, and 89% at 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, and 5 years, respectively. The rates of freedom from ≥80% in-stent stenosis for primary CAS and CAS for post-CEA stenosis were also not statistically significant (P = .516). Rates of freedom from reintervention were 98%, 96%, 93%, 93%, and 91% at 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, and 5 years, respectively, and there were no significant differences between primary CAS and CAS for post-CEA stenosis (P = .939). The overall late survival rates were 99%, 97%, 96%, 94%, and 91% at 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, 4 years, and 5 years.
CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of ≥50% in-stent stenosis is relatively high; however, the rates of ≥80% stenosis and late neurologic events are low. Longer follow-up of patients with ≥50% carotid in-stent stenosis may yield higher incidence of ≥80% stenosis.
Copyright © 2018 Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Carotid artery stenting; Carotid endarterectomy; Carotid in-stent stenosis; Restenosis

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30552039      PMCID: PMC6548627          DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2018.08.185

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


  33 in total

1.  Restenosis after carotid angioplasty, stenting, or endarterectomy in the Carotid and Vertebral Artery Transluminal Angioplasty Study (CAVATAS).

Authors:  Dominick J H McCabe; Anthony C Pereira; Andrew Clifton; J Martin Bland; Martin M Brown
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2005-01-13       Impact factor: 7.914

2.  Comparative study of operative treatment and percutaneous transluminal angioplasty/stenting for recurrent carotid disease.

Authors:  A F Aburahma; M C Bates; P A Stone; J T Wulu
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 4.268

3.  Safety, efficacy, and durability of carotid artery stenting for restenosis following carotid endarterectomy: a multicenter study.

Authors:  G New; G S Roubin; S S Iyer; J J Vitek; M H Wholey; E B Diethrich; L N Hopkins; R W Hobson; M B Leon; S V Myla; F Shawl; S R Ramee; J S Yadav; K Rosenfield; M W Liu; C R Gomez; N Al-Mubarak; W A Gray; W A Tan; J E Goldstin; R S Stack
Journal:  J Endovasc Ther       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 3.487

4.  Acute-phase response after stent implantation in the carotid artery: association with 6-month in-stent restenosis.

Authors:  Martin Schillinger; Markus Exner; Wolfgang Mlekusch; Helmut Rumpold; Ramazanali Ahmadi; Schila Sabeti; Wilfried Lang; Oswald Wagner; Erich Minar
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-03-20       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  In-stent recurrent stenosis after carotid artery stenting: life table analysis and clinical relevance.

Authors:  Brajesh K Lal; Robert W Hobson; Jonathan Goldstein; Madge Geohagan; Elie Chakhtoura; Peter J Pappas; Zafar Jamil; Paul B Haser; Shubha Varma; Frank T Padberg; Joaquim J Cerveira
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.268

6.  Predictors of restenosis after successful carotid artery stenting.

Authors:  Masroor A Khan; Ming W Liu; Francisco L Chio; Gary S Roubin; Sriram S Iyer; Jiri J Vitek
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2003-10-01       Impact factor: 2.778

7.  Protected carotid-artery stenting versus endarterectomy in high-risk patients.

Authors:  Jay S Yadav; Mark H Wholey; Richard E Kuntz; Pierre Fayad; Barry T Katzen; Gregory J Mishkel; Tanvir K Bajwa; Patrick Whitlow; Neil E Strickman; Michael R Jaff; Jeffrey J Popma; David B Snead; Donald E Cutlip; Brian G Firth; Kenneth Ouriel
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2004-10-07       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Endarterectomy vs. Angioplasty in Patients with Symptomatic Severe Carotid Stenosis (EVA-3S) Trial.

Authors: 
Journal:  Cerebrovasc Dis       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 2.762

9.  Carotid artery stenting: analysis of data for 105 patients at high risk.

Authors:  Robert W Hobson; Brajesh K Lal; Elie Chakhtoura; Jonathan Goldstein; Paul B Haser; Richard Kubicka; Joaquim Cerveira; Peter J Pappas; Frank T Padberg; Zafar Jamil; Ellie Chaktoura
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 4.268

10.  Carotid artery stenting: is there a need to revise ultrasound velocity criteria?

Authors:  Brajesh K Lal; Robert W Hobson; Jonathan Goldstein; Elie Y Chakhtoura; Walter N Durán
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.268

View more
  1 in total

1.  Poststent ballooning during transcarotid artery revascularization.

Authors:  Hanaa Dakour-Aridi; Christina L Cui; Andrew Barleben; Marc L Schermerhorn; Jens Eldrup-Jorgensen; Mahmoud B Malas
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2020-11-27       Impact factor: 4.860

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.