Stents in the treatment of renal artery stenosis: long-term follow-up.

M Henry, M Amor, I Henry, G Ethevenot, K Tzvetanov, A Courvoisier, B Mentre, Z Chati
{"title":"Stents in the treatment of renal artery stenosis: long-term follow-up.","authors":"M Henry,&nbsp;M Amor,&nbsp;I Henry,&nbsp;G Ethevenot,&nbsp;K Tzvetanov,&nbsp;A Courvoisier,&nbsp;B Mentre,&nbsp;Z Chati","doi":"10.1583/1074-6218(1999)006<0042:SITTOR>2.0.CO;2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the role of percutaneous stenting in the treatment of renal arterial lesions after failure of balloon angioplasty.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Two hundred ten patients (139 males; mean age 67.7 +/- 9.9 years, range 27 to 87) had 259 balloon-expandable stents (165 Palmaz and 94 Renal Bridge stents) implanted in 244 renal artery stenoses (171 ostial and 73 nonostial lesions). The patients were suffering from intractable hypertension (n = 210) and/or renal dysfunction (n = 48). The majority of the lesions (n = 234) were atheromatous in origin. Stents were implanted for suboptimal balloon dilation (n = 182, 75%), restenotic lesions (n = 27, 11%), or dissection (n = 9, 4%); 26 (11%) ostial lesions were stented primarily. Mean lesion length was 11.9 +/- 4.4 mm (range 5 to 30) and mean percent stenosis was 81.9% +/- 8.25% (range 70 to 100).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Immediate technical success was 99% (241 of 244). Three (1.2%) major complications included one intraprocedural stent thrombosis, one arterial perforation manifesting as a perirenal hematoma 24 hours after the procedure, and one renal arterial rupture. Follow-up over a mean 25.4 +/- 22.8 months (range 1 to 96) in 185 eligible patients (209 arteries) found 24 cases of restenosis (11.4%). Primary and secondary patencies for all lesions at 60 months were 79% and 98%, respectively, with no significant differences between ostial and nonostial lesions or stent types. Hypertension was reversed in 35 (19%), improved in 112 (61%), and remained unchanged in 37 (20%). Renal function was improved in 29% (14 of 48), unchanged in 67% (32 of 48), and worse in 4% (2 of 48).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Renal artery stenting is safe, effective, and may be an alternative to surgery, particularly in ostial lesions. Our experience shows reduction in the restenosis rate compared to conventional angioplasty. All ostial stenoses should be stented.</p>","PeriodicalId":79443,"journal":{"name":"Journal of endovascular surgery : the official journal of the International Society for Endovascular Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"66","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of endovascular surgery : the official journal of the International Society for Endovascular Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1583/1074-6218(1999)006<0042:SITTOR>2.0.CO;2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 66

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the role of percutaneous stenting in the treatment of renal arterial lesions after failure of balloon angioplasty.

Methods: Two hundred ten patients (139 males; mean age 67.7 +/- 9.9 years, range 27 to 87) had 259 balloon-expandable stents (165 Palmaz and 94 Renal Bridge stents) implanted in 244 renal artery stenoses (171 ostial and 73 nonostial lesions). The patients were suffering from intractable hypertension (n = 210) and/or renal dysfunction (n = 48). The majority of the lesions (n = 234) were atheromatous in origin. Stents were implanted for suboptimal balloon dilation (n = 182, 75%), restenotic lesions (n = 27, 11%), or dissection (n = 9, 4%); 26 (11%) ostial lesions were stented primarily. Mean lesion length was 11.9 +/- 4.4 mm (range 5 to 30) and mean percent stenosis was 81.9% +/- 8.25% (range 70 to 100).

Results: Immediate technical success was 99% (241 of 244). Three (1.2%) major complications included one intraprocedural stent thrombosis, one arterial perforation manifesting as a perirenal hematoma 24 hours after the procedure, and one renal arterial rupture. Follow-up over a mean 25.4 +/- 22.8 months (range 1 to 96) in 185 eligible patients (209 arteries) found 24 cases of restenosis (11.4%). Primary and secondary patencies for all lesions at 60 months were 79% and 98%, respectively, with no significant differences between ostial and nonostial lesions or stent types. Hypertension was reversed in 35 (19%), improved in 112 (61%), and remained unchanged in 37 (20%). Renal function was improved in 29% (14 of 48), unchanged in 67% (32 of 48), and worse in 4% (2 of 48).

Conclusions: Renal artery stenting is safe, effective, and may be an alternative to surgery, particularly in ostial lesions. Our experience shows reduction in the restenosis rate compared to conventional angioplasty. All ostial stenoses should be stented.

支架治疗肾动脉狭窄:长期随访。
目的:探讨球囊血管成形术失败后经皮肾动脉支架置入术在肾动脉病变治疗中的作用。方法:210例患者(男性139例;平均年龄67.7±9.9岁,范围27 ~ 87岁),244例肾动脉狭窄(171例为开口病变,73例为非开口病变)植入259例球囊扩张支架(165例为Palmaz支架,94例为肾桥支架)。患者均患有顽固性高血压(n = 210)和/或肾功能不全(n = 48)。大多数病变(n = 234)起源于动脉粥样硬化。因球囊扩张不理想(n = 182, 75%)、再狭窄病变(n = 27, 11%)或夹层(n = 9, 4%)植入支架;26例(11%)口部病变以支架置入术为主。平均病变长度为11.9 +/- 4.4 mm(范围5 ~ 30),狭窄平均百分比为81.9% +/- 8.25%(范围70 ~ 100)。结果:即刻技术成功率为99%(244例中有241例)。3例(1.2%)主要并发症包括1例术中支架血栓形成,1例动脉穿孔,表现为术后24小时肾周血肿,1例肾动脉破裂。185例符合条件的患者(209条动脉)平均随访25.4±22.8个月(1 ~ 96个月),发现24例再狭窄(11.4%)。60个月时,所有病变的原发性和继发性通畅率分别为79%和98%,在孔道和非孔道病变或支架类型之间无显著差异。35例(19%)高血压逆转,112例(61%)好转,37例(20%)保持不变。29%的患者(14 / 48)肾功能改善,67%的患者(32 / 48)肾功能不变,4%的患者(2 / 48)肾功能恶化。结论:肾动脉支架置入术是安全、有效的,可以作为手术的一种替代方法,特别是对于口部病变。我们的经验表明,与传统血管成形术相比,再狭窄率降低。所有口部狭窄都应支架置入。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信