Carotid Revascularization with and without the Use of an Embolic Protection Device: A Single-Center Experience from Pakistan.

Q1 Medicine
Interventional Neurology Pub Date : 2018-10-01 Epub Date: 2018-06-11 DOI:10.1159/000489711
Qasim Bashir, Ammad Anwar Baig
{"title":"Carotid Revascularization with and without the Use of an Embolic Protection Device: A Single-Center Experience from Pakistan.","authors":"Qasim Bashir,&nbsp;Ammad Anwar Baig","doi":"10.1159/000489711","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>To assess the safety and clinical efficacy of carotid artery stenting with and without an embolic protection device (EPD) in both symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid disease cases.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Retrospective data of 55 symptomatic (≥50% occlusion by digital subtraction angiography [DSA], ≥70% by ultrasound, computed tomography angiography [CTA], and magnetic resonance angiography [MRA]) and asymptomatic (≥60% by DSA, ≥70% by ultrasound, ≥80% by CTA and MRA) carotid disease cases undergoing carotid stenting/angioplasty revascularization from February 2014 to October 2017 was reviewed. All symptomatic patients either experienced recurrent transient ischemic attacks or one or more stroke attacks. An EPD protocol was designed for its selective use based on plaque morphologies and working diameters. The primary end points at 30 days of follow-up were a periprocedural incidence of any stroke, myocardial infarction or death, and ipsilateral stroke during the follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 55 cases, 39 were males and 16 females; mean age was 64.8 years. Fifty-one patients (92.7%) were symptomatic, with a mean stenosis of 80.1%. EPD was used in only 11 cases (20%). Minor stroke rate during the first 30 postoperative days was 1.8% (1 case) with EPD; no myocardial infarction or mortality. No stroke occurred during the median 1.5 years' follow-up.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on our single-center experience and findings of a relatively small sample size, carotid revascularization with stenting and angioplasty without EPD in experienced hands was found to be safe and efficacious. In addition, it proves cost-effective for patients by limiting the use of unnecessary disposables. These results are comparable to those reported in major trials and are well within the complication thresholds suggested in current guidelines. These results also show promise and illustrate the need for a larger, randomized controlled trial in order to thoroughly address this aspect of carotid revascularization.</p>","PeriodicalId":46280,"journal":{"name":"Interventional Neurology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000489711","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interventional Neurology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000489711","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/6/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: To assess the safety and clinical efficacy of carotid artery stenting with and without an embolic protection device (EPD) in both symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid disease cases.

Methods: Retrospective data of 55 symptomatic (≥50% occlusion by digital subtraction angiography [DSA], ≥70% by ultrasound, computed tomography angiography [CTA], and magnetic resonance angiography [MRA]) and asymptomatic (≥60% by DSA, ≥70% by ultrasound, ≥80% by CTA and MRA) carotid disease cases undergoing carotid stenting/angioplasty revascularization from February 2014 to October 2017 was reviewed. All symptomatic patients either experienced recurrent transient ischemic attacks or one or more stroke attacks. An EPD protocol was designed for its selective use based on plaque morphologies and working diameters. The primary end points at 30 days of follow-up were a periprocedural incidence of any stroke, myocardial infarction or death, and ipsilateral stroke during the follow-up period.

Results: Of the 55 cases, 39 were males and 16 females; mean age was 64.8 years. Fifty-one patients (92.7%) were symptomatic, with a mean stenosis of 80.1%. EPD was used in only 11 cases (20%). Minor stroke rate during the first 30 postoperative days was 1.8% (1 case) with EPD; no myocardial infarction or mortality. No stroke occurred during the median 1.5 years' follow-up.

Conclusion: Based on our single-center experience and findings of a relatively small sample size, carotid revascularization with stenting and angioplasty without EPD in experienced hands was found to be safe and efficacious. In addition, it proves cost-effective for patients by limiting the use of unnecessary disposables. These results are comparable to those reported in major trials and are well within the complication thresholds suggested in current guidelines. These results also show promise and illustrate the need for a larger, randomized controlled trial in order to thoroughly address this aspect of carotid revascularization.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

使用和不使用栓塞保护装置的颈动脉重建术:来自巴基斯坦的单中心经验。
背景:评价有无栓塞保护装置(EPD)的颈动脉支架置入术治疗有症状和无症状颈动脉疾病的安全性和临床疗效。方法:回顾性分析2014年2月至2017年10月行颈动脉支架/血管成形术重建术的55例有症状(数字减影血管造影[DSA]闭塞≥50%,超声、计算机断层血管造影[CTA]闭塞≥70%,磁共振血管造影[MRA]闭塞≥70%)和无症状(DSA≥60%,超声≥70%,CTA和MRA≥80%)颈动脉疾病患者的资料。所有有症状的患者都经历过反复的短暂性脑缺血发作或一次或多次脑卒中发作。EPD方案是根据其斑块形态和工作直径设计的选择性使用。随访30天的主要终点是随访期间卒中、心肌梗死或死亡的围手术期发生率和同侧卒中。结果:55例患者中,男39例,女16例;平均年龄64.8岁。51例(92.7%)患者有症状,平均狭窄率为80.1%。仅11例(20%)使用了EPD。EPD组术后30天轻度脑卒中发生率1.8%(1例);无心肌梗塞或死亡。在平均1.5年的随访期间没有发生中风。结论:基于我们的单中心经验和相对较小样本量的发现,在经验丰富的人手中进行无EPD的颈动脉支架置入术和血管成形术是安全有效的。此外,它通过限制使用不必要的一次性用品,证明对患者具有成本效益。这些结果与主要试验报告的结果相当,并且完全在当前指南建议的并发症阈值之内。这些结果也显示出希望,并说明需要进行更大规模的随机对照试验,以彻底解决颈动脉血运重建术的这方面问题。
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
Interventional Neurology
Interventional Neurology CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
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