颈动脉支架术后颈动脉几何形状的改变及临床意义。

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Edoardo Pasqui, Bruno Gargiulo, Leonardo Pasquetti, Elisa Lazzeri, Giuseppe Galzerano, Gianmarco de Donato
{"title":"颈动脉支架术后颈动脉几何形状的改变及临床意义。","authors":"Edoardo Pasqui, Bruno Gargiulo, Leonardo Pasquetti, Elisa Lazzeri, Giuseppe Galzerano, Gianmarco de Donato","doi":"10.3390/jpm14111091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Carotid artery stenting (CAS) could lead to a modification of the carotid bifurcation geometry with possible clinical implications. This study aimed to clarify the geometrical impact of three carotid stents with different designs on the carotid bifurcation and its clinical consequences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective single-center study. We included all patients who underwent CAS in a 3-year period. Anatomical changes of the carotid bifurcation were evaluated by reviewing angiographic images. The population was divided into three groups based on the stent implanted: Group 1 (Carotid Wallstent), Group 2 (Roadsaver), and Group 3 (C-Guard).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 226 patients were included. The mean age was 77.0 ± 7.4 years and 72.5% (164/226) were male. Three different stents were implanted into three groups: Group 1 (<i>n</i> = 131/226, 58%), Group 2 (<i>n</i> = 57/226, 25.2%), and Group 3 (<i>n</i> = 38/226, 16.8%). The mean pre-stent implantation CCA-ICA angle of the entire population was 155 ± 14.9°, and the post-CAS angle was 167.7 ± 8.7° (<i>p</i> = 0.0001). In every subgroup, the difference was statistically different, with the biggest difference registered in Group 2 (-16.1 ± 13.2°). Regarding stent oversizing, there was a significant relationship between CCA oversizing and CCA-ICA angle modification (<i>p</i> = 0.006). During follow-up, a total of 14 (6.2%) restenoses were registered. The mean CCA-ICA angle modification in the restenosis group was -9.5 ± 14.4° vs. -12.8 ± 11.9° in the no-restenosis group with no significant statistical differences were outlined (<i>p</i> = 0.3).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to the Carotid Wallstent and C-Guard, the Roadsaver stent appears to have a lower adaptability to the carotid vascular territory, resulting in a higher CCA-ICA angle modification after implantation, with no impact on the stent restenosis rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":16722,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Personalized Medicine","volume":"14 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11595456/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Carotid Artery Geometry Modifications and Clinical Implications after Carotid Artery Stenting.\",\"authors\":\"Edoardo Pasqui, Bruno Gargiulo, Leonardo Pasquetti, Elisa Lazzeri, Giuseppe Galzerano, Gianmarco de Donato\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/jpm14111091\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Carotid artery stenting (CAS) could lead to a modification of the carotid bifurcation geometry with possible clinical implications. This study aimed to clarify the geometrical impact of three carotid stents with different designs on the carotid bifurcation and its clinical consequences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective single-center study. We included all patients who underwent CAS in a 3-year period. Anatomical changes of the carotid bifurcation were evaluated by reviewing angiographic images. The population was divided into three groups based on the stent implanted: Group 1 (Carotid Wallstent), Group 2 (Roadsaver), and Group 3 (C-Guard).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 226 patients were included. The mean age was 77.0 ± 7.4 years and 72.5% (164/226) were male. Three different stents were implanted into three groups: Group 1 (<i>n</i> = 131/226, 58%), Group 2 (<i>n</i> = 57/226, 25.2%), and Group 3 (<i>n</i> = 38/226, 16.8%). The mean pre-stent implantation CCA-ICA angle of the entire population was 155 ± 14.9°, and the post-CAS angle was 167.7 ± 8.7° (<i>p</i> = 0.0001). In every subgroup, the difference was statistically different, with the biggest difference registered in Group 2 (-16.1 ± 13.2°). Regarding stent oversizing, there was a significant relationship between CCA oversizing and CCA-ICA angle modification (<i>p</i> = 0.006). During follow-up, a total of 14 (6.2%) restenoses were registered. The mean CCA-ICA angle modification in the restenosis group was -9.5 ± 14.4° vs. -12.8 ± 11.9° in the no-restenosis group with no significant statistical differences were outlined (<i>p</i> = 0.3).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to the Carotid Wallstent and C-Guard, the Roadsaver stent appears to have a lower adaptability to the carotid vascular territory, resulting in a higher CCA-ICA angle modification after implantation, with no impact on the stent restenosis rate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16722,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Personalized Medicine\",\"volume\":\"14 11\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11595456/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Personalized Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm14111091\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Personalized Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm14111091","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:颈动脉支架置入术(CAS)可导致颈动脉分叉几何形状发生改变,并可能对临床产生影响。本研究旨在阐明三种不同设计的颈动脉支架对颈动脉分叉的几何影响及其临床后果:这是一项回顾性单中心研究。方法:这是一项回顾性的单中心研究,我们纳入了 3 年内接受 CAS 手术的所有患者。通过查看血管造影图像评估颈动脉分叉的解剖学变化。根据植入的支架将患者分为三组:第一组(颈动脉壁支架)、第二组(Roadsaver)和第三组(C-Guard):结果:共纳入 226 名患者。平均年龄为 77.0 ± 7.4 岁,72.5%(164/226)为男性。三组患者分别植入了三种不同的支架:第一组(n = 131/226,58%)、第二组(n = 57/226,25.2%)和第三组(n = 38/226,16.8%)。整个人群支架植入前的平均 CCA-ICA 角度为 155 ± 14.9°,CAS 后的角度为 167.7 ± 8.7°(P = 0.0001)。每个亚组的差异都有统计学意义,其中第 2 组的差异最大(-16.1 ± 13.2°)。关于支架过大,CCA 过大与 CCA-ICA 角度改变之间存在显著关系(p = 0.006)。在随访期间,共有 14 例(6.2%)再狭窄。再狭窄组的平均CCA-ICA角度变化为-9.5 ± 14.4°,而未再狭窄组为-12.8 ± 11.9°,无明显统计学差异(p = 0.3):结论:与颈动脉 Wallstent 和 C-Guard 相比,Roadsaver 支架似乎对颈动脉血管区域的适应性较低,导致植入后 CCA-ICA 角度变化较大,但对支架再狭窄率没有影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Carotid Artery Geometry Modifications and Clinical Implications after Carotid Artery Stenting.

Background: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) could lead to a modification of the carotid bifurcation geometry with possible clinical implications. This study aimed to clarify the geometrical impact of three carotid stents with different designs on the carotid bifurcation and its clinical consequences.

Methods: This was a retrospective single-center study. We included all patients who underwent CAS in a 3-year period. Anatomical changes of the carotid bifurcation were evaluated by reviewing angiographic images. The population was divided into three groups based on the stent implanted: Group 1 (Carotid Wallstent), Group 2 (Roadsaver), and Group 3 (C-Guard).

Results: A total of 226 patients were included. The mean age was 77.0 ± 7.4 years and 72.5% (164/226) were male. Three different stents were implanted into three groups: Group 1 (n = 131/226, 58%), Group 2 (n = 57/226, 25.2%), and Group 3 (n = 38/226, 16.8%). The mean pre-stent implantation CCA-ICA angle of the entire population was 155 ± 14.9°, and the post-CAS angle was 167.7 ± 8.7° (p = 0.0001). In every subgroup, the difference was statistically different, with the biggest difference registered in Group 2 (-16.1 ± 13.2°). Regarding stent oversizing, there was a significant relationship between CCA oversizing and CCA-ICA angle modification (p = 0.006). During follow-up, a total of 14 (6.2%) restenoses were registered. The mean CCA-ICA angle modification in the restenosis group was -9.5 ± 14.4° vs. -12.8 ± 11.9° in the no-restenosis group with no significant statistical differences were outlined (p = 0.3).

Conclusions: Compared to the Carotid Wallstent and C-Guard, the Roadsaver stent appears to have a lower adaptability to the carotid vascular territory, resulting in a higher CCA-ICA angle modification after implantation, with no impact on the stent restenosis rate.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Personalized Medicine
Journal of Personalized Medicine Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1878
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Personalized Medicine (JPM; ISSN 2075-4426) is an international, open access journal aimed at bringing all aspects of personalized medicine to one platform. JPM publishes cutting edge, innovative preclinical and translational scientific research and technologies related to personalized medicine (e.g., pharmacogenomics/proteomics, systems biology). JPM recognizes that personalized medicine—the assessment of genetic, environmental and host factors that cause variability of individuals—is a challenging, transdisciplinary topic that requires discussions from a range of experts. For a comprehensive perspective of personalized medicine, JPM aims to integrate expertise from the molecular and translational sciences, therapeutics and diagnostics, as well as discussions of regulatory, social, ethical and policy aspects. We provide a forum to bring together academic and clinical researchers, biotechnology, diagnostic and pharmaceutical companies, health professionals, regulatory and ethical experts, and government and regulatory authorities.
×
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