Yves Leonard Voss, Mousa Zidan, Alexander Radbruch, Igor Fischer, Franziska Dorn, Hannes Nordmeyer
{"title":"CGuard双层支架和颈动脉壁支架用于选择性颈动脉支架置入的比较评价:一项回顾性多中心研究。","authors":"Yves Leonard Voss, Mousa Zidan, Alexander Radbruch, Igor Fischer, Franziska Dorn, Hannes Nordmeyer","doi":"10.1007/s00234-025-03764-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the CGuard dual-layer stent with its mesh embolic protection system (EPS) in elective cases for treatment of internal carotid artery stenosis and compares it to the Carotid Wallstent as benchmark.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective, multicenter study, we analyzed data from consecutive patients who underwent carotid artery stenting with CGuard at two high-volume neurointerventional centers and compared them with prior consecutive patients treated with Carotid Wallstent (CWS), with and without a balloon guiding catheter (BGC) as protection, at the same institutions. Patient demographics, procedural details, clinical complications, early in-stent thrombosis and occlusion rates, and late follow-up restenosis rates were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 428 patients were treated, 144 with the CGuard stent, 203 with CWS + BGC and 83 with CWS-BGC, the majority of patients for symptomatic stenoses. Technical success was achieved in 98.6% of CGuard patients. No clinical complications were observed in CGuard patients, however the clinical complication rate was 2.96% (6/203) for CWS + BGC and 4.94% (4/83) for CWS-BGC patients (p = 0.052). The in-hospital stent occlusion rate was 0.69% (1/144) for CGuard and 2.1% (6/286) in CWS ± BGC patients (p = 0.49). On long-term follow-up (mean 9.9 months) the CGuard demonstrated a comparatively low rate of restenosis (6.25%) and retreatment (2.1%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The CGuard dual-layer stent was safe and effective for carotid artery stenting in our series. Its design appears to contribute to a low risk of periprocedural complications, high technical success rate, while maintaining restenosis rates comparable to the Carotid Wallstent.</p>","PeriodicalId":19422,"journal":{"name":"Neuroradiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative evaluation of the CGuard dual-layer stent and Carotid Wallstent for elective carotid artery stenting: a retrospective multicenter study.\",\"authors\":\"Yves Leonard Voss, Mousa Zidan, Alexander Radbruch, Igor Fischer, Franziska Dorn, Hannes Nordmeyer\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00234-025-03764-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the CGuard dual-layer stent with its mesh embolic protection system (EPS) in elective cases for treatment of internal carotid artery stenosis and compares it to the Carotid Wallstent as benchmark.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this retrospective, multicenter study, we analyzed data from consecutive patients who underwent carotid artery stenting with CGuard at two high-volume neurointerventional centers and compared them with prior consecutive patients treated with Carotid Wallstent (CWS), with and without a balloon guiding catheter (BGC) as protection, at the same institutions. Patient demographics, procedural details, clinical complications, early in-stent thrombosis and occlusion rates, and late follow-up restenosis rates were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 428 patients were treated, 144 with the CGuard stent, 203 with CWS + BGC and 83 with CWS-BGC, the majority of patients for symptomatic stenoses. Technical success was achieved in 98.6% of CGuard patients. No clinical complications were observed in CGuard patients, however the clinical complication rate was 2.96% (6/203) for CWS + BGC and 4.94% (4/83) for CWS-BGC patients (p = 0.052). The in-hospital stent occlusion rate was 0.69% (1/144) for CGuard and 2.1% (6/286) in CWS ± BGC patients (p = 0.49). On long-term follow-up (mean 9.9 months) the CGuard demonstrated a comparatively low rate of restenosis (6.25%) and retreatment (2.1%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The CGuard dual-layer stent was safe and effective for carotid artery stenting in our series. Its design appears to contribute to a low risk of periprocedural complications, high technical success rate, while maintaining restenosis rates comparable to the Carotid Wallstent.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19422,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neuroradiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neuroradiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-025-03764-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroradiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-025-03764-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparative evaluation of the CGuard dual-layer stent and Carotid Wallstent for elective carotid artery stenting: a retrospective multicenter study.
Purpose: This study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the CGuard dual-layer stent with its mesh embolic protection system (EPS) in elective cases for treatment of internal carotid artery stenosis and compares it to the Carotid Wallstent as benchmark.
Methods: In this retrospective, multicenter study, we analyzed data from consecutive patients who underwent carotid artery stenting with CGuard at two high-volume neurointerventional centers and compared them with prior consecutive patients treated with Carotid Wallstent (CWS), with and without a balloon guiding catheter (BGC) as protection, at the same institutions. Patient demographics, procedural details, clinical complications, early in-stent thrombosis and occlusion rates, and late follow-up restenosis rates were assessed.
Results: A total of 428 patients were treated, 144 with the CGuard stent, 203 with CWS + BGC and 83 with CWS-BGC, the majority of patients for symptomatic stenoses. Technical success was achieved in 98.6% of CGuard patients. No clinical complications were observed in CGuard patients, however the clinical complication rate was 2.96% (6/203) for CWS + BGC and 4.94% (4/83) for CWS-BGC patients (p = 0.052). The in-hospital stent occlusion rate was 0.69% (1/144) for CGuard and 2.1% (6/286) in CWS ± BGC patients (p = 0.49). On long-term follow-up (mean 9.9 months) the CGuard demonstrated a comparatively low rate of restenosis (6.25%) and retreatment (2.1%).
Conclusion: The CGuard dual-layer stent was safe and effective for carotid artery stenting in our series. Its design appears to contribute to a low risk of periprocedural complications, high technical success rate, while maintaining restenosis rates comparable to the Carotid Wallstent.
期刊介绍:
Neuroradiology aims to provide state-of-the-art medical and scientific information in the fields of Neuroradiology, Neurosciences, Neurology, Psychiatry, Neurosurgery, and related medical specialities. Neuroradiology as the official Journal of the European Society of Neuroradiology receives submissions from all parts of the world and publishes peer-reviewed original research, comprehensive reviews, educational papers, opinion papers, and short reports on exceptional clinical observations and new technical developments in the field of Neuroimaging and Neurointervention. The journal has subsections for Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, Advanced Neuroimaging, Paediatric Neuroradiology, Head-Neck-ENT Radiology, Spine Neuroradiology, and for submissions from Japan. Neuroradiology aims to provide new knowledge about and insights into the function and pathology of the human nervous system that may help to better diagnose and treat nervous system diseases. Neuroradiology is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and follows the COPE core practices. Neuroradiology prefers articles that are free of bias, self-critical regarding limitations, transparent and clear in describing study participants, methods, and statistics, and short in presenting results. Before peer-review all submissions are automatically checked by iThenticate to assess for potential overlap in prior publication.