These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Percutaneous carotid artery stenting in high-risk patients].
    Author: Kerner A, Gruberg L, Pitchersky S, Kouperberg E, Halabi M, Nikolsky E, Hoffman A, Beyar R.
    Journal: Harefuah; 2006 May; 145(5):338-41, 399, 398. PubMed ID: 16805212.
    Abstract:
    UNLABELLED: Recent studies have shown that percutaneous carotid artery angioplasty and stenting can be safely performed in patients with carotid artery stenosis, especially those considered to be at high-risk for surgery. AIM: We evaluated the safety and feasibility of carotid artery angioplasty and stenting, with and without distal protection devices in patients at high-risk for surgical endarterectomy. METHODS: A total of 169 consecutive patients underwent 185 procedures and 189 stents were deployed successfully in 195 lesions. The majority of patients (51%) had restenosis after a prior carotid endarterectomy, 40% were considered to be ineligible for carotid endarterectomy by both the vascular surgeons and the interventional cardiologist and 7% were considered ineligible for surgery due to hostile neck anatomy. RESULTS: Distal embolic protection devices were used in 52% of all cases. Procedural success was achieved in 181 of 185 procedures (98%). The overall rate of in-hospital major adverse cerebrovascular events (death, major stroke, and myocardial infarction) was 2.4%. In-hospital event rates in patients with prior carotid endarterectomy were comparable to patients with de novo lesions with 3.3% vs. 1.1% death/ stroke at 30 days, and 3.3% and 3.3% stroke/death rates at 30 days, respectively. When distal protection devices were used death/stroke rates were 0% as compared to 4.7% when distal protection was not used (p = NS). However, minor embolic phenomena were observed in both primary and secondary lesions independent of the use of distal protection. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the use of carotid artery angioplasty and stenting in high-risk patients with significant primary or secondary carotid artery stenosis. In both types of lesions, acceptable results justify its use as a valid revascularization method. While clinical embolic events occur in a minority of patients in both lesion types, they are not entirely prevented by distal protection devices.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]