Clinical Outcomes Following Protected Carotid Artery Stenting in Symptomatic and Asymptomatic Patients

[Functional assessment of internal carotid artery tortuosity in patients with multifocal atherosclerosis]

The review is devoted to diagnosis and treatment of internal carotid artery tortuosity. The authors consider modern classification, epidemiology and diagnostic options using neuroimaging or ultrasound-assisted functional stress tests depending on medical history and complaints. In addition to standard Doppler ultrasound, rotational and orthostatic tests are advisable due to possible changes of local shape and hemodynamic parameters following body position changes, especially in patients with concomitant atherosclerotic stenosis. Thus, a personalized approach is especially important for treatment and diagnostics of internal carotid artery tortuosity.

Clinical Outcomes of Second- versus First-Generation Carotid Stents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Single-cohort studies suggest that second-generation stents (SGS; “mesh stents”) may improve carotid artery stenting (CAS) outcomes by limiting peri- and postprocedural cerebral embolism. SGS differ in the stent frame construction, mesh material, and design, as well as in mesh-to-frame position (inside/outside). Objectives: To compare clinical outcomes of SGS in relation to first-generation stents (FGSs; single-layer) in CAS. Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies with FGSs and SGS (PRISMA methodology, 3302 records). Endpoints were 30-day death, stroke, myocardial infarction (DSM), and 12-month ipsilateral stroke (IS) and restenosis (ISR). A random-effect model was applied. Results: Data of 68,422 patients from 112 eligible studies (68.2% men, 44.9% symptomatic) were meta-analyzed. Thirty-day DSM was 1.30% vs. 4.11% (p < 0.01, data for SGS vs. FGS). Among SGS, both Casper/Roadsaver and CGuard reduced 30-day DSM (by 2.78 and 3.03 absolute percent, p = 0.02 and p < 0.001), whereas the Gore stent was neutral. SGSs significantly improved outcomes compared with closed-cell FGS (30-day stroke 0.6% vs. 2.32%, p = 0.014; DSM 1.3% vs. 3.15%, p < 0.01). At 12 months, in relation to FGS, Casper/Roadsaver reduced IS (−3.25%, p < 0.05) but increased ISR (+3.19%, p = 0.04), CGuard showed a reduction in both IS and ISR (−3.13%, −3.63%; p = 0.01, p < 0.01), whereas the Gore stent was neutral. Conclusions: Pooled SGS use was associated with improved short- and long-term clinical results of CAS. Individual SGS types, however, differed significantly in their outcomes, indicating a lack of a “mesh stent” class effect. Findings from this meta-analysis may provide clinically relevant information in anticipation of large-scale randomized trials.

Mid-term and late results of endovascular treatment for symptomatic carotid artery stenosis under proximal protection

Introduction

Although filters are still preferred during carotid stenting, proximal protection systems (PPS) are increasingly used during these procedures. PPS seem to be safer than distal systems, especially in symptomatic patients, but evidence supporting their use is limited.

Aim

This was a post hoc survey with 30-day mid-term and long-term follow up, which was aimed at assessment of the safety and efficacy of stenting of the internal carotid artery under PPS in symptomatic patients.

Material and methods

We analysed the results of stenting in 120 symptomatic patients presenting with at least 60% stenosis. Patients were aged 67.9 ±9.8 years, and 12 patients were older than 80 years. An occlusion of contralateral artery was found in 5 patients and bilateral stenosis in 26 patients. The primary endpoint of this study was the proportion of patients who had new neurological events, including transient ischemic attack and minor or major stroke in 30-day follow-up. The secondary endpoint was a composite of technical and clinical success. During long-term follow-up we assessed new neurological events and stenoses of implanted stents.

Results

The incidence of new neurological events during 30-day follow-up was 0.8%. The rate of technical success defined by secondary endpoint was 100%. Mean internal carotid artery stenosis before and after stent implantation was 93.8 ±9% and 8.4 ±6.3%, respectively (p < 0.001). Procedural success was achieved in all cases. During long-term follow-up there were two (1.7%) asymptomatic in-stent stenoses and no (0%) new neurological events.

Conclusions

Endovascular management of symptomatic carotid stenosis under PPS is safe, feasible, and appears to be a good alternative to surgical endarterectomy.

Carotid Artery Stenting Without Embolic Protection Device: A Single-Center Experience

PURPOSE

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of carotid artery stenting (CAS) performed without an embolic protection device (EPD) in a selected group of asymptomatic patients with primary internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis or restenosis after carotid endarterectomy (CEA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between May 2015 and May 2018, 77 patients (mean age 77 years; 60 men) underwent CAS without any embolic protection device. Forty-seven (61%) patients had primary ICA stenosis and were excluded from CEA because of high surgical risk; the other 30 (39%) patients had post-CEA restenosis (n=26) or a distal ICA flap after eversion CEA (n=4). The mean ICA stenosis was 82%. All procedures were performed from a femoral artery access. Pre- and/or postdilation were used in 64 patients. The primary outcome was the incidence of major complications (death, stroke, or myocardial infarction) during the procedure and within 30 days; the secondary outcome was the incidence of restenosis in follow-up.

RESULTS

No relevant bradycardia was encountered during CAS. The combined rate of stroke, death, or myocardial infarction at 30 days was 1.3%. The single stroke patient recovered fully after 2 months. Over a follow-up that ranged to 3 years (mean 24±18 months), no further neurological events were recorded. One (1.3%) patient had a >70% restenosis after 6 months; the lesion was dilated, successfully restoring the lumen contour.

CONCLUSION

In our series, endovascular treatment of carotid stenosis without the use of protection devices in patients with primary stenosis or postsurgical restenosis can achieve satisfactory safety and efficacy outcomes. The choice of performing CAS without using EPDs should follow a tailored approach based on the appropriate patient anatomy and specific clinical parameters to minimize neurological complications.

Early results of endovascular treatment of patients with bilateral stenoses of the internal carotid arteries using proximal protection systems at 30-day follow-up

BACKGROUND

Although surgical endarterectomy remains the treatment of choice for carotid artery stenosis, carotid artery stenting (CAS) with use of proximal protection systems (PPS) plays an very important role as alternative treatment modality, especially in patients with critical, symptomatic lesions. This study was single-centre study to evaluate the technical and clinical success of proximal protection devices as the first choice for embolic protection in symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis in patients with bilateral, advanced lesions of carotid arteries (bilateral stenoses or stenosis and occlusion).

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis, with 30-day follow up. We analyzed results of treatment of 38 patients who underwent 38 CAS with PPS, 17 such procedures in asymptomatic (group A), and 21 in symptomatic individuals (group B). The GORE^® Flow Reversal System (W.L. Gore, Flagstaff, AZ, USA) was used in 2 patients, and the Mo.Ma Ultra device (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA) in 36 patients. Mean age was 68±7 years, 65% percent of patient were male.

RESULTS

There were no procedural and during 30-day follow-up neurologic events. Intolerance of occlusion system occurred in 4 patients (11%) in both groups with any later symptoms. Risk factors of this adverse event comprised: lesions of the left internal carotid lesion and coexisiting diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSIONS

CAS in high risk patients with bilateral lesions of carotid arteries with the use of PPS seems to be a relatively very safe procedure.

Patient- and lesion-tailored algorithm of endovascular treatment for arterial occlusive disease of extracranial arteries supplying the brain: safety of the treatment at 30-day follow-up

Introduction

Although surgical endarterectomy remains the treatment of choice for carotid artery stenosis, stenting plays an important role as an alternative treatment modality, especially in high-risk patients. The actual safety profile associated with stenting procedures is probably better than that reported by randomized controlled trials.

Aim

To assess the safety of stent implantations in extracranial arteries supplying the brain, and also to identify risk factors associated with this procedure.

Material and methods

This was a post hoc analysis, with 30-day follow-up. We analyzed the results of treatment of 372 patients who underwent 408 procedures, 197 such procedures in asymptomatic, and 211 in symptomatic individuals. Stenting procedures were performed using a technique and armamentarium which were tailored to the type and anatomy of lesions.

Results

There were 6 (1.5%) strokes, including 2 (0.5%) major strokes, 1 ipsi- and 1 contralateral, and 4 (1.0%) minor strokes. In asymptomatic patients there was 1 (0.3%) minor stroke. Transient ischemic attacks occurred in 5 (1.2%) patients. There were 2 (0.5%) non-STEMI myocardial infarctions and 2 (0.5%) non-stroke related fatalities. Risk factors of these adverse events were diabetes mellitus, lesions localized in a tortuous segment of the artery, embolic material in the filter and bilateral stenoses of carotid arteries. Additional risk factors in asymptomatic patients were renal impairment and advanced coronary artery disease; and in symptomatic patients, grade 3 arterial hypertension, dislipidemia, cigarette smoking and lesions requiring predilatation.

Conclusions

Stenting procedures of extracranial arteries supplying the brain, which are tailored to the type and anatomy of lesions, seem to be relatively safe.

Selective-versus-Standard Poststent Dilation for Carotid Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKROUND

The safety and efficacy of standard poststent angioplasty in patients undergoing carotid artery stent placement have not been well-established.

PURPOSE

We conducted a systematic review of the literature to evaluate the safety and efficacy of carotid artery stent placement and analyzed outcomes of standard-versus-selective poststent angioplasty.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and the Web of Science was performed for studies published between January 2000 and January 2015.

STUDY SELECTION

We included studies with >30 patients describing standard or selective poststent angioplasty during carotid artery stent placement.

DATA ANALYSIS

A random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the following outcomes: periprocedural stroke/TIA, procedure-related neurologic/cardiovascular morbidity/mortality, bradycardia/hypotension, long-term stroke at last follow-up, long-term primary patency, and technical success.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We included 87 studies with 19,684 patients with 20,378 carotid artery stenoses. There was no difference in clinical (P = .49) or angiographic outcomes (P = .93) in carotid artery stent placement treatment with selective or standard poststent balloon angioplasty. Both selective and standard poststent angioplasty groups had a very high technical success of >98% and a low procedure-related mortality of 0.9%. There were no significant differences between both groups in the incidence of restenosis (P = .93) or procedure-related complications (P = .37).

LIMITATIONS

No comparison to a patient group without poststent dilation could be performed.

CONCLUSIONS

Our meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference in angiographic and clinical outcomes among series that performed standard poststent angioplasty and those that performed poststent angioplasty in only select patients.