Selective-versus-standard poststent dilation for carotid artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

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, procedurerelated 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 procedurerelated mortality of 0.9%. There were no significant differences between both groups in the incidence of restenosis (P =.93) or procedurerelated 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.