Primary carotid artery stenting versus carotid artery stenting for postcarotid endarterectomy stenosis

33Citations
Citations of this article
21Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has been advocated as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in high-risk surgical patients, including stenosis after CEA. This study compared early and midterm clinical outcomes for primary CAS vs CAS for post-CEA stenosis. Methods: This study analyzed 180 high-risk surgical patients: 68 had primary CAS (group A), and 112 had CAS for post-CEA stenosis (group B). Patients were followed-up prospectively and had duplex ultrasound imaging at 1 month and every 6 months thereafter. All patients had cerebral protection devices. Kaplan-Meier life-table analysis was used to estimate rates of freedom from stroke, stroke-free survival, ≥50% in-stent stenosis, ≥80% in-stent stenosis, and target vessel reintervention (TVR). Results: Patients had comparable demographic and clinical characteristics. Carotid stent locations were similar. Indications for CAS were transient ischemic attacks (TIA) or stroke in 50% for group A and 45% for group B. The mean follow-up was comparable, at 21 (range, 1-73) vs 25 (range, 1-78) months, respectively. The technical success rate was 100%. The perioperative stroke rates and combined stroke/death/myocardial infarction (MI) rates were 7.4% for group A vs 0.9% for group B (P = .0294). No perioperative MIs occurred in either group. One death was secondary to stroke. The combined early and late stroke rates were 10.8% for group A and 1.8% for group B (P = .0275). The stroke-free rates at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years for groups A and B were 89%, 89%, 89%, and 89%; and 98%, 98%, 98%, and 98%, respectively (P = .0105). The rates of freedom from ≥50% carotid in-stent stenosis were 94%, 83%, 83%, and 66% for group A vs 96%, 91%, 83%, and 72% for group B (P = .4705). Two patients (3%) in group A and seven patients (6.3%) in group B had ≥80% in-stent stenosis (all were asymptomatic except one). The freedom from ≥80% in-stent stenosis at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years for groups A and B were 100%, 98%, 98%, and 78% vs 99%, 96%, 92%, and 87%, respectively (P = .7005). Freedom from TVR rates at 1, 2, 3, and 4 years for groups A and B were 100%, 100%, 100%, and 100% vs 99%, 97%, 97%, and 92%, respectively (P = .261). Conclusions: CAS for post-CEA stenosis carried a lower risk of early postprocedural neurologic events than primary CAS, with a trend toward a higher restenosis rate during follow-up. © 2009 Society for Vascular Surgery.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

AbuRahma, A. F., Abu-Halimah, S., Bensenhaver, J., Nanjundappa, A., Stone, P. A., Dean, L. S., … AbuRahma, Z. (2009). Primary carotid artery stenting versus carotid artery stenting for postcarotid endarterectomy stenosis. Journal of Vascular Surgery, 50(5), 1031–1039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2009.06.051

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free