Comparative Study
Journal Article
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Carotid angioplasty and stenting in anatomically high-risk patients: Safe and durable except for radiation-induced stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: Carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is used in patients considered high-risk for carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Patients qualify as high-risk because of medical comorbid conditions or for anatomic considerations (previous CEA, radical neck dissection, radiation). We compared the technical feasibility and durability of CAS in medically high-risk patients (MED) vs anatomically high-risk patients (ANAT).

METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of all consecutive patients undergoing CAS by a single vascular surgery group. All patients were high risk and evaluated with duplex ultrasound imaging and angiography. Primary end points were technical success, 30-day stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), death, and in-stent restenosis. Standard statistical analysis included Kaplan-Meier life tables.

RESULTS: From January 2003 to December 2007, 230 CAS (98 ANAT, 132 MED) procedures were attempted. The ANAT cohort comprised 84 patients with a single anatomic risk factor: 71 with a previous ipsilateral CEA, 6 high lesions, 6 history of neck radiation, and 1 with a tracheostomy. Ten patients had two or three anatomic risk factors: nine with radical neck dissection and radiation and one with neck radiation and ipsilateral CEA. The mean age was 71.1 years for ANAT vs 73.9 years for MED (P = .021). Technical success rates were 98% in ANAT and 98.5% in MED (P = .76). Thirty-day stroke rate was 1.0% in ANAT and 5.3% in MED (P = .14); the mortality rate was 2.0% in ANAT and 0.8% in MED (P = .79). The 2-year survival free from stroke was MED, 93.6% and ANAT, 98.9% (P = .118); and from restenosis was MED, 91.9%; and ANAT, 91.0% (P = .98). Two-year overall survival was significantly better in ANAT (84.6%) vs MED (70.1%; P = .026). Four of the seven restenoses in the ANAT group occurred in patients with previous neck radiation. The restenosis rate for radiation-induced (RAD) stenosis treated with CAS was significantly higher at 22.2% (4 of 18) compared with 3.8% (3 of 78) in ANAT group patients without a history of radiation (non-RAD; P = .028). The 2-year restenosis-free survival was 72.7% in the RAD group vs 95.9% in the non-RAD group (P = .017).

CONCLUSION: CAS is as technically feasible, safe, and durable in anatomically high-risk patients as in medically high-risk patients, with similar rates of periprocedural stroke and death and late restenosis. However, patients with radiation-induced stenosis appear to be at an increased risk for restenosis.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app