Are Distal Protection Devices ‘Protective’ During Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting?

Author:

Tallarita Tiziano1,Rabinstein Alejandro A.1,Cloft Harry1,Kallmes David1,Oderich Gustavo S.1,Brown Robert D.1,Lanzino Giuseppe1

Affiliation:

1. From the Division of Vascular Surgery and the Departments of Neurology, Radiology, and Neurologic Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.

Abstract

Background and Purpose— To evaluate the periprocedural outcome after carotid artery stenting with embolic brain protection (EBP+) versus without embolic brain protection (EBP−). Methods— We retrospectively reviewed data from a prospective nonrandomized database of 357 patients who underwent carotid artery stenting in the neuroradiology division of our institution from 1999 to 2009. One hundred five patients underwent angioplasty and stenting without distal protection, whereas 252 were treated with distal protection. Patients were analyzed according to their EBP status (+ or −) for the primary end points of perioperative stroke, death, or myocardial infarction. Results— Unprotected stenting was mostly performed in the early years of this study and this is reflected in significant baseline differences between the two groups. In our earlier experience, carotid artery stenting was used in patients with more significant comorbidities. Diabetes mellitus ( P =0.04), previous coronary artery disease ( P =0.02) and myocardial infarction ( P =0.04), and symptomatic lesion ( P =0.01) were significantly more common in the EBP− cohort. Despite these baseline differences, there were no significant differences in the primary end points (2% in the EBP+ group and 4.8% in the EBP−, P =0.15). The incidence of ipsilateral stroke in the EBP− and in the EBP+ group was 3.8% versus 0.8%, respectively ( P =0.6). There were 2 perioperative deaths (1 in each group) and 4 myocardial infarctions (3 in the EBP+ arm and 1 in the EBP− arm, all non-Q infarcts; P =nonsignificant). Conclusions— In accordance with recent literature, this series cast doubts as to the real effectiveness of distal embolic protection devices in reducing periprocedural complications.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Advanced and Specialised Nursing,Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine,Clinical Neurology

Cited by 33 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3