The Relationship Between Achilles Tendon Thickness and Instent Restenosis in Patients with Carotid Stents
Author:
Yılmaz Cemalettin1ORCID, Güvendi Şengör Büşra2ORCID, Özdil Mehmet Hasan3ORCID, Kaya Ahmet Ferhat3ORCID, Öcal Lütfi2ORCID, Havan Nuri4ORCID, Karagoz Ali2ORCID, Yazıcıoğlu Mehmet Vefik2ORCID, Zehir Regayip2ORCID
Affiliation:
1. Sağlık bilimleri üniversitesi Kartal koşuyolu yüksek ihtisas eğitim ve araştırma hastanesi 2. SAĞLIK BİLİMLERİ ÜNİVERSİTESİ, İSTANBUL KARTAL KOŞUYOLU YÜKSEK İHTİSAS SAĞLIK UYGULAMA VE ARAŞTIRMA MERKEZİ 3. Muş Devlet Hastanesi 4. DEMIROGLU SCIENCE UNIVERSITY
Abstract
Objective: Considering that atherosclerosis and Achilles tendon thickening share common mechanisms, the aim of this study to reveal the relationship between Achilles tendon thickness (ATT) and carotid in-stent restenosis (ISR).
Methods: In this study, 89 patients who had carotid stenting for carotid artery disease at our institute between 2016 and 2020 were included. Subjects were divided into two groups as restenosis (+) and restenosis (-) based on the ultrasonographic and/or angiographic findings. The development of 50% or more restenosis in the carotid stent was defined as ISR. Bilateral ATT was measured for all patients who satisfied the inclusion criteria.
Results: In our study, 16 (17.9%) patients constituted the restenosis group and 73 (82%) the no-restenosis group. ATT values were similar between groups (4.90.8 vs 4.70.6, p=.27). However, in the marginal effect graphic, it has been demonstrated that the probability of carotid stent restenosis increases with the increase in the mean ATT. The probability of restenosis was 14% when the mean ATT value was 4.16 mm (mean -1 SD) and the probability of restenosis was 22% when the mean ATT value was 5.36 mm (mean +1 SD).
Conclusion: No significant difference was found in ATT between the restenosis and no-restenosis group, however, the probability of restenosis increased with increasing ATT. In addition, ultrasonographic measurement of ATT is an easy, inexpensive and safe method that can be used to identify patients at high risk for carotid stent restenosis.
Publisher
Marmara University
Reference27 articles.
1. Brott TG, Howard G, Roubin GS, Meschia JF, Mackey A, Brooks W, Moore WS, Hill MD, Mantese VA, Clark WM, Timaran CH, Heck D, Leimgruber PP, Sheffet AJ, Howard VJ, Chaturvedi S, Lal BK, Voeks JH, Hobson RW, CREST Investigators. Long-term results of stenting versus endarterectomy for carotid-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2016;374(11):1021-1031. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1505215 2. Bonati LH, Dobson J, Featherstone RL, Ederle J, van der Worp HB, de Borst GJ, Mali WPTM, Beard JD, Cleveland T, Engelter ST, Lyrer PA, Ford GA, Dorman PJ, Brown MM, International Carotid Stenting Study investigators. Long-term outcomes after stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment of symptomatic carotid stenosis: The International Carotid Stenting Study (ICSS) randomised trial. Lancet 2015;385(9967):529-538. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61184-3 3. Eckstein HH, Ringleb P, Allenberg JR, Berger J, Fraedrich G, Hacke W, Hennerici M, Stingele R, Fiehler J, Zeumer H, Jansen O. Results of the Stent-Protected Angioplasty versus Carotid Endarterectomy (SPACE) study to treat symptomatic stenoses at 2 years: A multinational, prospective, randomised trial. Lancet Neurol. 2008;7(10):893-902. DOI: 10.1016/S1474-4422(08)70196-0 4. Barros P, Felgueiras H, Pinheiro D, Guerra M, Gama V, Veloso M. Restenosis after carotid artery stenting using a specific designed ultrasonographic protocol. Journal of Stroke and Cerebrovascular Diseases 2014;23(6):1416-1420. DOI: 10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2013.12.002 5. Tekieli Ł, Musiałek P, Kabłak-Ziembicka A, Trystuła M, Przewłocki T, Legutko J, Dzierwa K, MacIejewski D, Michalski M, Pieniązek P. Severe, recurrent in-stent carotid restenosis: endovascular approach, risk factors. Results from a prospective academic registry of 2637 consecutive carotid artery stenting procedures (TARGET-CAS). Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej. 2019;15(4):465. DOI: 10.5114/AIC.2019.90221
|
|