Background Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been shown to be superior to medical therapy alone in the prevention of stroke only if it can be safely performed (ie, with a complication rate less than 3% in asymptomatic patients and less than 6% in symptomatic patients). Technical defects are the most common cause of neurological complications after CEA, and their correction has traditionally been performed through standard surgical techniques. Methods From 1999, we started to treat intimal flaps, dissection, or partial thrombosis after CEA with carotid artery stenting (CAS). A retrospective analysis of the operating room registry and of the registry of our Interventional Cardiology laboratory was conducted in order to identify all the patients that underwent stenting of the internal carotid artery after CEA between January 2001 and June 2009. Results During the time period considered, 5012 CEA were performed at our institution and a total of 34 patients (34/5012; 0.6%) were found to have received carotid stenting after CEA, both for symptomatic and asymptomatic defects. Immediate technical success was obtained in all patients. One major cerebrovascular adverse event (1/34; 3%) in the immediate perioperative period was recorded. At a mean follow-up of 18.6 months (range, 3-84 months; median, 12 months), we did not observe any neurological symptoms related to the treated carotid artery, nor hemodynamic in-stent restenosis. Long-term follow-up (ie, equal or greater than 4 years) was available for five patients: all patients remained event-free during the entire period. Conclusions Our study adds to the assumption that CAS in post-CEA symptomatic and asymptomatic patients is safe and technically feasible, and represents a valid and quick alternative to standard surgical revision. Even if in a small group of patients, long-term results seem promising. Copyright © 2010 by the Society for Vascular Surgery.

Eight-year experience with carotid artery stenting for correction of symptomatic and asymptomatic post-endarterectomy defects

MARONE, ENRICO MARIA;
2010-01-01

Abstract

Background Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) has been shown to be superior to medical therapy alone in the prevention of stroke only if it can be safely performed (ie, with a complication rate less than 3% in asymptomatic patients and less than 6% in symptomatic patients). Technical defects are the most common cause of neurological complications after CEA, and their correction has traditionally been performed through standard surgical techniques. Methods From 1999, we started to treat intimal flaps, dissection, or partial thrombosis after CEA with carotid artery stenting (CAS). A retrospective analysis of the operating room registry and of the registry of our Interventional Cardiology laboratory was conducted in order to identify all the patients that underwent stenting of the internal carotid artery after CEA between January 2001 and June 2009. Results During the time period considered, 5012 CEA were performed at our institution and a total of 34 patients (34/5012; 0.6%) were found to have received carotid stenting after CEA, both for symptomatic and asymptomatic defects. Immediate technical success was obtained in all patients. One major cerebrovascular adverse event (1/34; 3%) in the immediate perioperative period was recorded. At a mean follow-up of 18.6 months (range, 3-84 months; median, 12 months), we did not observe any neurological symptoms related to the treated carotid artery, nor hemodynamic in-stent restenosis. Long-term follow-up (ie, equal or greater than 4 years) was available for five patients: all patients remained event-free during the entire period. Conclusions Our study adds to the assumption that CAS in post-CEA symptomatic and asymptomatic patients is safe and technically feasible, and represents a valid and quick alternative to standard surgical revision. Even if in a small group of patients, long-term results seem promising. Copyright © 2010 by the Society for Vascular Surgery.
2010
Medical Research, Diagnosis & Treatment contains studies of existing and developing diagnostic and therapeutic techniques, as well as specific classes of clinical intervention. Resources in this category emphasize the difference between normal and disease states, with the ultimate goal of more effective diagnosis and intervention. Specific areas of interest include pathology and histochemical analysis of tissue, clinical chemistry and biochemical analysis of medical samples, diagnostic imaging, radiology and radiation, surgical research, anesthesiology and anesthesia, transplantation, artificial tissues, and medical implants. Resources focused on the disease, diagnosis, and treatment of specific organs or physiological systems are excluded and are covered in the Medical Research: Organs & Systems category.
52
6
1511
1517
7
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-78650189483&partnerID=40&md5=17e092d9fed0e5e238e511bbf1510e96
4
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
262
Marone, ENRICO MARIA; Coppi, G; Tshomba, Y; Chiesa, R.
1 Contributo su Rivista::1.1 Articolo in rivista
none
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11571/1150222
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 4
  • Scopus 10
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 8
social impact