Carotid angioplasty and stent placement: Comparison of transcranial Doppler US data and clinical outcome with and without filtering cerebral protection devices in 509 patients

被引:126
作者
Vos, JA
van den Berg, JC
Ernst, SMPG
Suttorp, MJ
Overtoom, TTC
Mauser, HW
Vogels, OJM
van Heesewijk, HPM
Moll, FL
van der Graaf, Y
Mali, WPT
Ackerstaff, RGA
机构
[1] St Antonius Hosp, Dept Radiol, NL-3435 CM Nieuwegein, Netherlands
[2] St Antonius Hosp, Dept Cardiol, NL-3435 CM Nieuwegein, Netherlands
[3] St Antonius Hosp, Dept Neurol, NL-3435 CM Nieuwegein, Netherlands
[4] St Antonius Hosp, Dept Clin Neurophysiol, NL-3435 CM Nieuwegein, Netherlands
[5] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Vasc Surg, Utrecht, Netherlands
[6] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Clin Epidemiol, Utrecht, Netherlands
[7] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Radiol, Utrecht, Netherlands
关键词
D O I
10.1148/radiol.2342040119
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate emboli detected at transcranial Doppler ultrasonography (US) and outcome of carotid angioplasty and stent placement and compare these findings in patients treated with the use of filtering cerebral protection devices (CPDs) with the findings in patients, treated without the use of filtering,CPDs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was approved by the institutional human research committee. Written informed consent was obtained for all patients, Patients were divided into three groups: 1,61 Patients treated before filtering CPDs had become available (group 1), 1.51 patients treated with filtering CPDs (group 2), and 197 patients, treated without CPDs after CPDs had become available (group 3). Clinical end-points were cerebral ischemic events and death. Transcranial Doppler US end points included isolated microemboli, microembolic showers, macroemboli, and distal thrombus. The procedure was divided into five wiring, predilation stent, deployment, postdilation, and CPD handling Data not distributed normally were analysed with the Mann-Whitney U statistic. For binomial data, the chi(2) test was used. P <.05 indicated statistical significance. RESULTS: For each phase, median: and interquartile range (IQR) for isolated microemboli in group 2 versus group 3 were as follows: wiring, 51 (IQR, 31-69) versus 27 (IQR, 15-48); predilation, 19 (IQR,- 13-33) versus 13 (IQR, 8-19); stent deployment, 64 (IQR, 46-82) versus 48.5 (IQR, 33.25-66); and postdilation, 24 (IQR 14-39) versus 16 (IQR, 11-27.5) (P <.001 for each Phase). Median,and IQR for microembolic showers were as follows: wiring, 0 (IQR, 0-3) versus 0 (IQR, 0-0); predilation, 1.5 (IQR, 0-4) versus 0 (IQR, 0-2); stent deployment,, 22 (IQR, 11-36) versus 11 (IQR, 6-17); postdilation, three (IQR, 0-9) versus one (IQR, 0-4); (postdilation phase,-,P = .001; all other phases, P <.001). Median for isolated microemboli in group 1 versus groups 2 and 3 combined were as follows: predilation, 10 (IQR, 5-22.75) versus 16 (IQR, 9 -25) (P=.001), stent deployment, 32 (IQR, 15-58), versus 54 (IQR, 40.5-74) (P <.001); and postdilation, 11, (IQR, 6-19) versus 18 (IQR, 12-33) (P <.001). Median for microembolic showers during stent deployment were six (IQR, 1-14) versus 13 (IQR, 7-26) (P <.001). Five patients died, and five major strokes and 14 minor strokes occurred. Eight. macroemboli occurred in unprotected procedures; six distal thrombi occurred in protected procedures. CONCLUSION: Carotid angioplasty and stent placement yielded more microemboli in filtering CPDs than, in unprotected procedures The infrequent patients treated with occurrence of cerebral sequelae did not allow comprehensive statistical, comparison, between groups.
引用
收藏
页码:493 / 499
页数:7
相关论文
共 35 条
[1]   Effect of the distal-balloon protection system on microembolization during carotid stenting [J].
Al-Mubarak, N ;
Roubin, GS ;
Vitek, JJ ;
Iyer, SS ;
New, G ;
Leon, MB .
CIRCULATION, 2001, 104 (17) :1999-2002
[2]   Benefit of carotid endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic moderate or severe stenosis [J].
Barnett, HJM ;
Taylor, W ;
Eliasziw, M ;
Fox, AJ ;
Ferguson, GG ;
Haynes, RB ;
Rankin, RN ;
Clagett, GP ;
Hachinski, VC ;
Sackett, DL ;
Thorpe, KE ;
Meldrum, HE ;
Spence, JD .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1998, 339 (20) :1415-1425
[3]  
Castriota F, 2002, J ENDOVASC THER, V9, P786, DOI 10.1583/1545-1550(2002)009<0786:IOCPDO>2.0.CO
[4]  
2
[5]   Protected carotid stenting - Clinical advantages and complications of embolic protection devices in 442 consecutive patients [J].
Cremonesi, A ;
Manetti, R ;
Setacci, F ;
Setacci, C ;
Castriota, F .
STROKE, 2003, 34 (08) :1936-1941
[6]  
Diethrich EB, 1996, J ENDOVASC SURG, V3, P42, DOI 10.1583/1074-6218(1996)003<0042:SITCAI>2.0.CO
[7]  
2
[8]   Carotid artery stenting with or without protection devices? Strong opinions, poor evidence! Comment [J].
Eckert, B ;
Zeumer, H .
STROKE, 2003, 34 (08) :1941-1943
[9]  
Ernst JMPG, 2003, J ENDOVASC THER, V10, P702
[10]   Randomised trial of endarterectomy for recently symptomatic carotid stenosis: final results of the MRC European carotid surgery trial (ECST) [J].
Farrell, B ;
Fraser, A ;
Sandercock, P ;
Slattery, J ;
Warlow, CP .
LANCET, 1998, 351 (9113) :1379-1387