Download PDF
Int J Angiol 2014; 23(04): 263-270
DOI: 10.1055/s-0034-1390084
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Lesion-Related Carotid Angioplasty and Stenting with Closed-Cell Design without Embolic Protection Devices in High-Risk Elderly Patients—Can This Concept Work Out? A Single Center Experience Focusing on Stent Design

Silke Hopf-Jensen
1   Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, Diakonissenhospital Flensburg, Flensburg, Germany
,
Leonardo Marques
1   Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, Diakonissenhospital Flensburg, Flensburg, Germany
,
Michael Preiß
1   Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, Diakonissenhospital Flensburg, Flensburg, Germany
,
Stefan Müller-Hülsbeck
1   Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology and Neuroradiology, Diakonissenhospital Flensburg, Flensburg, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
11 November 2014 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

To compare the performance differences of three carotid artery stents in high-risk elderly patients without embolic protection devices (EPDs) on the basis of stent design, procedure-related complications, conveniences in handling, in-stent restenosis, 30-day outcome, and long-term follow-up. A total of 101 symptomatic internal carotid stenoses of 94 patients were prospectively treated with stent-protected angioplasty to 94 patients. Three closed-cell stents, one of those being hybrid cell design, were chosen depending on vascular anatomy: curved vessel, lesion length > 1 cm: 64 Carotid Wallstent (Boston Scientific, Natick, MA); curved vessel, lesion length < 1 cm: 21 Cristallo Ideale (Invatec, Roncadelle, Italy); straight vessel, lesion length > 1 cm: 16 Xact (Vascular Abbott, Santa Clara, CA). Comparisons of demographics, procedures, and outcomes were performed. The mean age of patients was 73.1 years (standard deviation [SD], ± 7.9; range, 58–87 years), 71% of the patients were older than 70 years and 20% were octogenarians. Male/female ratio was 3.1:1. About 13.9% (14/101) had contralateral internal carotid artery occlusion. Overall peri-interventional complication rate was 2.9% and 30-day mortality rate was 1%. During the long-term follow-up (34 months, range 1–59) no ipsilateral stroke was documented. Ten deaths (three after MI) were recognized. Two in-stent restenosis were detected (> 70% North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial) during follow-up, one patient was detected with previous carotid endarterectomy. Especially, if individual anatomical variance is considered, lesion-related stent-protected carotid angioplasty with lesion-adapted closed-cell design is an effective, reliable, safe, and comprehensible treatment option in symptomatic patients. Even without EPDs, the rate of complications is low, when compared with symptomatic carotid artery stenosis described in the literature. In-stent restenosis seems to play no significant role in follow-up.

Keywords

carotid stent - carotid stenosis - closed-cell design - lesion related - symptomatic - carotid endarterectomy - CAS
 

  • References

  • 1 Dente K. Experts divided over carotid stenting for stroke prevention. Lancet Neurol 2006; 5 (1) 24
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Mansour OY, Weber J, Niesen W, Schumacher M, Berlis A ; Safety and Efficacy Concerns-Single Center Experience. Carotid angioplasty and stenting without protection devices: safety and efficacy concerns—single center experience. Clin Neuroradiol 2011; 21 (2) 65-73
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Sidawy AN, Zwolak RM, White RA, Siami FS, Schermerhorn ML, Sicard GA ; Outcomes Committee for the Society for Vascular Surgery. Risk-adjusted 30-day outcomes of carotid stenting and endarterectomy: results from the SVS Vascular Registry. J Vasc Surg 2009; 49 (1) 71-79
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Müller-Hülsbeck S, Preuss H, Elhöft H. CAS: which stent for which lesion. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 2009; 50 (6) 767-772
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Tietke MW, Kerby T, Alfke K , et al. Complication rate in unprotected carotid artery stenting with closed-cell stents. Neuroradiology 2010; 52 (7) 611-618
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Müller-Hülsbeck S, Schäfer PJ, Charalambous N, Schaffner SR, Heller M, Jahnke T. Comparison of carotid stents: an in-vitro experiment focusing on stent design. J Endovasc Ther 2009; 16 (2) 168-177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Maleux G, Nevelsteen A. Carotid artery stenting: which stent for which lesion?. Acta Chir Belg 2002; 102 (6) 430-434
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Moore WS, Barnett HJ, Beebe HG , et al. Guidelines for carotid endarterectomy. A multidisciplinary consensus statement from the Ad Hoc Committee, American Heart Association. Circulation 1995; 91 (2) 566-579
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Cremonesi A, Gieowarsingh S, Spagnolo B , et al. Safety, efficacy and long-term durability of endovascular therapy for carotid artery disease: the tailored-Carotid Artery Stenting Experience of a single high-volume centre (tailored-CASE Registry). EuroIntervention 2009; 5 (5) 589-598
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Gross-Fengels W, Dörfler A, Berkefeld J, Huppert P. Diagnostik und Behandlung von Carotisstenosen: Die neue S3-Leitlinie aus radiologischer Sicht. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2013; 185 (2) 113-115
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Kastrup A, Gröschel K, Krapf H, Brehm BR, Dichgans J, Schulz JB. Early outcome of carotid angioplasty and stenting with and without cerebral protection devices: a systematic review of the literature. Stroke 2003; 34 (3) 813-819
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Ringleb PA, Allenberg J, Brückmann H , et al; SPACE Collaborative Group. 30 day results from the SPACE trial of stent-protected angioplasty versus carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients: a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2006; 368 (9543) 1239-1247
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Tietke M, Jansen O. Cerebral protection vs no cerebral protection: timing of stroke with CAS. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 2009; 50 (6) 751-760
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Biasi GM, Froio A, Diethrich EB , et al. Carotid plaque echolucency increases the risk of stroke in carotid stenting: the Imaging in Carotid Angioplasty and Risk of Stroke (ICAROS) study. Circulation 2004; 110 (6) 756-762
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Whitlow PL, Lylyk P, Londero H , et al. Carotid artery stenting protected with an emboli containment system. Stroke 2002; 33 (5) 1308-1314
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Cremonesi A, Manetti R, Setacci F, Setacci C, Castriota F. Protected carotid stenting: clinical advantages and complications of embolic protection devices in 442 consecutive patients. Stroke 2003; 34 (8) 1936-1941
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Müller-Hülsbeck S. Cerebral protection devices for treatment of carotid stenoses: Where do we stand today? [in German]. Rofo 2002; 174 (8) 945-954
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Ohki T, Veith FJ. Critical analysis of distal protection devices. Semin Vasc Surg 2003; 16 (4) 317-325
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Reimers B, Corvaja N, Moshiri S , et al. Cerebral protection with filter devices during carotid artery stenting. Circulation 2001; 104 (1) 12-15
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Cardaioli P, Giordan M, Panfili M, Chioin R. Complication with an embolic protection device during carotid angioplasty. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2004; 62 (2) 234-236
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Giri J, Yeh RW, Kennedy KF , et al. Unprotected carotid artery stenting in modern practice. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2014; 83 (4) 595-602
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Wu YM, Wong HF, Chen YL, Wong MC, Toh CH. Carotid stenting of asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid artery stenoses with and without the use of a distal embolic protection device. Acta Cardiol 2011; 66 (4) 453-458
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Jansen O, Fiehler J, Hartmann M, Brückmann H. Protection or nonprotection in carotid stent angioplasty: the influence of interventional techniques on outcome data from the SPACE Trial. Stroke 2009; 40 (3) 841-846
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Sayeed S, Stanziale SF, Wholey MH, Makaroun MS. Angiographic lesion characteristics can predict adverse outcomes after carotid artery stenting. J Vasc Surg 2008; 47 (1) 81-87
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Hobson II RW, Howard VJ, Roubin GS , et al; CREST Investigators. Carotid artery stenting is associated with increased complications in octogenarians: 30-day stroke and death rates in the CREST lead-in phase. J Vasc Surg 2004; 40 (6) 1106-1111
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Stanziale SF, Marone LK, Boules TN , et al. Carotid artery stenting in octogenarians is associated with increased adverse outcomes. J Vasc Surg 2006; 43 (2) 297-304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Bonati LH, Dobson J, Algra A , et al; Carotid Stenting Trialists' Collaboration. Short-term outcome after stenting versus endarterectomy for symptomatic carotid stenosis: a preplanned meta-analysis of individual patient data. Lancet 2010; 376 (9746) 1062-1073
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar