Article

Outcomes of carotid stenting in patients with previous neck radiation.

Department of Internal Medicine, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions (Impact Factor: 2.51). 08/2012; DOI: 10.1002/ccd.24589
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to report outcomes of percutaneous stenting of carotid stenosis in patients with previous neck radiation. BACKGROUND: Post-irradiation carotid disease is often extensive and involves atypical areas. Data regarding outcomes of stenting of these lesions are scarce. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed medical records at our institution from January 1998 through May 2010 to determine baseline characteristics, procedural details and follow up data of patients who underwent stenting of radiation associated carotid stenosis. RESULTS: Our study included 70 patients who underwent a total of 83 procedures. Of these, 47 patients were male (67%), mean age was 66.3 ± 10.6 years. Mean follow-up was 47.5 months (range from 1 to 155 months). All patients had a history of radiotherapy to the neck area, with laryngeal cancer being the most common reason. Furthermore, 41 patients (58.5%) had previous neck surgery due to malignancies. An embolic protection device was used in 61 (73%) procedures. During the follow up, 5 (6%) ipsilateral events among a total of 10 (12.0%) ischemic events were observed. There was 1 intra-procedural stroke (1.2%), but there were no other ischemic event at 30 days and 1 year post procedure. Mortality was 4.8% during the first 30 days, 8.6% during the first year and 60% at the end of the study. Restenosis was seen in 2 (2.4%) patients at 1 year and in total 9 patients (10.8 %) with long-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Carotid stenting is a safe and durable treatment option for patients with severe carotid stenosis and neck radiation. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
81 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: No consensus exists for duplex ultrasound criteria in the diagnosis of significant common carotid artery (CCA) stenosis. In general, peak systolic velocity (PSV) >150 cm/s with poststenotic turbulence indicates a stenosis >50%. The purpose of our study is to correlate CCA duplex velocities with angiographic findings of significant stenosis >60%. We reviewed the carotid duplex records from 2008 to 2011 looking for patients with isolated CCA stenosis and no ipsilateral internal or contralateral carotid artery disease who received either a carotid angiogram or a computed tomography scan. We identified 25 patients who had significant CCA disease >60%. We also selected 74 controls without known CCA stenosis. We performed receiver operating characteristics analysis to correlate PSV and end-diastolic velocity (EDV) with angiographic stenosis >60%. The degree of stenosis was determined by measuring the luminal stenosis in comparison to the proximal normal CCA diameter. Most patients had a carotid angiogram (21/25), four only had a computed tomography angiography and four had both. Eighteen patients had history of neck radiation. The CCA PSV ≥250 cm/s had a sensitivity of 98.7% (81.5%-100%) and a specificity of 95.7% (92.0%-99.9%), CCA PSV ≥300 cm/s had a sensitivity of 90.9% (69.4%-98.4%) and a specificity of 98.7% (92.0%-99.9%). The CCA EDV ≥40 cm/s had a sensitivity of 95.5% (95% confidence interval of 75.1-99.8%) and specificity of 98.7% (92.0%-99.9%), EDV ≥60 cm/s had a sensitivity of 100% (75.1%-99.8%) and specificity of 87% (94.1-100%), and EDV ≥70 cm/s had a sensitivity of 86.4% (64.0%-96.4%) and specificity of 100% (94.1%-100%). The presence of both PSV <250 cm/s and EDV <60 cm/s had a 98.7% negative predictive value, and the presence of both PSV ≥250 cm/s and EDV ≥60 cm/s had 100% positive predictive value. Establishing CCA duplex criteria to screen patients with significant stenosis is crucial to identify those who will need further imaging modality or treatment. In our laboratory, CCA PSV ≥250 cm/s and EDV ≥60 cm/s are thresholds that can be used to identify significant (>60%) CCA stenosis with a high degree of accuracy.
    Journal of vascular surgery: official publication, the Society for Vascular Surgery [and] International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter 09/2013; · 2.98 Impact Factor