A diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging-based study of transcervical carotid stenting with flow reversal vs transfemoral filter protection.

Vascular Surgery Section, Complejo Hospitalario de Toledo, Toledo, Spain.
Journal of vascular surgery: official publication, the Society for Vascular Surgery [and] International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery, North American Chapter (Impact Factor: 2.98). 09/2012; 56(6). DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2012.05.107
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: Transfemoral carotid artery stenting (CAS) has been associated with a high incidence of embolic phenomena and silent brain infarction. The goal of this study was to compare the incidence of new ischemic cerebral lesions on diffusion-perfusion magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sequences after transcervical CAS performed with carotid flow reversal vs stenting via transfemoral approach with distal filter protection. METHODS: During a 26-month period, 64 consecutive patients diagnosed with significant carotid stenosis by ultrasound imaging were assigned to transcervical CAS with carotid flow reversal or a transfemoral approach with a distal filter. The Rankin stroke scale was administered by an independent neurologist, and diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI) studies were performed ≤24 hours before and ≤24 to 48 hours after the procedure. DW-MRI studies were compared by two neuroradiologists not involved in the study and blinded for time, clinical status, and treatment option. Hyperintense DW-MRI signals found after the procedure were interpreted as postoperative ischemic infarcts. All patients were assessed at 1, 6, and 12 months after the intervention. RESULTS: The distribution of demographic and pathologic variables was similar in both groups. All procedures were technically successful, with a mean carotid flow reversal time of 22 minutes. Twenty-one (70%) and 23 patients (69.69%) were symptomatic in the transcervical and transfemoral groups, respectively (P = .869). After intervention, new postprocedural DW-MRI ischemic infarcts were found in four transcervical (12.9%) and in 11 transfemoral (33.3%) patients (P = .03), without new neurologic symptoms. No major adverse events occurred at 30 days after the intervention. All patients remained neurologically intact, without an increase in stroke scale scoring. All stents remained patent, and all patients remained stroke-free during follow-up. In multivariate analysis, age (relative risk [RR], 1.022; P < .001), symptomatic status (RR, 4.109; P < .001), and open-cell vs closed-cell stent design (RR, 2.01; P < .001) were associated with a higher risk of embolization in the transfemoral group but not in the transcervical group. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that transcervical carotid stenting with carotid flow reversal carries a significantly lower incidence of new ischemic brain infarcts than that resulting from transfemoral CAS with a distal filter. The transcervical approach with carotid flow reversal may improve the safety of CAS and has the potential to improve results in especially vulnerable patients such as the elderly and symptomatic.

1 Bookmark
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The volume of carotid artery stenting (CAS) safety and efficacy data has grown exponentially over the last decade. Recent comparative data with carotid endarterectomy, the utility of embolic protection devices, peri-procedural medications, basic technical aspects of CAS, developments in carotid stent design, potential complications of CAS, and complication risk factors are discussed in this review.
    Journal of Cardiovascular Translational Research 04/2014; 7(4). DOI:10.1007/s12265-014-9567-3 · 3.06 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Stroke remains an exceedingly incident and prevalent public health burden across the globe, with an estimated 16 million new strokes per annum and prevalence over 60 million, and extracranial internal carotid artery atherosclerotic disease is an important risk factor for stroke. Randomized trials of surgical treatment were conducted (North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial, European Carotid Surgery Trial) and demonstrated efficacy of carotid endarterectomy for secondary prevention of stroke in patients with cerebrovascular events (e.g. ipsilateral stroke, transient ischemic attack, and/or amaurosis fugax) attributable to a diseased artery with 50-99% stenosis. Therapeutic clarity, however, proved elusive with asymptomatic carotid artery disease. Asymptomatic Carotid Atherosclerosis Study (ACAS), Asymptomatic Carotid Surgery Trial, and Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study (VACS) suggested only modest benefit from surgical intervention for primary stroke prevention and the best medical therapy at the time of these trials is not comparable to modern medical therapy. ACT-1, Asymptomatic Carotid Surgery Trial-2, Stent-Protected Angioplasty in asymptomatic Carotid artery stenosis versus Endarterectomy Trial-2, European Carotid Surgery Trial-2, Carotid Revascularization Endarterectomy Versus Stenting Trial-2 are trials that are recent, ongoing, or in development that include diverse populations across Europe and North America, complementary trial designs, and a collaborative spirit that should provide clinicians with evidence that informs best clinical practice for asymptomatic carotid artery disease.
    02/2014; 3:2048004014529419. DOI:10.1177/2048004014529419
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Stroke is a major cause of morbidity and mortality and up to 15-20% of ischemic strokes can be attributed to atherosclerotic internal carotid artery disease. The treatment of carotid artery disease has been the subject of a wealth of literature in the past twenty years since the publication of the landmark randomized controlled trials, the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial and the European Carotid Surgery Trial, in the early 1990s. Although these landmark trials have helped establish the current guidelines for treatment of patients with symptomatic carotid artery disease, there have since been major advancements in the medical treatment of cardiovascular disease and there still remains a great deal of controversy regarding the timing and technical approach to carotid revascularization. In particular, there has been a wealth of literature to determine whether carotid endarterectomy or carotid stenting should be used for revascularization and when this revascularization should occur following onset of symptoms. This update offers an overview of the standards for diagnosis and medical treatment of patients with symptomatic carotid artery disease, the indications for surgical revascularization and a review of the most pertinent literature as it pertains to the more controversial issues of technical approach and timing of surgical revascularization following onset of symptoms in patients with carotid artery disease. Copyright © 2014 Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh (Scottish charity number SC005317) and Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    The surgeon: journal of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons of Edinburgh and Ireland 11/2014; 13(1). DOI:10.1016/j.surge.2014.09.001 · 2.21 Impact Factor