Article Text

PDF
Original research
Subclinical ischemic events in patients undergoing carotid artery stent placement: comparison of proximal and distal protection techniques
  1. Emrah Aytac1,2,
  2. Erdem Gürkaş1,
  3. Cetin Kursad Akpinar1,
  4. Muhammad A Saleem2,
  5. Adnan I Qureshi2
  1. 1Ankara Numune Training and Research Hospital, Neurology Clinic, Ankara, Turkey
  2. 2Zeenat Qureshi Stroke Institute, St Cloud, Minnesota, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Muhammad A Saleem, 519 2nd St N, St Cloud, Minneapolis 56303, USA; akmamsaleem{at}gmail.com

Abstract

Objective To determine the relative effectiveness of proximal and distal protection in prevention of cerebral ischemic events during carotid artery stent (CAS) placement using diffusion-weighted MRI (DW-MRI).

Methods We analyzed data from patients who had undergone DW-MRI before and within 24 hours of CAS for symptomatic internal carotid artery (ICA) stenosis (with last ischemic events within 3 months). The study was performed prospectively; patients were not randomized, and were treated either with a proximal balloon occlusion system (Mo.Ma; Invatec, Roncadelle, Italy) or filter-type distal protection device (Spider device; ev3, Plymouth, Minnesota, USA).

Results Of the 45 patients (mean age±SD: 66.9±9.8 years; 73.3% were men) who underwent CAS, 19 had proximal protection and 26 distal protection. New ischemic lesions were detected in 26/45 patients on DW-MRI scans obtained within 24 hours after CAS. The proportion of patients with new lesions on DW-MRI at 24 hours was not different between the two groups (47.4% vs 65.4% for proximal and distal protection, respectively). The mean number of new ischemic lesions on post-CAS DW-MRI was non-significantly higher in patients who underwent CAS with distal protection (2.80±3.54 for proximal protection vs 4.96±5.11 for distal protection; p=0.12). The proportion of patients with new lesions >1 cm did not differ between the two groups (5.3% for proximal protection vs 11.5% for distal protection; p=0.62). There was no difference in the rates of ischemic stroke between patients who underwent CAS treatment using proximal and distal protection (5.3% vs 7.7%; p=1.000).

Conclusions We found a relatively high rate of new ischemic lesions in patients undergoing CAS with cerebral protection. There was no difference in the proportion of patients with new lesions between patients treated using distal protection and those treated using proximal protection.

  • Angioplasty
  • Stenosis
  • Stent
  • Stroke
  • Technique

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Contributors EA: study concepts, data acquisition, data analysis, data interpretation, literature research, manuscript drafting, manuscript revision, and approval of final manuscript. EG: study concepts, data acquisition, data interpretation, and approval of final manuscript. CKA: data acquisition, data analysis, data interpretation, literature research, manuscript revision, and approval of final manuscript. MAS: data interpretation, literature research, manuscript revision, and approval of final manuscript. AIQ: study concepts, data analysis, data interpretation, literature research, manuscript drafting, manuscript revision, and approval of final manuscript.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent Obtained.

  • Ethics approval The study was approved by the institutional review board and Ankara Numune Training and Research Hospital ethics committee. The patients or their next of kin provided written consent for participation in the study.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.