Advertisement

AJNR is seeking candidates for the AJNR Podcast Editor. Read the position description.

Research ArticleExtracranial Vascular

Selective-versus-Standard Poststent Dilation for Carotid Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

O. Petr, W. Brinjikji, M.H. Murad, B. Glodny and G. Lanzino
American Journal of Neuroradiology May 2017, 38 (5) 999-1005; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A5103

Abstract

BACKROUND: The safety and efficacy of standard poststent angioplasty in patients undergoing carotid artery stent placement have not been well-established.

PURPOSE: We conducted a systematic review of the literature to evaluate the safety and efficacy of carotid artery stent placement and analyzed outcomes of standard-versus-selective poststent angioplasty.

DATA SOURCES: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and the Web of Science was performed for studies published between January 2000 and January 2015.

STUDY SELECTION: We included studies with >30 patients describing standard or selective poststent angioplasty during carotid artery stent placement.

DATA ANALYSIS: A random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool the following outcomes: periprocedural stroke/TIA, procedure-related neurologic/cardiovascular morbidity/mortality, bradycardia/hypotension, long-term stroke at last follow-up, long-term primary patency, and technical success.

DATA SYNTHESIS: We included 87 studies with 19,684 patients with 20,378 carotid artery stenoses. There was no difference in clinical (P = .49) or angiographic outcomes (P = .93) in carotid artery stent placement treatment with selective or standard poststent balloon angioplasty. Both selective and standard poststent angioplasty groups had a very high technical success of >98% and a low procedure-related mortality of 0.9%. There were no significant differences between both groups in the incidence of restenosis (P = .93) or procedure-related complications (P = .37).

LIMITATIONS: No comparison to a patient group without poststent dilation could be performed.

CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference in angiographic and clinical outcomes among series that performed standard poststent angioplasty and those that performed poststent angioplasty in only select patients.

ABBREVIATION:

CAS
carotid artery stent placement

Endovascular therapy of carotid artery disease has advanced during the past decade and is now considered a valuable treatment alternative to surgery in appropriately selected patients.1⇓⇓⇓–5 The indications for carotid endarterectomy were initially established in the North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial6 in 1991, which expanded treatment indications to patients with symptomatic severe or moderate carotid stenoses. Formerly, patients who were not eligible for surgery were treated with percutaneous transluminal balloon angioplasty,7,8 first described by Kerber et al in 1980.9 Although procedure-related complication rates were similar/comparable for both treatment modalities,7,8,10 some potential drawbacks and specific problems occurred due to the endovascular approach, including luminal compromise from catheters and guidewires crossing the stenotic lesions and/or during balloon inflation (temporary carotid occlusion by a balloon and/or wire catheter), intraprocedural thromboembolic events, elastic vessel recoil, or intimal dissection.11 After the carotid artery stent placement technique was developed, stent-assisted balloon angioplasty showed better results in event-free survival and even lower repeat angioplasty rates.11 The primarily used balloon-expandable stents were increasingly replaced by self-expanding stents,11,12 exhibiting an intrinsic radial expansion force with memory on the stenotic vessel wall. Poststent balloon angioplasty may then be performed to closely appose the stent and intima and, moreover, to expand regions of residual stent narrowing.11

Supporters of standard poststent balloon angioplasty (per protocol) indicated that poststent ballooning decreased the incidence of restenosis by re-establishing the normal luminal diameter. However, numerous studies13⇓–15 have suggested that poststent balloon dilation increases the likelihood of postprocedural emboli. Moreover, poststent ballooning can increase the probability of reflex bradycardia and hypotension, which might be associated with higher rates of periprocedural and postprocedural complications.16⇓⇓–19

Some authors claim that poststent dilation should be performed on a selective, case-by-case basis to maximize patient benefits and limit complications. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no evidence in the recently published literature supporting the superiority of either of these techniques. Standard poststent balloon angioplasty has become the standard of care in many vascular centers,20⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–35 and only some interventionalists19,36⇓⇓⇓⇓–41 prefer performing poststent angioplasty on a selective base. On the basis of the latter studies, standard poststent balloon angioplasty may be associated with additional risks in patients with acceptable angiographic results, without additional post–carotid artery stent placement (CAS) angioplasty.

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of standard poststent angioplasty versus selective poststent angioplasty, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis and analyzed outcomes by a series that performed standard poststent balloon angioplasty per protocol on all patients versus those that performed selective poststent balloon angioplasty on only a subset of patients.

Materials and Methods

Study Selection

A comprehensive review of the literature was performed by using the keywords “carotid stenosis,” “carotid artery disease,” “revascularization,” “carotid,” “stent,” “angioplasty,” and “endarterectomy” in both “AND” and “OR” combinations to search PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, Scopus, and the Web of Science. Inclusion criteria were the following: English language; >30 patients; studies published between January 2000 and January 2015; studies that performed poststent angioplasty regardless of patient selection for this procedure; and studies with adequate data on periprocedural and postprocedural complications, outcome and technical success, and primary patency. The exclusion criteria were the following: case reports; in vitro, cadaveric or animal studies; studies with no poststent angioplasty; review articles, guidelines, and technical notes. In case of any inconsistencies or differences with regard to study inclusion/exclusion into the meta-analysis, the senior author decided on inclusion or exclusion (G.L.).

The electronic search was supplemented by contacting experts in the field and reviewing the bibliographies of included studies for relevant publications. Abstracts, methods, results, figures, and tables of full text for detailed review were searched by 2 independent reviewers (neurosurgeon O.P. and radiologist W.B.) for data on poststent balloon angioplasty selection, technical success, long-term primary patency, procedure-related morbidity and mortality, and possible selection-related complications such as periprocedural hypotension and bradycardia. The reference lists of retrieved articles were also screened for additional studies. Furthermore, in case of multiple publications from the same institution and/or the same authors, only the most recent and updated study was considered to avoid inclusion of overlapping patients.

Definition of Treatment Groups

The objective of this study was to determine whether there was any difference in angiographic and clinical outcomes among series in which standard poststent angioplasty was performed and those in which poststent angioplasty was performed in only select cases. Studies were categorized as either a “standard poststent balloon angioplasty” series or a “selective poststent balloon angioplasty” series. Standard poststent balloon angioplasty series were defined as those in which poststent angioplasty was reportedly performed in all patients, whereas selective poststent balloon angioplasty series were defined as those in which poststent balloon angioplasty was performed in select cases (ie, residual stenosis, poor wall apposition, and so forth).

Data Abstraction

For each study, we extracted the following descriptive clinical and anatomic information: patient demographics, initial clinical status, and the type of patient selection for the poststent balloon angioplasty (standard versus selective). We studied the following outcomes: periprocedural stroke rates with differentiation of minor and major stroke, periprocedural TIA, procedure-related neurologic or cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, periprocedural myocardial infarction, bradycardia and hypotension rates in all patients distinguishing between hemodynamic changes requiring intervention, long-term stroke rate at last follow-up, long-term primary patency, and technical success. Periprocedural complications were defined as those occurring within 30 days of the carotid artery stent placement.

Statistical Analysis

We estimated from each study the cumulative incidence (event rate) and 95% confidence interval for each outcome. Event rates for each intervention were pooled in the meta-analysis across studies by using the random-effects model.42 Consequently, there was no need for establishing a hierarchy of analyzed outcomes. Subgroup interactions were conducted by using an interaction test as described by Altman and Bland.43 For all outcomes, we quantified between-study heterogeneity by calculating the I2 statistics.44,45 Anticipating heterogeneity between studies, we chose this model a priori because it incorporates within-study variance and between-study variance. We were unable to test for publication bias due to the noncomparative nature of these studies.

Results

Literature Review

An initial comprehensive literature search yielded 1585 articles. Eighteen studies were removed as duplicates. On the initial abstract and title review, 1099 were excluded because they were deemed not relevant to the current study. Four hundred sixty-eight studies were reviewed in additional detail; 283 studies were irrelevant because they lacked information about the use of poststent balloon angioplasty and/or postprocedural outcome/complications of patients. Ninety-eight additional studies were excluded because they were either case reports or had too few patients. In total, 87 studies with 19,684 patients with 20,378 carotid artery stenoses were included. Series reporting standard poststent angioplasty included 16,983 procedures (83.3%), and series reporting selective poststent angioplasty included 3395 procedures (16.7%). Sixty included studies had ≥100 patients. Eleven studies were prospective, and 76 were retrospective. Data are summarized in On-line Table 1. Methodologic characteristics of included studies are listed in On-line Table 2. A flow diagram describing our literature search process is provided in Fig 1.

Fig 1.
Fig 1.

A flow diagram describing our comprehensive literature search.

Complication Rates by Type of Poststent Angioplasty

There were no statistically significant differences in any of the periprocedural and long-term complication rates by type of poststent angioplasty. Studies reporting selective poststent balloon angioplasty had similar rates of periprocedural stroke (2.3%; 95% CI, 1.8%–3.0%) compared with those reporting standard poststent balloon angioplasty (2.6%; 95% CI, 2.2%–3.1%) (P = .36). The same was true for long-term stroke rates (1.3% versus 1.6%, P = .49). Major stroke rates were similar in the selective poststent angioplasty group compared with the standard poststent angioplasty group (1.2% versus 1.0%, P = .44). There was no difference in minor stroke rates in the selective poststent angioplasty group (1.3% versus 1.7%, P = .19). There was no difference in periprocedural TIA rates either (1.7% versus 2.2%, P = .43). The periprocedural myocardial infarction rate was 0.6% (95% CI, 0.4%–1.1%) in the selective poststent angioplasty group versus 0.7% (95% CI, 0.5%–1.1%) in the standard poststent angioplasty group (P = .66). These data are summarized in On-line Table 3.

Periprocedural Hemodynamic Changes by Type of Poststent Angioplasty

Studies reporting selective poststent balloon angioplasty had significantly higher rates of bradycardia/hypotension (25.3%; 95% CI, 16.9%–36.3%) compared with those undergoing standard poststent angioplasty (13.3%; 95% CI, 8.0%–21.4%) (P = .04). The same was true for bradycardia/hypotension rates requiring interventions (18.7% versus 8.6%, P = .01). Data are summarized in On-line Table 3.

Angiographic Long-Term Results by Type of Poststent Angioplasty

There were no statistically significant differences in any of the long-term primary patency rates or technical success by type of poststent angioplasty. Studies reporting selective poststent angioplasty had similar long-term primary patency rates (94.3%; 95% CI, 90.7%–96.6%) compared with those undergoing standard poststent angioplasty (94.5%; 95% CI, 92.5%–95.9%) (P = .93). Technical success was 98.7% (95% CI, 97.1%–99.5%) in the selective poststent angioplasty group versus 99.0% (95% CI, 98.6%–99.3%) in the standard poststent angioplasty group (P = .61). These data are summarized in On-line Table 3.

Study Heterogeneity and Characteristics

Significant heterogeneity (I2 value > 50% and P value for the Cochrane Q test < .05) was noted in the analyses of 2 outcomes: bradycardia/hypotension and bradycardia/hypotension requiring intervention. Therefore, confidence in a pooled summary estimate for these 2 outcomes is limited. I2 values are summarized in On-line Table 3. Methodologic characteristics of included studies are listed in On-line Table 2.

Discussion

This systematic review and meta-analysis of 87 studies with 19,684 patients reporting either selective and standard poststent balloon angioplasty following carotid artery stent placement demonstrated no difference in clinical or angiographic outcomes in the CAS treatment with selective or standard poststent balloon angioplasty. In our study, we also found that both selective and standard poststent angioplasty groups had very high technical success rates of >98% and very low procedure-related mortality rates of 0.9%. Furthermore, there were no statistically significant differences between both groups in the incidence of restenosis or in procedure-related complication rates. Last, despite the selective poststent balloon angioplasty being associated with higher rates of periprocedural bradycardia/hypotension events, there was a very slight trend toward lower rates of periprocedural TIAs in these patients. These findings are important because they suggest that standard poststent angioplasty is not required during carotid stent placement. The similar rates of primary patency between groups suggest that the addition of standard poststent angioplasty does not provide any definite benefit.

Comparisons of clinical and angiographic outcomes between standard and selective poststent dilations in the literature are limited largely due to the small sizes of most case series. Numerous transcranial Doppler studies14,15,46 demonstrate the presence of emboli with each passage across a stenosis with a guidewire, embolic protection device, balloon, or stent, with the highest potential for embolization occurring during poststent dilation when the balloon pushes the stent struts against the atheromatous plaque. Ackerstaff et al47 reported in a series of 550 patients that multiple microemboli (>5 showers) at poststent angioplasty were independently associated with neurologic deficits. While our study found no statistically significant differences between the selective and the standard poststent angioplasty groups in terms of risk of stroke and TIA, the standard poststent angioplasty producing no benefit in primary patency suggests that this additional procedure may not always be necessary.

There has been considerable debate in the literature with regard to hemodynamic depression as a possible predictor of adverse events. Some studies16,17,19,48 suggested that hypotension may result in a greater incidence of periprocedural complications, and even death. To our knowledge, in the largest study to date of 103 patients evaluating the effect of poststent ballooning on hemodynamic stability during and after carotid stent placement, Qazi et al19 demonstrated that poststent balloon angioplasty was a significant predictor of hemodynamic depression (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.3–11; P < .01) with increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events. Gupta et al16 showed that patients with persistent hypotension are at a higher risk of developing an adverse clinical event such as stroke or death after CAS. On the other hand, our study found higher rates of bradycardia/hypotension in patients treated with selective poststent angioplasty compared with standard poststent angioplasty; however, there was no impact on procedure-related complications. The reasons behind this surprising finding in our study are not known. Presumably, patients who undergo selective post-CAS dilation are more likely to have rigid stenoses or insufficient alignment of the stent with the vessel wall compared with those undergoing standard post-CAS angioplasty. Consequently, selective post-CAS dilation is then performed in these cases. During this procedure, relevant hemodynamic events such as bradycardia and/or hypotension can occur, reflecting forced opening of the rigid stenosis.

Limitations

We acknowledge that our meta-analysis has several limitations. Studies reporting only carotid artery stent placement without subsequent angioplasty were excluded. With this design, no comparison with a group without poststent dilation could be performed. There was a paucity of studies comparing outcomes of patients who received no poststent angioplasty and those who did. Our results should not be interpreted as saying that poststent angioplasty is ineffective because it is likely useful on a case-by-case basis. Rather, our results should be interpreted to say that there is no difference in angiographic and clinical outcomes among patients undergoing standard poststent angioplasty and those undergoing selective poststent angioplasty.

Ecologic bias (eg, comparisons are made across studies and not within studies), the possibility of publication bias, and statistical heterogeneity are important limitations that affect inferences derived from this study. None of the included studies were randomized or included control groups. There was no detailed information regarding the indications for selective poststent angioplasty. Similarly, there was no information about residual stent narrowing before performing balloon angioplasty. However, given the contemporary and widely accepted literature evidence for treatment of carotid artery disease, all included studies most likely had similar strict indications for carotid artery stent placement.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis of >87 series reporting selective and standard poststent balloon angioplasty following carotid artery stent placement demonstrated that both standard and selective approaches were associated with low rates of procedure-related neurologic or cardiovascular morbidity and high rates of long-term primary patency of >94%. There were no statistically significant differences in clinical or angiographic outcomes between series reporting standard and selective poststent angioplasty. Comparative prospective studies are needed to confirm our findings.

Footnotes

  • Disclosures: Giuseppe Lanzino—UNRELATED: Consultancy: Covidien/Medtronic.* *Money paid to the institution.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    2. Ricotta JJ 2nd.,
    3. Piazza M
    . Carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting? Matching the patient to the intervention. Perspect Vasc Surg Endovasc Ther 2010;22:124–36 doi:10.1177/1531003510381136 pmid:20858617
    CrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    2. Ederle J,
    3. Bonati LH,
    4. Dobson J, et al
    ; CAVATAS Investigators. Endovascular treatment with angioplasty or stenting versus endarterectomy in patients with carotid artery stenosis in the Carotid and Vertebral Artery Transluminal Angioplasty Study (CAVATAS): long-term follow-up of a randomised trial. Lancet Neurol 2009;8:898–907 doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70228-5 pmid:19717345
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    2. Ederle J,
    3. Dobson J,
    4. Featherstone RL, et al
    ; International Carotid Stenting Study investigators. Carotid artery stenting compared with endarterectomy in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis (International Carotid Stenting Study): an interim analysis of a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2010;375:985–97 doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60239-5 pmid:20189239
    CrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    2. Yadav JS,
    3. Wholey MH,
    4. Kuntz RE, et al
    ; Stenting and Angioplasty with Protection in Patients at High Risk for Endarterectomy Investigators. Protected carotid-artery stenting versus endarterectomy in high-risk patients. N Engl J Med 2004;351:1493–501 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa040127 pmid:15470212
    CrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    2. Brott TG,
    3. Hobson RW 2nd.,
    4. Howard G, et al
    ; CREST Investigators. Stenting versus endarterectomy for treatment of carotid-artery stenosis. N Engl J Med 2010;363:11–23 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0912321 pmid:20505173
    CrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial Collaborators. Beneficial effect of carotid endarterectomy in symptomatic patients with high-grade carotid stenosis. N Engl J Med 1991;325:445–53 doi:10.1056/NEJM199108153250701 pmid:1852179
    CrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    2. Kachel R
    . Results of balloon angioplasty in the carotid arteries. J Endovasc Surg 1996;3:22–30 pmid:8798123
    CrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    2. Gil-Peralta A,
    3. Mayol A,
    4. Marcos JR, et al
    . Percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of the symptomatic atherosclerotic carotid arteries: results, complications, and follow-up. Stroke 1996;27:2271–73 doi:10.1161/01.STR.27.12.2271 pmid:8969792
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    2. Kerber CW,
    3. Cromwell LD,
    4. Loehden OL
    . Catheter dilatation of proximal carotid stenosis during distal bifurcation endarterectomy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1980;1:348–49 pmid:6779610
    FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    2. Ferguson GG,
    3. Eliasziw M,
    4. Barr HW, et al
    . The North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial: surgical results in 1415 patients. Stroke 1999;30:1751–58 doi:10.1161/01.STR.30.9.1751 pmid:10471419
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    2. Phatouros CC,
    3. Higashida RT,
    4. Malek AM, et al
    . Carotid artery stent placement for atherosclerotic disease: rationale, technique, and current status. Radiology 2000;217:26–41 doi:10.1148/radiology.217.1.r00oc2526 pmid:11012420
    CrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    2. Mathur A,
    3. Dorros G,
    4. Iyer SS, et al
    . Palmaz stent compression in patients following carotid artery stenting. Cathet Cardiovasc Diag 1997;41:137–40 pmid:9184284
    CrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    2. Martin JB,
    3. Pache JC,
    4. Treggiari-Venzi M, et al
    . Role of the distal balloon protection technique in the prevention of cerebral embolic events during carotid stent placement. Stroke 2001;32:479–84 pmid:11157186
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    2. Manninen HI,
    3. Räsänen HT,
    4. Vanninen RL, et al
    . Stent placement versus percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of human carotid arteries in cadavers in situ: distal embolization and findings at intravascular US, MR imaging and histopathologic analysis. Radiology 1999;212:483–92 doi:10.1148/radiology.212.2.r99au48483 pmid:10429707
    CrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    2. Vos JA,
    3. van den Berg JC,
    4. Ernst SM, et al
    . Carotid angioplasty and stent placement: comparison of transcranial Doppler US data and clinical outcome with and without filtering cerebral protection devices in 509 patients. Radiology 2005;234:493–99 doi:10.1148/radiol.2342040119 pmid:15616120
    CrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    2. Gupta R,
    3. Abou-Chebl A,
    4. Bajzer CT, et al
    . Rate, predictors, and consequences of hemodynamic depression after carotid artery stenting. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:1538–43 doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2005.08.079 pmid:16630988
    FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    2. Howell M,
    3. Krajcer Z,
    4. Dougherty K, et al
    . Correlation of periprocedural systolic blood pressure changes with neurological events in high-risk carotid stent patients. J Endovasc Ther 2002;9:810–16 doi:10.1177/152660280200900614 pmid:12546582
    CrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    2. Park BD,
    3. Divinagracia T,
    4. Madej O, et al
    . Predictors of clinically significant postprocedural hypotension after carotid endarterectomy and carotid angioplasty with stenting. J Vasc Surg 2009;50:526–33 doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2009.05.005 pmid:19700091
    CrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    2. Qazi U,
    3. Obeid TE,
    4. Enwerem N, et al
    . The effect of ballooning following carotid stent deployment on hemodynamic stability. J Vasc Surg 2014;59:756–60 doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2013.09.027 pmid:24342066
    CrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    2. Ghandehari K,
    3. Edraki K,
    4. Karimi M, et al
    . Complications of angioplasty and stenting of cervicocerebral arteries in Iran. Asian Cardiovasc Thorac Ann 2010;18:49–53 doi:10.1177/0218492309355598 pmid:20124297
    CrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    2. Ielasi A,
    3. Latib A,
    4. Godino C, et al
    . Clinical outcomes following protected carotid artery stenting in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients. J Endovasc Ther 2010;17:298–307 doi:10.1583/09-2997.1 pmid:20557166
    CrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    2. Micari A,
    3. Stabile E,
    4. Cremonesi A, et al
    . Carotid artery stenting in octogenarians using a proximal endovascular occlusion cerebral protection device: a multicenter registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2010;76:9–15 doi:10.1002/ccd.22503 pmid:20578188
    CrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    2. Montorsi P,
    3. Galli S,
    4. Ravagnani P, et al
    . Randomized trial of predilation versus direct stenting for treatment of carotid artery stenosis. Int J Cardiol 2010;138:233–38 doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2008.08.012 pmid:18793813
    CrossRefPubMed
  24. 24.↵
    2. Stabile E,
    3. Salemme L,
    4. Sorropago G, et al
    . Proximal endovascular occlusion for carotid artery stenting: results from a prospective registry of 1,300 patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;55:1661–67 doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2009.11.079 pmid:20394868
    FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    2. Almekhlafi MA,
    3. Couillard PL,
    4. Pandya A, et al
    . Outcomes after carotid angioplasty and stenting in symptomatic octogenarians. Can J Neurol Sci 2011;38:446–51 doi:10.1017/S0317167100011859 pmid:21515504
    CrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    2. Satya K,
    3. Dougherty K,
    4. Lee VV, et al
    . Determinants and outcomes of asystole during carotid artery stenting. J Endovasc Ther 2011;18:513–17 doi:10.1583/11-3516R.1 pmid:21861740
    CrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    2. Kimiagar I,
    3. Gur AY,
    4. Auriel E, et al
    . Long-term follow-up of patients after carotid stenting with or without distal protective device in a single tertiary medical center. Vasc Endovasc Surg 2012;46:536–41 doi:10.1177/1538574412457471 pmid:22903330
    CrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    2. Mazzaccaro D,
    3. Occhiuto MT,
    4. Stegher S, et al
    . Long-term results of carotid artery stenting in patients 80 years and older. Perspect Vasc Surg Endovasc Ther 2012;24:49–54 doi:10.1177/1531003512459913 pmid:22965950
    CrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    2. Mohammadian R,
    3. Sohrabi B,
    4. Mansourizadeh R, et al
    . Unprotected carotid artery stenting: complications in 6 months follow-up. Neuroradiology 2012;54:225–30 doi:10.1007/s00234-011-0867-x pmid:21479568
    CrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    2. Dumont TM,
    3. Wach MM,
    4. Mokin M, et al
    . Perioperative complications after carotid artery stenting: a contemporary experience from the University at Buffalo neuroendovascular surgery team. Neurosurgery 2013;73:689–93; discussion 693–94 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000000077 pmid:23842555
    CrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    2. Lago A,
    3. Parkhutik V,
    4. Tembl JI, et al
    . Diabetes does not affect outcome of symptomatic carotid stenosis treated with endovascular techniques. Eur Neurol 2013;69:263–69 doi:10.1159/000346000 pmid:23429066
    CrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    2. Ullery BW,
    3. Orlova K,
    4. Shang EK, et al
    . Results of carotid angioplasty and stenting are equivalent for critical versus high-grade lesions in patients deemed high risk for carotid endarterectomy. J Surg Res 2013;185:21–26 doi:10.1016/j.jss.2013.07.027 pmid:23953786
    CrossRefPubMed
  33. 33.↵
    2. Biggs NG,
    3. Rangarajan S,
    4. McClure DN
    . Has carotid artery stenting found its place? A 10-year regional centre perspective. ANZ J Surg 2016;86:179–83 doi:10.1111/ans.12517 pmid:24456223
    CrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    2. Hernández-Fernández F,
    3. Parrilla G,
    4. Garcia-Villalba B, et al
    . Comparison between proximal versus distal protection devices in 287 cases of carotid revascularization using angioplasty and stenting: periprocedure complications, morbidity, and mortality. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2014;37:639–45 doi:10.1007/s00270-013-0714-z: pmid:23912495
    CrossRefPubMed
  35. 35.↵
    2. Morgan CE,
    3. Lee CJ,
    4. Chin JA, et al
    . High-risk anatomic variables and plaque characteristics in carotid artery stenting. Vasc Endovascular Surg 2014;48:452–59 doi:10.1177/1538574414551577 pmid:25252921
    CrossRefPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    2. Cohen JE,
    3. Gomori JM,
    4. Itshayek E, et al
    . Ischemic complications after tailored carotid artery stenting in different subpopulations with high-grade stenosis: feared but rare. J Clin Neurosci 2015;22:189–94 doi:10.1016/j.jocn.2014.09.005 pmid:25444995
    CrossRefPubMed
  37. 37.↵
    2. Ogata A,
    3. Sonobe M,
    4. Kato N, et al
    . Carotid artery stenting without post-stenting balloon dilatation. J Neurointerv Surg 2014;6:517–20 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2013-010873 pmid:24014467
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  38. 38.↵
    2. Oteros Fernandez R,
    3. Jimenez-Gomez E,
    4. Bravo-Rodriguez F, et al
    . Unprotected carotid artery stenting in symptomatic patients with high-grade stenosis: results and long-term follow-up in a single-center experience. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:1285–91 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2951 pmid:22422184
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  39. 39.↵
    2. Tallarita T,
    3. Rabinstein AA,
    4. Cloft H, et al
    . Are distal protection devices ‘protective’ during carotid angioplasty and stenting? Stroke 2011;42:1962–66 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.607820 pmid:21566230
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  40. 40.↵
    2. Mansour OY,
    3. Weber J,
    4. Niesen W, et al
    . Carotid angioplasty and stenting without protection devices: safety and efficacy concerns–single center experience. Clin Neuroradiol 2011;21:65–73 doi:10.1007/s00062-011-0057-6 pmid:21562830
    CrossRefPubMed
  41. 41.↵
    2. González A,
    3. Gil-Peralta A,
    4. Mayol A, et al
    . Internal carotid artery stenting in patients with near occlusion: 30-day and long-term outcome. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:252–58 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2285 pmid:21051515
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  42. 42.↵
    2. DerSimonian R,
    3. Laird N
    . Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986;7:177–88 doi:10.1016/0197-2456(86)90046-2 pmid:3802833
    CrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.↵
    2. Altman DG,
    3. Bland JM
    . Interaction revisited: the difference between two estimates. BMJ 2003;326:219 doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7382.219 pmid:12543843
    FREE Full Text
  44. 44.↵
    2. Higgins JP,
    3. Thompson SG,
    4. Deeks JJ, et al
    . Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003;327:557–60 doi:10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557 pmid:12958120
    FREE Full Text
  45. 45.↵
    2. Higgins JP,
    3. Thompson SG
    . Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002;21:1539–58 doi:10.1002/sim.1186 pmid:12111919
    CrossRefPubMed
  46. 46.↵
    2. Rubartelli P,
    3. Brusa G,
    4. Arrigo A, et al
    . Transcranial Doppler monitoring during stenting of the carotid bifurcation: evaluation of two different distal protection devices in preventing embolization. J Endovasc Ther 2006;13:436–42 doi:10.1583/05-1804MR.1 pmid:16928156
    CrossRefPubMed
  47. 47.↵
    2. Ackerstaff RG,
    3. Suttorp MJ,
    4. van den Berg JC, et al
    ; Antonius Carotid Endarterectomy, Angioplasty, and Stenting Study Group. Prediction of early cerebral outcome by transcranial Doppler monitoring in carotid bifurcation angioplasty and stenting. J Vasc Surg 2005;41:618–24 doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2005.01.034 pmid:15874925
    CrossRefPubMed
  48. 48.↵
    2. Park B,
    3. Shapiro D,
    4. Dahn M, et al
    . Carotid artery angioplasty with stenting and postprocedure hypotension. Am J Surg 2005;190:691–95 doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2005.07.004 pmid:16226941
    CrossRefPubMed
  49. 49.
    2. Morrish W,
    3. Grahovac S,
    4. Douen A, et al
    . Intracranial hemorrhage after stenting and angioplasty of extracranial carotid stenosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000;21:1911–16 pmid:11110546
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  50. 50.
    2. Ahmadi R,
    3. Schillinger M,
    4. Lang W, et al
    . Carotid artery stenting in older patients: is age a risk factor for poor outcome? J Endovasc Ther 2002;9:559–65 doi:10.1177/152660280200900501 pmid:12431135
    CrossRefPubMed
  51. 51.
    2. Criado FJ,
    3. Lingelbach JM,
    4. Ledesma DF, et al
    . Carotid artery stenting in a vascular surgery practice. J Vasc Surg 2002;35:430–34 doi:10.1067/mva.2002.121209 pmid:11877688
    CrossRefPubMed
  52. 52.
    2. Hobson RW 2nd.,
    3. Lal BK,
    4. Chakhtoura EY, et al
    . Carotid artery closure for endarterectomy does not influence results of angioplasty-stenting for restenosis. J Vasc Surg 2002;35:435–38 doi:10.1067/mva.2002.122022 pmid:11877689
    CrossRefPubMed
  53. 53.
    2. Kao HL,
    3. Lin LY,
    4. Lu CJ, et al
    . Long-term results of elective stenting for severe carotid artery stenosis in Taiwan. Cardiology 2002;97:89–93 doi:10.1159/000057678 pmid:11978955
    CrossRefPubMed
  54. 54.
    Antonius Carotid Endaterectomy, Angioplasty, and Stenting Study Group. Transcranial Doppler monitoring in angioplasty and stenting of the carotid bifurcation. J Endovasc Ther 2003;10:702–10 doi:10.1177/152660280301000404 pmid:14533974
    CrossRefPubMed
  55. 55.
    2. Cernetti C,
    3. Reimers B,
    4. Picciolo A, et al
    . Carotid artery stenting with cerebral protection in 100 consecutive patients: immediate and two-year follow-up results. Ital Heart J 2003;4:695–700 pmid:14664282
    PubMed
  56. 56.
    2. Cremonesi A,
    3. Manetti R,
    4. Setacci F, et al
    . Protected carotid stenting: clinical advantages and complications of embolic protection devices in 442 consecutive patients. Stroke 2003;34:1936–41 doi:10.1161/01.STR.0000081000.23561.61 pmid:12843347
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  57. 57.
    2. Tsuura M,
    3. Terada T,
    4. Matsumoto H, et al
    . Clinical results of stenting for cervical internal carotid stenoses. Interv Neuroradiol 2003;9:133–36 pmid:20591242
    CrossRefPubMed
  58. 58.
    2. Wholey MH,
    3. Wholey MH,
    4. Tan WA, et al
    . A comparison of balloon-mounted and self-expanding stents in the carotid arteries: immediate and long-term results of more than 500 patients. J Endovasc Ther 2003;10:171–81 doi:10.1177/152660280301000203 pmid:12877596
    CrossRefPubMed
  59. 59.
    2. Eskandari MK,
    3. Longo GM,
    4. Vijungco JD, et al
    . Does carotid stenting measure up to endarterectomy? A vascular surgeon's experience. Arch Surg 2004;139:734–38 doi:10.1001/archsurg.139.7.734 pmid:15249405
    CrossRefPubMed
  60. 60.
    2. Faries PL,
    3. Dayal R,
    4. Clair DG, et al
    . Continuity in the treatment of carotid artery disease: results of a carotid stenting program initiated by vascular surgeons. Ann Vasc Surg 2004;18:669–76 doi:10.1007/s10016-004-0101-y pmid:15599624
    CrossRefPubMed
  61. 61.
    2. Kastrup A,
    3. Schulz JB,
    4. Raygrotzki S, et al
    . Comparison of angioplasty and stenting with cerebral protection versus endarterectomy for treatment of internal carotid artery stenosis in elderly patients. J Vasc Surg 2004;40:945–51 doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2004.08.022 pmid:15557909
    CrossRefPubMed
  62. 62.
    2. Sadato A,
    3. Satow T,
    4. Ishii A, et al
    . Use of a large angioplasty balloon for predilation is a risk factor for embolic complications in protected carotid stenting. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 2004;44:337–42; discussion 343 doi:10.2176/nmc.44.337 pmid:15347209
    CrossRefPubMed
  63. 63.
    2. Bonaldi G,
    3. Aiazzi L,
    4. Baruzzi F, et al
    . Angioplasty and stenting of the cervical carotid bifurcation under filter protection: a prospective study in a series of 53 patients. J Neuroradiol 2005;32:109–17 doi:10.1016/S0150-9861(05)83125-6 pmid:15984402
    CrossRefPubMed
  64. 64.
    2. Cayne NS,
    3. Faries PL,
    4. Trocciola SM, et al
    . Carotid angioplasty and stent-induced bradycardia and hypotension: impact of prophylactic atropine administration and prior carotid endarterectomy. J Vasc Surg 2005;41:956–61 doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2005.02.038 pmid:15944593
    CrossRefPubMed
  65. 65.
    2. Coppi G,
    3. Moratto R,
    4. Silingardi R, et al
    . PRIAMUS: proximal flow blockage cerebral protection during carotid stenting—results from a multicenter Italian registry. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 2005;46:219–27 pmid:15956919
    PubMed
  66. 66.
    2. Eskandari MK,
    3. Longo GM,
    4. Matsumura JS, et al
    . Carotid stenting done exclusively by vascular surgeons: first 175 cases. Ann Surg 2005;242:431–36; discussion 436–38 pmid:16135929
    PubMed
  67. 67.
    2. Kadkhodayan Y,
    3. Derdeyn CP,
    4. Cross DT 3rd., et al
    . Procedure complications of carotid angioplasty and stent placement without cerebral protection devices. Neurosurg Focus 2005;18:e1 pmid:15669795
    PubMed
  68. 68.
    2. Li SM,
    3. Li D,
    4. Ling F, et al
    . Carotid artery stenting: experience of a single institute in China. Interv Neuroradiol 2005;11:205–12 pmid:20584476
    PubMed
  69. 69.
    2. Lin PH,
    3. Bush RL,
    4. Peden EK, et al
    . Carotid artery stenting with neuroprotection: assessing the learning curve and treatment outcome. Am J Surg 2005;190:850–57 doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2005.08.008 pmid:16307933
    CrossRefPubMed
  70. 70.
    2. Longo GM,
    3. Kibbe MR,
    4. Eskandari MK
    . Carotid artery stenting in octogenarians: is it too risky? Ann Vasc Surg 2005;19:812–16 doi:10.1007/s10016-005-7977-z pmid:16200469
    CrossRefPubMed
  71. 71.
    2. Reimers B,
    3. Sievert H,
    4. Schuler GC, et al
    . Proximal endovascular flow blockage for cerebral protection during carotid artery stenting: results from a prospective multicenter registry. J Endovasc Ther 2005;12:156–65 doi:10.1583/04-1400MR.1 pmid:15823062
    CrossRefPubMed
  72. 72.
    2. Chaer RA,
    3. Derubertis BG,
    4. Trocciola SM, et al
    . Safety and efficacy of carotid angioplasty and stenting in high-risk patients. Am Surg 2006;72:694–98; discussion 698–99 pmid:16913312
    PubMed
  73. 73.
    2. Faries PL,
    3. Trocciola SM,
    4. De Rubertis B, et al
    . Hemodynamic instability after carotid artery angioplasty and stening is associated with increased age and female gender. Vas Dis Management 2006;3:200–05
  74. 74.
    2. Gröschel K,
    3. Ernemann U,
    4. Schulz JB, et al
    . Statin therapy at carotid angioplasty and stent placement: effect on procedure-related stroke, myocardial infarction, and death. Radiology 2006;240:145–51 doi:10.1148/radiol.2401050603 pmid:16793975
    CrossRefPubMed
  75. 75.
    2. Halabi M,
    3. Gruberg L,
    4. Pitchersky S, et al
    . Carotid artery stenting in surgical high-risk patients. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2006;67:513–18 doi:10.1002/ccd.20640 pmid:16534816
    CrossRefPubMed
  76. 76.
    2. Kwon BJ,
    3. Han MH,
    4. Kang HS, et al
    . Protection filter-related events in extracranial carotid artery stenting: a single-center experience. J Endovasc Ther 2006;13:711–22 doi:10.1583/06-1900.1 pmid:17154708
    CrossRefPubMed
  77. 77.
    2. Nano G,
    3. Dalainas I,
    4. Bianchi P, et al
    . Ballooning-induced bradycardia during carotid stenting in primary stenosis and restenosis. Neuroradiology 2006;48:533–36 doi:10.1007/s00234-006-0096-x pmid:16670918
    CrossRefPubMed
  78. 78.
    2. Cotroneo AR,
    3. Iezzi R
    . Cutting balloon angioplasty (CBA) versus conventional balloon angioplasty (PTA) in the pre-dilatation of carotid artery stenosis: our preliminary experience. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2007;30:1210–17 doi:10.1007/s00270-007-9171-x pmid:17909883
    CrossRefPubMed
  79. 79.
    2. Criado E,
    3. Fontcuberta J,
    4. Orgaz A, et al
    . Transcervical carotid stenting with carotid artery flow reversal: 3-year follow-up of 103 stents. J Vasc Surg 2007;46:864–69 doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2007.07.028 pmid:17980271
    CrossRefPubMed
  80. 80.
    2. Kawarada O,
    3. Yokoi Y,
    4. Takemoto K, et al
    . Double-wire technique in balloon-protected carotid artery stenting. J Interv Cardio 2007;20:55–62 doi:10.1111/j.1540-8183.2007.00218.x pmid:17300405
    CrossRefPubMed
  81. 81.
    2. Lin PH,
    3. Zhou W,
    4. Kougias P, et al
    . Factors associated with hypotension and bradycardia after carotid angioplasty and stenting. J Vasc Surg 2007;46:846–53; discussion 853–54 doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2007.07.020 pmid:17980268
    CrossRefPubMed
  82. 82.
    2. Maynar M,
    3. Baldi S,
    4. Rostagno R, et al
    . Carotid stenting without use of balloon angioplasty and distal protection devices: preliminary experience in 100 cases. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:1378–83 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A0543 pmid:17698546
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  83. 83.
    2. Van der Heyden J,
    3. Suttorp MJ,
    4. Bal ET, et al
    . Staged carotid angioplasty and stenting followed by cardiac surgery in patients with severe asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis: early and long-term results. Circulation 2007;116:2036–42 doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.106.658625 pmid:17938290
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  84. 84.
    2. Younis GA,
    3. Gupta K,
    4. Mortazavi A, et al
    . Predictors of carotid stent restenosis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2007;69:673–82 doi:10.1002/ccd.20809 pmid:17351931
    CrossRefPubMed
  85. 85.
    2. AbuRahma AF,
    3. Bates MC,
    4. Eads K, et al
    . Safety and efficacy of carotid angioplasty/stenting in 100 consecutive high surgical risk patients: immediate and long-term follow-up. Vasc Endovasc Surg 2008;42:433–39 doi:10.1177/1538574408318477 pmid:8583300
    CrossRefPubMed
  86. 86.
    2. Bussière M,
    3. Pelz DM,
    4. Kalapos P, et al
    . Results using a self-expanding stent alone in the treatment of severe symptomatic carotid bifurcation stenosis. J Neurosurg 2008;109:454–60 doi:10.3171/JNS/2008/109/9/0454 pmid:18759576
    CrossRefPubMed
  87. 87.
    2. Bussière M,
    3. Lownie SP,
    4. Lee D, et al
    . Hemodynamic instability during carotid artery stenting: the relative contribution of stent deployment versus balloon dilation. J Neurosurg 2009;110:905–12 doi:10.3171/2008.9.JNS08509 pmid:19231933
    CrossRefPubMed
  88. 88.
    2. Buszman P,
    3. Debiński M,
    4. Gruszka A, et al
    . Early and late outcomes of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty of cephalad arteries. Kardiol Pol 2008;66:233–42, discussion 243 pmid:18393110
    PubMed
  89. 89.
    2. Castriota F,
    3. de Campos Martins EC,
    4. Setacci C, et al
    . Cutting balloon angioplasty in percutaneous carotid interventions. J Endovasc Ther 2008;15:655–62 doi:10.1583/08-2408.1 pmid:19090627
    CrossRefPubMed
  90. 90.
    2. Cieri E,
    3. De Rango P,
    4. Maccaroni MR, et al
    . Is haemodynamic depression during carotid stenting a predictor of peri-procedural complications? Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg 2008;35:399–404 doi:10.1016/j.ejvs.2007.10.020 pmid:18178113
    CrossRefPubMed
  91. 91.
    2. Diehm N,
    3. Katzen BT,
    4. Dick F, et al
    . Influence of stent type on hemodynamic depression after carotid artery stent placement. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2008;19:23–30 doi:10.1016/j.jvir.2007.09.020 pmid:18192464
    CrossRefPubMed
  92. 92.
    2. Henry M,
    3. Henry I,
    4. Polydorou A, et al
    . Carotid angioplasty and stenting in octogenarians: is it safe? Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2008;72:309–17 doi:10.1002/ccd.21574 pmid:18729151
    CrossRefPubMed
  93. 93.
    2. Pieniazek P,
    3. Musialek P,
    4. Kablak-Ziembicka A, et al
    . Carotid artery stenting with patient- and lesion-tailored selection of the neuroprotection system and stent type: early and 5-year results from a prospective academic registry of 535 consecutive procedures (TARGET-CAS). J Endovasc Ther 2008;15:249–62 doi:10.1583/07-2264.1 pmid:18540694
    CrossRefPubMed
  94. 94.
    2. Roffi M,
    3. Greutmann M,
    4. Schwarz U, et al
    . Flow impairment during protected carotid artery stenting: impact of filter device design. J Endovasc Ther 2008;15:103–09 doi:10.1583/07-2252.1 pmid:18254671
    CrossRefPubMed
  95. 95.
    2. Velez CA,
    3. White CJ,
    4. Reilly JP, et al
    . Carotid artery stent placement is safe in the very elderly (> or =80 years). Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2008;72:303–08 doi:10.1002/ccd.21635 pmid:18726941
    CrossRefPubMed
  96. 96.
    2. Brown KE,
    3. Usman A,
    4. Kibbe MR, et al
    . Carotid stenting using tapered and nontapered stents: associated neurological complications and restenosis rates. Ann Vasc Surg 2009;23:439–45 doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2008.11.007 pmid:19128933
    CrossRefPubMed
  97. 97.
    2. Goldstein LJ,
    3. Khan HU,
    4. Sambol EB, et al
    . Carotid artery stenting is safe and associated with comparable outcomes in men and women. J Vasc Surg 2009;49:315–23; discussion 323–24 doi:10.1016/j.jvs.2008.08.110 pmid:19216949
    CrossRefPubMed
  98. 98.
    2. Simonetti G,
    3. Gandini R,
    4. Versaci F, et al
    . Carotid artery stenting: findings based on 8 years' experience [in English, Italian]. Radiol Med 2009;114:95–110 doi:10.1007/s11547-008-0326-x pmid:18820992
    CrossRefPubMed
  99. 99.
    2. Theron J,
    3. Venturi C,
    4. Reul J, et al
    . Immediate and 30-day clinical outcome of patients treated with the TwinOne cerebral protection system: multicenter experience in 217 cases. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2009;32:1139–45 doi:10.1007/s00270-009-9686-4 pmid:19730937
    CrossRefPubMed
  100. 100.
    2. Veselka J,
    3. Cerná D,
    4. Zimolová P, et al
    . Feasibility, safety, and early outcomes of direct carotid artery stent implantation with use of the FilterWire EZ Embolic Protection System. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2009;73:733–38 doi:10.1002/ccd.21936 pmid:19198010
    CrossRefPubMed
  101. 101.
    2. Chung C,
    3. Cayne NS,
    4. Adelman MA, et al
    . Improved hemodynamic outcomes with glycopyrrolate over atropine in carotid angioplasty and stenting. Perspect Vasc Surg Endovasc Ther 2010;22:164–70 doi:10.1177/1531003510388277 pmid:21098497
    CrossRefPubMed
  102. 102.
    2. Shabaneh B,
    3. Dougherty K,
    4. Hernandez E, et al
    . Catheter aspiration thrombectomy during carotid stenting is safe and potentially efficacious: a pilot retrospective study. J Cardiovasc Surg (Torino) 2010;51:865–72 pmid:21124284
    PubMed
  103. 103.
    2. Knur R
    . Carotid artery stenting with distal filter protection: single-center experience in high-surgical-risk patients. Heart Vessels 2011;26:125–30 doi:10.1007/s00380-010-0002-7 pmid:21052692
    CrossRefPubMed
  104. 104.
    2. Mak CS,
    3. Chambers BR,
    4. Clark DJ, et al
    . Multidisciplinary approach to carotid stenting. Intern Med J 2011;41:789–94 doi:10.1111/j.1445-5994.2010.02285.x pmid:20561100
    CrossRefPubMed
  105. 105.
    2. Mendiz OA,
    3. Sampaolesi AH,
    4. Londero HF, et al
    . Initial experience with transradial access for carotid artery stenting. Vasc Endovasc Surg 2011;45:499–503 doi:10.1177/1538574411405547 pmid:21844492
    CrossRefPubMed
  106. 106.
    2. Rizwan Khalid M,
    3. Khalid F,
    4. Farooqui FA, et al
    . Can experienced physicians with high peripheral interventional volume but low carotid artery stenting (CAS) volume achieve low complication rates during CAS? EuroIntervention 2011;6:744–47 doi:10.4244/EIJV6I6A126 pmid:21205599
    CrossRefPubMed
  107. 107.
    2. Wu YM,
    3. Wong HF,
    4. Chen YL, et al
    . Carotid stenting of asymptomatic and symptomatic carotid artery stenoses with and without the use of a distal embolic protection device. Acta Cardiol 2011;66:453–58 doi:10.2143/AC.66.4.2126593 pmid:21894801
    CrossRefPubMed
  108. 108.
    2. Harada K,
    3. Morioka J,
    4. Higa T, et al
    . Significance of combining distal filter protection and a guiding catheter with temporary balloon occlusion for carotid artery stenting: clinical results and evaluation of debris capture. Ann Vasc Surg 2012;26:929–36 doi:10.1016/j.avsg.2012.04.022 pmid:22944567
    CrossRefPubMed
  109. 109.
    2. Moratto R,
    3. Veronesi J,
    4. Silingardi R, et al
    . Urgent carotid artery stenting with technical modifications for patients with transient ischemic attacks and minor stroke. J Endovasc Ther 2012;19:627–35 doi:10.1583/JEVT-12-3852MR.1 pmid:23046328
    CrossRefPubMed
  110. 110.
    2. Kessler I,
    3. Gory B,
    4. Macian F, et al
    . Carotid artery stenting in patients with symptomatic carotid stenosis: a single-center series. J Neuroradiol 2013;40:38–44 doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2012.03.003 pmid:22633044
    CrossRefPubMed
  111. 111.
    2. Miyawaki S,
    3. Maeda K
    . Surgical treatment for cervical carotid artery stenosis in the elderly: importance of perioperative management of ischemic cardiac complications. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 2014;54:120–25 doi:10.2176/nmc.oa2012-0436 pmid:24257501
    CrossRefPubMed
  112. 112.
    2. Shinozaki N,
    3. Ogata N,
    4. Ikari Y
    . Plaque protrusion detected by intravascular ultrasound during carotid artery stenting. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis 2014;23:2622–25 doi:10.1016/j.jstrokecerebrovasdis.2014.06.007 pmid:25304722
    CrossRefPubMed
  • Received August 29, 2016.
  • Accepted after revision December 12, 2016.
View Abstract
Back to top

In this issue

Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article
Cite this article
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Bookmark this article
Selective-versus-Standard Poststent Dilation for Carotid Artery Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
O. Petr, W. Brinjikji, M.H. Murad, B. Glodny, G. Lanzino
American Journal of Neuroradiology May 2017, 38 (5) 999-1005; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5103
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
Purchase

Jump to section

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

Similar Articles

Advertisement