An evidence‐based review of the impact of periprocedural myocardial infarction in carotid revascularization

Landmark trials comparing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) with medical therapy in patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic atherosclerotic stenosis of extracranial carotid arteries have favored carotid revascularization. Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has emerged as a minimally invasive option for revascularization of carotid artery stenoses and has been shown to be noninferior to CEA, regardless of patient symptom status. Debate continues regarding the importance of periprocedural myocardial infarction (PMI) as an endpoint in carotid revascularization trials. Recent randomized comparisons of CEA and CAS pre‐specify PMI as an endpoint. Understanding PMI in CEA and CAS, the need for routine biomarker assessment surrounding both revascularization strategies, the effect of PMI on long‐term morbidity and mortality, and the groups most at risk for PMI are of critical importance when choosing a carotid revascularization strategy for symptomatic and asymptomatic patients, since decreasing the incidence of PMI will make revascularization safer. This review examines available data regarding the relevance of PMI in vascular and carotid‐specific outcomes. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Feasibility of carotid artery stenting in patients with angiographic string sign

Background : Treatment of angiographic string sign (SS) of the carotid artery with carotid endarterectomy or carotid artery stenting (CAS) has been associated with a high incidence of periprocedural neurological events. We describe our experience with CAS in a case series of symptomatic patients with severe carotid stenosis and angiographic SS. Methods : We performed a retrospective review from 1999 to 2009 using our cardiac cath laboratory database and identified nine patients with the angiographic SS who underwent CAS. All patients were referred for carotid angiography by a neurologist due to symptoms (stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA)). All lesions were predilated and treated with self‐expanding stents. Distal protection devices were utilized (six patients) once they became available. Periprocedural outcomes and long‐term follow‐up was reviewed when available. Results : The average time from onset of symptoms to CAS was 45 days. All CAS procedures were technically and clinically successful without acute complications. One year follow‐up was available in eight patients. One patient had a possible TIA, and the remaining seven patients did not report any events (death, stroke, TIA or myocardial infarction). Carotid ultrasound evaluation at 12 months was available in six patients and showed no evidence of restenosis. Conclusions : In our experience, CAS in patients with severe symptomatic carotid stenosis and angiographic SS is feasible, with an acceptably low periprocedural complication rate. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Carotid Revascularization: A Systematic Review of the Evidence

Objective and Background

The aim of this study is to provide an evidence‐based review of the periprocedural safety and long‐term effectiveness of carotid artery stenting (CAS) compared to carotid endarterectomy (CEA), with particular attention paid to the use of embolic protection devices and patients at high risk for CEA.

Methods

Electronic databases (Ovid Medline, Cochrane central register of controlled trials, Pubmed, and Embase) were searched to identify: (1) randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing outcomes of CEA and CAS, and (2) prospective clinical trials assessing the safety of CAS in patients at high surgical risk. Pooled incidence rates and one‐sided 95% confidence interval for the periprocedural and long‐term composite end‐point of stroke, myocardial infarction, or death among high surgical risk patients were generated and compared to objective performance criteria (OPC) reported by previous trials.

Results

Six RCTs and 14 prospective clinical trials met our search criteria. Selected RCTs showed inconsistency in reported periprocedural and long‐term outcome rates. Pooled incidence rates of the periprocedural and long‐term composite end‐point of stroke, myocardial infarction or death in high surgical risk candidates were 5.59% and 7.92%, respectively. These results were noninferior to selected OPCs (P‐value <0.001).

Conclusions

CAS represents a safe and effective stroke prevention strategy in high surgical risk patients when compared with CEA. The inconsistent results from the RCTs and the improved outcomes in the prospective clinical trials are likely related to variability in operator experience, use of embolic protection devices, and patient selection strategies.

     

Carotid artery stenting with distal filter protection: single-center experience in high-surgical-risk patients

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is an efficient alternative procedure for the treatment of high-surgical-risk patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis. The use of cerebral protection systems might decrease procedural risk of stroke and death. We report our initial experience with protected carotid stenting in high-risk patients with severe carotid artery disease. From January 2006 until July 2008 we routinely performed CAS using a distal filter protection device in 65 consecutive high-surgical-risk patients with 72 high-grade carotid stenoses. Technical success rate was 97.2%. Neurologic periprocedural complications included two transient ischemic attacks and one major stroke. Three filter-related complications were managed without negative results to the patients. The overall in-hospital and 30-days MACE rate was 1.5%, 3.6% in symptomatic patients and 0% in asymptomatic patients. In our series of high-risk patients, CAS with the use of a distal filter protection system was safe and effective with a low incidence of periprocedural complications.     

Carotid artery stenting: a therapeutic alternative in subtotal internal carotid artery occlusions

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is emerging as a less invasive modality for treating atherosclerotic occlusive disease of the internal carotid artery (ICA). Randomized trials like the SAPPHIRE trial have demonstrated that CAS is not inferior to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in the treatment of carotid artery stenosis, and maybe even superior in high-risk symptomatic patients. However, patients with subtotal ICA occlusions with thrombus are excluded from randomized CAS trials and CAS registries. To our knowledge, carotid angioplasty with stenting has not been attempted in these cases. We present three cases of symptomatic subtotal ICA occlusions successfully treated with CAS without any periprocedural complications. With careful patient selection and technical expertise, endovascular management could be considered as a treatment option in subtotal carotid occlusions.     

Carotid Artery Stenting: Update

“Extracranial carotid artery stenosis is responsible for approximately 20–30% of ischemic strokes. Traditionally, carotid artery stenosis has been treated with carotid endarterectomy. However, the low periprocedural complication rate and the mid term durability of carotid artery stenting has made it a competitive alternative treatment strategy. This update reviews the technical aspects of carotid artery stenting, clinical data supporting carotid artery stenting‐particularly in high risk patients, and the complications associated with carotid artery stenting.”     

Carotid artery revascularization with distal protection in high‐surgical‐risk patients in routine clinical practice: Rationale and design of the CABANA safety surveillance program

Background: Continuous improvement in carotid artery stenting (CAS) outcomes, especially for periprocedural death and stroke in high‐surgical‐risk patients, have been seen in recent randomized trials of CAS versus carotid endarterectomy and CAS registries. However, these studies use stringent inclusion/exclusion criteria for patient, institution, and physician selection. The Carotid Stenting Boston Scientific Surveillance Program (CABANA) study was initiated to evaluate periprocedural outcomes with modern versions of the Carotid Wallstent and FilterWire EZ System for operators with a wide range of clinical specialties, CAS experience and training levels, in patients with a broad range of high‐surgical‐risk conditions and lesion types. Methods: This prospective, single‐arm study enrolled 1,097 subjects with 1,098 carotid artery lesions at 99 study centers. Investigators were grouped into one of three tiers according to whether they had a high, medium, or low level of previous CAS experience and were also categorized by their CAS‐credential‐based training requirements for the CABANA study. Follow‐up at 30 days includes clinical evaluation and independent neurological and NIH stroke scale assessments. The primary endpoint rate of 30‐day composite stroke, death, and MI, as well as the rates of these individual events, will be evaluated across the overall study, by physician experience tier, and by physician training tier. Discussion: The evaluation of periprocedural CAS safety in a real‐world environment with modern devices in high‐surgical‐risk patients treated by physicians with a broad range of training and experience will better inform treatment decisions in the future. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

A "mouse in a trap" method for cerebral protection during carotid stenting: Technical note.

Carotid artery angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is now used as an alternative to surgical endarterectomy. The introduction of cerebral protection systems during stenting has improved carotid artery stenosis treatment, with less periprocedural complications. A "mouse in a trap" method was conceived and used in three patients. This involved an emboli entrapment-aspiration system using one proximal occluder in the common carotid artery and two distal occluders in the internal carotid artery or external carotid artery, followed by serial inflation-deflation cycles during each carotid stenting procedure. Debris was retrieved before dilation in one patient, after deployment in one, and after dilation in two. Although only used in a few cases to date, the method may improve the practice of CAS in treating patients with carotid stenosis, resulting in less thromboembolic events.     

颈动脉支架成形术中少见并发症的预防和处理技巧

目的 探讨颈动脉支架成形术（CAS）中少见并发症的原因及其处理技巧。方法 给5例颈动脉起始段狭窄率〉98％的患昔行CAS治疗，对术中出现的并发症进行分析。结果 术中斑块碎裂1例，保护伞导致的病变血管急性闭塞2例，保护伞撤出困难1例，支架到位困难1例。5例患者无一例出现术中和术后卒中发作或死亡。结论 正确预防和处理这些并发症，是避免术中致残、致死的关键。     

Rate, predictors, and consequences of hemodynamic depression after carotid artery stenting.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the frequency, predictors, and consequences of hemodynamic depression (HD) after carotid artery stenting (CAS). BACKGROUND: Hemodynamic depression has been reported after carotid artery stenting CAS and carotid endarterectomy (CEA). METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data on 500 consecutive CAS procedures performed over a 5-year period. Hemodynamic depression was defined as periprocedural hypotension (systolic blood pressure <90 mm Hg) or bradycardia (heart rate <60 beats/s). Univariate and multivariate binary logistic regression models were used to determine the predictors and consequences of HD and persistent HD. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 70.5 +/- 10 years, and 69% were men. Hemodynamic depression occurred during 210 procedures (42%), whereas persistent HD developed in 84 procedures (17%). Features that independently predicted HD included lesions involving the carotid bulb (odds ratio [OR] 2.18 [range 1.46 to 3.26], p < 0.0001) or the presence of a calcified plaque (OR 1.89 [range 1.25 to 2.84], p < 0.002). Prior ipsilateral CEA was associated with reduced risk of HD (OR 0.35 [range 0.20 to 0.60], p < 0.0001). Patients who developed persistent HD were at a significantly increased risk of a periprocedural major adverse clinical event (OR 3.05 [range 1.35 to 5.23], p < 0.02) or stroke (OR 3.34 [range 1.13 to 9.90], p < 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Hemodynamic depression is common after CAS, particularly in patients with a calcified plaque in the carotid bulb, but is easily treated with conventional methods. Patients who develop persistent HD are at an increased risk of periprocedural major adverse clinical events and stroke.     

Zerebrale Protektion bei der Karotisstentangioplastie

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is an efficient procedure for the treatment of symptomatic and asymptomatic carotid stenosis and is nowadays well established as an interesting alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA) in daily clinical routine. The use of cerebral protection systems led to a significantly lower periprocedural incidence of stroke and death. Filter systems and balloon occlusion systems are available for cerebral protection. This overview compiles the technique, benefit and need for cerebral protection during carotid artery stenting.     

Technik der Karotis-PTA

Over the past 25 years carotid artery stenting (CAS) has emerged as an alternative to carotid endarterectomy (CEA). Most of all younger patients and symptomatic patients with contralateral carotid artery occlusion particularly benefit from CAS. To achieve an optimal result with CAS, patient selection and even more important, knowledge and experience of the interventionist is crucial. The periprocedural complication rate of CAS in large experienced centers is lower (2–3%) than those in randomized trials. Several different devices are now available which allow the procedure to be tailored according to patient anatomy and lesion complexity. Complications like hyperperfusion syndrome and intracerebral bleeding, rupture of side branches of the external or internal carotid artery as well as problems caused by slow flow can be widely avoided by adequate experience.     

Carotid sinus reactions during carotid artery stenting: predictors, incidence, and influence on clinical outcome.

Carotid sinus reactions (CSR), defined as asystole >/= 3 sec and hypotension (systolic blood pressure ostial > isolated internal carotid artery; P < 0.001). The other independent predictors were presence of contralateral stenosis (P < 0.02), length of stenosis (P < 0.03), and balloon-to-artery ratio (P < 0.02). Occurrence of CSR was unrelated to periprocedural cerebral or cardiovascular complications (7.1% vs. 9.5%; NS). We conclude that CSR occurs frequently (40%) during CAS. Bifurcation location of stenosis is the most important predictor of CSR. CSR does not increase the risk of periprocedural complications.     

Predicting Hemodynamic Changes of Cerebral Blood Flow during Temporal Carotid Occlusion: A Review of Current Knowledge with Implication for Carotid Artery Stenting

Carotid artery disease (CAD) plays an important role in the stroke development and its prevalence increases with aging of the population. Its wide variability of clinical manifestation ranges from incidental asymptomatic finding to devastating or fatal stroke, although cerebral collateral circulation is considered one of the major modifying factors. Over time, carotid artery stenting (CAS) has evolved into a reputable method for the treatment of patients with severe CAD. With expanding use of proximal protection systems resembling surgical clamp, there is an increasing demand to understand collateral cerebral circulation to protect patients from periprocedural hypoperfusion, which increases the risk of cerebral events. Transcranial Doppler ultrasound (TCD) is a useful tool allowing monitoring in real time during procedure patien$\acute{t}$s cerebral hemodynamic status providing the operator with valuable information. Its role in predicting periprocedural hypoperfusion is, however, less well established. In this article, we discuss the role of cerebral collateral circulation, summarize the current knowledge regarding its evaluation with TCD and suggest future implications for CAS.     

Feasibility and efficacy of balloon-based neuroprotection during carotid artery stenting in a single-center setting

We sought to prospectively assess the feasibility and in-hospital efficacy of the PercuSurge GuardWire temporary balloon-occlusive system for neuroprotection during carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS).Carotid angioplasty and stenting harbors a risk of distal embolization. Cerebral protection devices are currently under clinical investigation.Ninety-six consecutive patients with carotid bifurcation disease underwent a total of 102 CAS procedures with the intention to use the GuardWire for neuroprotection.GuardWire deployment was achieved in 99 procedures performed in 93 patients (97%). Device failure (n = 3) and severe neurologic responses to balloon occlusion of the targeted carotid artery (n = 2) accounted for five additional procedures that were essentially concluded without neuroprotection, for a total of 94 procedures completed as intended in 88 patients (92% procedural feasibility rate). Carotid angioplasty and stenting was performed successfully in 94 patients (100 procedures). There were no in-hospital deaths; but three patients (3.1%) sustained strokes, and two patients experienced transient ischemic attacks, for a total periprocedural complication rate of 5.2%. One major stroke occurred with the GuardWire in place, whereas two minor strokes were observed in patients in whom the device could not be deployed. Thus, successful neuroprotected CAS without major neurologic events was achieved in 87 patients (91%).The GuardWire temporary balloon-occlusive system is feasible as an adjunct to CAS in the majority of patients. It is associated with a 3.1% rate of major periprocedural neurologic complications. Adverse neurologic reactions to balloon occlusion may prohibit effective use of the system in about 2% of patients.     

Carotid artery disease: Stenting versus endarterectomy

Atherosclerotic carotid artery stenosis is a major cause of disabling stroke or death. Although carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is currently considered to be the standard of care for patients with a severe symptomatic stenosis and selected patients with an asymptomatic carotid stenosis, carotid angioplasty and stenting (CAS) is increasingly being used as an alternative treatment modality. This article briefly summarizes the current trial data on CEA and CAS. More importantly, potential risk factors for CEA and CAS are reviewed and the complementary role of these techniques in the management of the individual patient is discussed.     

Interventional therapy for carotid artery disease using angioplasty and stenting with embolic protection

Carotid artery angioplasty with stenting (CAS) has emerged as a viable alternative to endarterectomy for the treatment of occlusive vascular disease. Advances in endovascular techniques and the improvement of specialized stents have served to rapidly close the gap with the traditional gold standard surgery. Furthermore, the development of cerebral embolic protection devices has reduced the occurrence of distal embolization of atheromatous material during such interventions and has reduced periprocedural stroke rates considerably. Continued improvements in distal embolic protection have further improved the risk profile of CAS, and increased operator experience with these interventional procedures has also been shown to reduce periprocedural complication rates. Outcomes may continue to improve as more providers gain experience with the evolving endovascular device technology, and several prospective clinical trials are currently investigating the efficacy of CAS with embolization protection versus endarterectomy in different cohorts. This review will survey the background and current literature covering angioplasty and stenting for occlusive disease in the carotid arteries and discuss the current methods employed to prevent distal emboli during intervention.     

Utilization of Intravascular Ultrasound during Carotid Artery Stenting

For patients at high risk for surgery, carotid artery stenting (CAS) is a viable alternative to help reduce risk of stroke for patients with high-grade carotid artery stenosis; however, a higher incidence of perioperative stroke has been observed in patients undergoing stenting compared to those undergoing open surgery. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) is commonly used during coronary artery procedures to help evaluate lesions and to guide stent placement. Multiple groups have sought to determine whether IVUS could also be used during CAS. While IVUS has been shown to be both feasible and safe during CAS, there is limited evidence that demonstrates direct improvement in procedural outcomes. Further studies focusing on clinical outcomes should be conducted in order to justify routine use of this technology during CAS.     

State of the Art in Carotid Artery Stenting: Trial Data,Technical Aspects,and Limitations

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.     

Improvement of neurocognitive function after protected carotid artery stenting

Objective: To investigate the effect of protected carotid artery stenting on neurocognitive function with particular consideration of the angiographic filling of the ipsilateral anterior cerebral artery (ACA). Background: An improved inflow to the supply area of the anterior cerebral artery after revascularisation of severe carotid artery stenosis may beneficially affect frontal lobe cognitive functions. Methods: We prospectively included 71 consecutive patients who underwent carotid artery stenting (CAS) due to high grade carotid artery stenosis. Intracranial angiograms and filling status of the ACA pre‐ and post‐stenting were analyzed and a battery of 5 selected neuropsychological tests for frontal lobe function were applied prior to and 6 months after CAS. Patients with improvement in at least two tests were defined as having improved neurocognitive function. Results: Compared to baseline, we found a significant improvement of the Trail‐Making Test A (median 6% improved change‐score; P = 0.01), the test of supermarket items showed a trend towards significant improvement (median 3.7% improved change‐score; P = 0.09). In 32 patients (45%) an improvement of at least 2 neurocognitive tests was observed. Neuropsychological improvement was found more frequently in patients with a contrasted ipsilateral ACA after CAS (88%, 95% CI 77 to 99) compared to patients without angiographic filling of the ipsilateral ACA post CAS (13%, 95% CI 1 to 25), respectively (P < 0.01). Conclusion: Carotid artery stenting improves neurocognitive function in a considerable proportion of patients. A contrasted ipsilateral anterior cerebral artery after CAS is associated with improved neurocognitive function, presumably due to amelioration of frontal lobe perfusion. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.