Edoardo Pasqui, Bruno Gargiulo, Leonardo Pasquetti, Elisa Lazzeri, Giuseppe Galzerano, Gianmarco de Donato
{"title":"颈动脉支架术后颈动脉几何形状的改变及临床意义。","authors":"Edoardo Pasqui, Bruno Gargiulo, Leonardo Pasquetti, Elisa Lazzeri, Giuseppe Galzerano, Gianmarco de Donato","doi":"10.3390/jpm14111091","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Carotid artery stenting (CAS) could lead to a modification of the carotid bifurcation geometry with possible clinical implications. This study aimed to clarify the geometrical impact of three carotid stents with different designs on the carotid bifurcation and its clinical consequences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective single-center study. We included all patients who underwent CAS in a 3-year period. Anatomical changes of the carotid bifurcation were evaluated by reviewing angiographic images. The population was divided into three groups based on the stent implanted: Group 1 (Carotid Wallstent), Group 2 (Roadsaver), and Group 3 (C-Guard).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 226 patients were included. The mean age was 77.0 ± 7.4 years and 72.5% (164/226) were male. Three different stents were implanted into three groups: Group 1 (<i>n</i> = 131/226, 58%), Group 2 (<i>n</i> = 57/226, 25.2%), and Group 3 (<i>n</i> = 38/226, 16.8%). The mean pre-stent implantation CCA-ICA angle of the entire population was 155 ± 14.9°, and the post-CAS angle was 167.7 ± 8.7° (<i>p</i> = 0.0001). In every subgroup, the difference was statistically different, with the biggest difference registered in Group 2 (-16.1 ± 13.2°). Regarding stent oversizing, there was a significant relationship between CCA oversizing and CCA-ICA angle modification (<i>p</i> = 0.006). During follow-up, a total of 14 (6.2%) restenoses were registered. The mean CCA-ICA angle modification in the restenosis group was -9.5 ± 14.4° vs. -12.8 ± 11.9° in the no-restenosis group with no significant statistical differences were outlined (<i>p</i> = 0.3).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to the Carotid Wallstent and C-Guard, the Roadsaver stent appears to have a lower adaptability to the carotid vascular territory, resulting in a higher CCA-ICA angle modification after implantation, with no impact on the stent restenosis rate.</p>","PeriodicalId":16722,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Personalized Medicine","volume":"14 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11595456/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Carotid Artery Geometry Modifications and Clinical Implications after Carotid Artery Stenting.\",\"authors\":\"Edoardo Pasqui, Bruno Gargiulo, Leonardo Pasquetti, Elisa Lazzeri, Giuseppe Galzerano, Gianmarco de Donato\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/jpm14111091\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Carotid artery stenting (CAS) could lead to a modification of the carotid bifurcation geometry with possible clinical implications. This study aimed to clarify the geometrical impact of three carotid stents with different designs on the carotid bifurcation and its clinical consequences.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a retrospective single-center study. We included all patients who underwent CAS in a 3-year period. Anatomical changes of the carotid bifurcation were evaluated by reviewing angiographic images. The population was divided into three groups based on the stent implanted: Group 1 (Carotid Wallstent), Group 2 (Roadsaver), and Group 3 (C-Guard).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 226 patients were included. The mean age was 77.0 ± 7.4 years and 72.5% (164/226) were male. Three different stents were implanted into three groups: Group 1 (<i>n</i> = 131/226, 58%), Group 2 (<i>n</i> = 57/226, 25.2%), and Group 3 (<i>n</i> = 38/226, 16.8%). The mean pre-stent implantation CCA-ICA angle of the entire population was 155 ± 14.9°, and the post-CAS angle was 167.7 ± 8.7° (<i>p</i> = 0.0001). In every subgroup, the difference was statistically different, with the biggest difference registered in Group 2 (-16.1 ± 13.2°). Regarding stent oversizing, there was a significant relationship between CCA oversizing and CCA-ICA angle modification (<i>p</i> = 0.006). During follow-up, a total of 14 (6.2%) restenoses were registered. The mean CCA-ICA angle modification in the restenosis group was -9.5 ± 14.4° vs. -12.8 ± 11.9° in the no-restenosis group with no significant statistical differences were outlined (<i>p</i> = 0.3).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to the Carotid Wallstent and C-Guard, the Roadsaver stent appears to have a lower adaptability to the carotid vascular territory, resulting in a higher CCA-ICA angle modification after implantation, with no impact on the stent restenosis rate.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16722,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Personalized Medicine\",\"volume\":\"14 11\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11595456/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Personalized Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm14111091\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Personalized Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm14111091","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Carotid Artery Geometry Modifications and Clinical Implications after Carotid Artery Stenting.
Background: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) could lead to a modification of the carotid bifurcation geometry with possible clinical implications. This study aimed to clarify the geometrical impact of three carotid stents with different designs on the carotid bifurcation and its clinical consequences.
Methods: This was a retrospective single-center study. We included all patients who underwent CAS in a 3-year period. Anatomical changes of the carotid bifurcation were evaluated by reviewing angiographic images. The population was divided into three groups based on the stent implanted: Group 1 (Carotid Wallstent), Group 2 (Roadsaver), and Group 3 (C-Guard).
Results: A total of 226 patients were included. The mean age was 77.0 ± 7.4 years and 72.5% (164/226) were male. Three different stents were implanted into three groups: Group 1 (n = 131/226, 58%), Group 2 (n = 57/226, 25.2%), and Group 3 (n = 38/226, 16.8%). The mean pre-stent implantation CCA-ICA angle of the entire population was 155 ± 14.9°, and the post-CAS angle was 167.7 ± 8.7° (p = 0.0001). In every subgroup, the difference was statistically different, with the biggest difference registered in Group 2 (-16.1 ± 13.2°). Regarding stent oversizing, there was a significant relationship between CCA oversizing and CCA-ICA angle modification (p = 0.006). During follow-up, a total of 14 (6.2%) restenoses were registered. The mean CCA-ICA angle modification in the restenosis group was -9.5 ± 14.4° vs. -12.8 ± 11.9° in the no-restenosis group with no significant statistical differences were outlined (p = 0.3).
Conclusions: Compared to the Carotid Wallstent and C-Guard, the Roadsaver stent appears to have a lower adaptability to the carotid vascular territory, resulting in a higher CCA-ICA angle modification after implantation, with no impact on the stent restenosis rate.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Personalized Medicine (JPM; ISSN 2075-4426) is an international, open access journal aimed at bringing all aspects of personalized medicine to one platform. JPM publishes cutting edge, innovative preclinical and translational scientific research and technologies related to personalized medicine (e.g., pharmacogenomics/proteomics, systems biology). JPM recognizes that personalized medicine—the assessment of genetic, environmental and host factors that cause variability of individuals—is a challenging, transdisciplinary topic that requires discussions from a range of experts. For a comprehensive perspective of personalized medicine, JPM aims to integrate expertise from the molecular and translational sciences, therapeutics and diagnostics, as well as discussions of regulatory, social, ethical and policy aspects. We provide a forum to bring together academic and clinical researchers, biotechnology, diagnostic and pharmaceutical companies, health professionals, regulatory and ethical experts, and government and regulatory authorities.