COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Restenosis rates following vertebral artery origin stenting: does stent type make a difference?

OBJECTIVES: To compare our experience with sirolimus and paclitaxel-eluting stents (drug-eluting stents [DES]) and non-drug-eluting stents (NDES) for treatment of vertebral artery (VA) origin stenosis and review the literature.

METHODS: A retrospective review of our prospectively collected database was performed. Clinical and radiologic follow up was obtained by reviewing office records and radiology. Data collected included demographics, comorbidities, presenting symptoms, stenosis severity, contralateral VA stenosis and/or carotid stenosis, type of stent used, angioplasty before or after stenting, post-treatment residual stenosis, clinical and radiological follow up and retreatment. Patients with symptomatic > 60% stenosis or asymptomatic > 70% stenosis and/or a hypoplastic or occluded contralateral VA or significant carotid occlusion were chosen for revascularization.

RESULTS: Thirty-five patients treated with NDES and 15 treated with DES for management of VA origin stenosis were identified. The technical success rate of the procedure was 100%. There were no procedural complications. There were 7 asymptomatic patients (NDES Group-4, DES Group-3). In the NDES Group, 9 patients had pre-stent angioplasty; 2 had post-stent angioplasty. In the DES group, 4 patients had post-stent angioplasty. Symptoms resolved in 30/31 (96.8%) patients treated with NDES and 11/12 (91.7%) treated with DES. Thirty-six patients had radiologic follow up (median 21.3 months); in-stent restenosis was documented in 11 patients (NDES 9/24 [38%], DES 2/12 [17%]). Among patients receiving NDES, re-stenotic lesions required angioplasty in 7 patients. No patients in the DES group required angioplasty.

CONCLUSIONS: DES for treatment of VA origin stenosis may decrease the incidence of restenosis when compared to NDES. Validation in prospective, randomized, multicenter trials is necessary.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app