Table_1_Treatment of the Carotid In-stent Restenosis: A Systematic Review.DOCX (50.62 kB)
Download file

Table_1_Treatment of the Carotid In-stent Restenosis: A Systematic Review.DOCX

Download (50.62 kB)
dataset
posted on 04.10.2021, 04:30 authored by Hao Huang, Lingshan Wu, Yinping Guo, Yi Zhang, Jing Zhao, Zhiyuan Yu, Xiang Luo

Background and Purpose: In-stent restenosis (ISR) after carotid artery stent (CAS) is not uncommon. We aimed to evaluate therapeutic options for ISR after CAS.

Methods: We searched PubMed and EMBASE until November 2, 2020 for studies including the treatment for ISR after CAS.

Results: In total, 35 studies, covering 1,374 procedures in 1,359 patients, were included in this review. Most cases (66.3%) were treated with repeat CAS (rCAS), followed by percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) (17.5%), carotid endarterectomy (CEA) (14.3%), carotid artery bypass (1.5%), and external beam radiotherapy (0.4%). The rates of stroke & TIA within the postoperative period were similar in three groups (PTA 1.1%, rCAS 1.1%, CEA 1.5%). CEA (2.5%) was associated with a slightly higher rate of postoperative death than rCAS (0.7%, P = 0.046). Furthermore, the rate of long-term stroke & TIA in PTA was 5.7%, significantly higher than rCAS (1.8%, P = 0.036). PTA (27.8%) was also associated with a significantly higher recurrent restenosis rate than rCAS (8.2%, P = 0.002) and CEA (1.6%, P < 0.001). The long-term stroke & TIA and recurrent restenosis rates showed no significant difference between rCAS and CEA.

Conclusions: rCAS is the most common treatment for ISR, with low postoperative risk and low long-term risk. CEA is an important alternative for rCAS. PTA may be less recommended due to the relatively high long-term risks of stroke & TIA and recurrent restenosis.

History

References